From: cbcox-AT-rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Carrol Cox)
Subject: Re: M-FEM: Ludic Feminism and Red Feminism
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 16:02:53 -0500 (CDT)


Gerry,

    I can't make a long reply because my e-mail program is acting up,
but I wanted to make a couple observations. I have read the article
by Ebert you mention, plus articles by her in *Rethinking Marxism*,
*Red Orange*, *Alternate Orange*, *Transformation* 1, *Against the
Current*, and her book (Ludic Feminism). I have been basically
impressed by all of them. The difficulty is this; in reading the
article in *Red Orange* (along with other articles in the first
issue of that journal) I was nagged by a worry of indications that
she and the authors she cited with similar views *might* have too
narrow a conception of "correct Marxism*. For me that has been more
than borne out by the performance of her comrades on another
Spoons Marx list, marxism-international. I *still*, despite my
disappointment, share your admiration for the article you cite
and for her other work. I believe that work will continue to be
of importance to the contemporary socialist movment despite what
seems to be the sectarianism of Ebert and her comrades. But you
must make up your own mind on these issues.

Carrol Cox


>
> I just read what was for me a great article in College English, and
> would like to ask if others have read it and what they think. It's
> "For a Red Pedagogy: Feminism, Desire, and Need" (CE 58:7, 11/96) by
> Teresa L. Ebert (author of Ludic Feminism and After, Michigan, 1996).
> Her basic argument is that "ludic feminism has become an accomplice of
> capitalism" (804), and proposes instead a red feminism (the title of
> her forthcoming book from Illinois). Yes, even in spite of
> postmodernism, she has the courage to quote Samora Machel: "love can
> only exist between free and equal people who have the same ideals and
> commitment..." (799). Of course she also quotes Marx: "Our wants and
> pleasures have their origin in society; we therefore measure them in
> relation to society" (795). I don't know whether Teresa is a member of
> this list, I haven't used the review command to check if it's
> available. But Teresa, if you're out there, thank you for articulating
> this position for me so clearly and persuasively.
>
> And as long as we're talking about love, may I ask for pointers to
> discussions about the possibility of deconstructing the dualistic view of
> matter and spirit, or more simply put, reconsideration of the taboo against
> anyone who calls herself or himself a materialist holding any ideas
> about God and/or spirit? E.g., recommended readings looking at
> liberation theology in both theory and practice, etc.? Other areas to
> look at besides liberation theology?
>
> Gerry Yokota-Murakami
> Osaka University, Japan
>
>