marxist feminism thesis

Marxist Feminism Theory

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Marxist feminists view capitalism and patriarchy as inseparable systems. They believe capitalism relies on the unpaid domestic labor of women to function, and that this exploitation reinforces patriarchal power structures within society.

Key Takeaways

• Marxist feminists see the family as a tool of capitalism and that it is capitalism, not men, who oppress women.
• They see the family as oppressing women while support capitalism in three ways:
• Women reproduce the workforce and socialize them into a social hierarchy.
• Women absorb the anger of men who are frustrated by their alienation and exploitation (cushioning effect).
• Women are a reserve army of cheap labor that can be activated when they are needed and let go when no longer needed

What Is Marxist Feminism?

Marxist feminism is a branch of feminist theory which argues that the main cause of women’s oppression is capitalism.

This type of feminism is based on the understandings of Marxism, proposed by Karl Marx and collaborator Friedrich Engels in the 19th century. Marx demonstrated how capitalism was able to grow through the exploitation of labor.

Social classes were described to explain how one class controls the other as a means to produce goods. People who are of a high-class level of economic condition are the bourgeoise, whereas people who are of a low-class level are claimed as the proletariat since they become the labors of the bourgeoise (Marx & Engels, 1848).

Marxist feminists regard classism, rather than sexism, as the fundamental cause of women’s oppression. They explore how ideas of gender structure production in capitalism and argue that women are exploited by a capitalist society.

While some Marxist themes may not be as relevant today, Marxist feminists can still be used to explore how the political economy is gendered in late-stage capitalism and how the social reproduction of people and communities renews capitalism (Armstrong, 2020).

Whilst Marxist feminism can affect all individuals, this article will be focused on cisgender women in typically heterosexual relationships since this is who much of the research and theory centers on.

The Key Issues According to Marxist Feminism

The main view of Marxist feminists is that the traditional nuclear family only came about with capitalism. They believe that the traditional role of the housewife- who does not have paid employment and resides in the home completing domestic tasks- supports capitalism.

Marxist feminists claim that while the proletariat are oppressed through the capitalist system, women are double oppressed through capitalism as well as through the nuclear family.

Women’s oppression is thought to support capitalism in multiple ways, which are detailed below:

Women reproduce the labor force

In a capitalist society, women are expected to reproduce children. These children will then grow up to be the next generation of workers and mothers.

Women are also socializing the next generation of workers and ‘servicing’ the current workers (their husbands) with their unpaid domestic labor. Thus, women are supporting capitalism through their own means of reproduction, according to Marxist feminists.

Unpaid domestic labor of women

Marxist feminists claim that there is a division of labor between men and women: men are assigned economic production, whereas women have been assigned reproduction of the workforce.

In a capitalist society, more value is given to the production of material goods by men, than the reproduction of people by women.

Domestic work which is usually carried out by women include household chores, house management, and childcare. This labor is not respected in capitalist society since there is no exchange value. It is, therefore, devalued, and unpaid but expected to be done, nonetheless.

Marxist feminists explain that the unpaid labor of women is a way to exploit them. It is done for free, and it benefits both men and the capitalist system.

Capitalism would not exist without this unpaid labor because workers would not be able to work all day if they also had to take care of their children and the house (Cottais, 2020).

Women are a reserve of cheap labor

Since the primary role of women in a capitalist society is in unpaid domestic labor, they were usually restricted from working a paid job. However, women are used as a reserve, to be taken on temporarily when required by the bourgeois.

This was observable during the World Wars when most men were sent away to fight. When the men were away, many women were enrolled in the work that they would have otherwise not been allowed to do (Grayzel, 2013).

However, the women would have been paid less than the men and many would have had to return to their unpaid domestic duties once the men returned from war.

Women take on emotional labor

While not directly creating any produce or service, Marxist feminists claim that women must provide emotional labor under a capitalist society. This refers to the labor that is involved in keeping family members emotionally stable, so they can work efficiently.

The partners of the women may be understandably frustrated by the exploitation they experience by the bourgeois and women are often expected to absorb this frustration which may result in domestic violence.

How Was Marxist Feminism Developed?

Although Marxist theory was not initially focused on women’s issues, it was realized that under a capitalist system, women were exploited by not being paid for the reproductive and emotional labor they were involved in.

Eleanor Marx, daughter of Karl Marx, is thought to be one of Marxist feminism’s pioneers in England in the 19th century among others such as Rosa Luxembourg.

During the suffrage movement in the early 20th century, class systems were considered when working-class women forged their own movement for the right to vote alongside white middle-class women.

It was not until the 1960s and 70s when Marxist feminism became particularly popular, resounding the most with women of the time. Marxist feminism is thought to have arisen in reaction to liberal feminism , whose fight failed to go beyond equal rights.

Marxist feminists argue that legal liberation is not enough to free women since it does nothing to abolish the patriarchy in social relations (Cottais, 2020). A few of the key women who contributed to the development of Marxist feminism as a theory are Chizuko Ueno, Anuradha Ghandy, Claudia Jones, and Angela Davis.

What Are The Goals Of Marxist Feminism?

Abolish capitalism.

The main goal of Marxist feminists is to abolish capitalism. Through this, they believe that patriarchy itself can be tackled. Overthrowing the existing economic system is thought to liberate women.

Since capitalism is at the root of inequality and patriarchy is a product of capitalism, removing this system should eliminate gender inequalities.

A classless society

Instead of capitalism, Marxist feminists advocate for a classless, communist society. Through a classless society, both the upper-class and working-class people will be treated equally.

Other solutions can be proposed such as reevaluating the reproductive work through the collectivism of domestic work and childcare.

The vision of Marx and Engels was to ensure that there was a collective ownership and the basic dignity of women in society, thus the domestic duties will be shared equally between partners.

More women in the public sphere

Since women’s exclusion from paid work makes them more oppressed, a way to combat this is to integrate women into paid work and the public sphere. This includes ensuring that women are paid equal wages to men and are offered the same opportunities if they have the necessary qualifications.

Marxist feminists do not generally seek to exclude men from feminist struggles, in fact, they often want to avoid separation between the sexes for fear of fueling a class division (Cottais, 2020).

Valuing domestic labor

Marxist feminists do not necessarily disagree that domestic labor should be ignored. Likewise, if a woman chooses to not work and instead take care of the household and children, then they should be free to do so. However, Marxist feminists wish for domestic labor to be as valued as reproductive labor.

For domestic labor to be fairly valued, Marxist feminists argue that women should be paid for domestic work. Being paid for this work puts an economic value on what is still largely considered women’s work.

Control over reproductive rights

If women have more reproductive rights and more of a choice as to whether to be a parent, they have more choice as to their role in society. Capitalist societies see women’s main job as to be a mother and nothing else.

So, if women realize they have a choice as to whether to go down this path, they can feel more liberated to do what they want to do.

Strengths And Criticisms Of Marxist Feminism

Marxist feminism has shone a light on how women are oppressed by a capitalist society. Attention has been drawn to the intersection of capitalism and patriarchy and the importance of taking both class and gender into consideration in feminist demands.

It considers how some previous feminist movements may have been more focused on the rights of middle-class or upper-class women, with working-class women being ignored or forgotten in history.

Marxist feminism can also highlight how working-class women are not only subservient to men, but often to wealthy women. More women and men recognize that there is often an imbalance in the share of household and childcare responsibilities.

This awareness means that couples can discuss and come to agreements as to how to split the duties. Many more men take on an active role in the household which can allow their partners to relax or to work on their career.

Likewise, people in relationships can start to be more aware of whether they are unwillingly doing more of the domestic duties. If someone’s partner is not willing to take on more of the unpaid labor and this is making them unhappy, then they can consider whether this is the person they want to spend their life with.

Ultimately, more people can find a partner who suits their lifestyle and do not have to settle for someone who is not helpful or supportive.

A main criticism of Marxist feminism is that women’s oppression is thought to have been prevalent in the family system before capitalism existed.

Therefore, it is doubtful whether men would suddenly stop exploiting women in a classless society. In fact, sexism and oppression of women can still be found in communist political parties, trade unions, and left-wing militant structures.

As such, viewing Marxism as a condition for women’s liberation ignores sexism as a whole and may only deal with a small percentage of the wider issue. Marxist feminism has focused heavily on the intersection of class and gender but initially did not always incorporate the intersection of race, sexuality, or disability alongside these issues.

A black woman in a mostly white capitalist society, for instance, would be oppressed because of being a woman, but also for being black. Angela Davis discusses the intersection of race on Marxist feminism in her book ‘Women, Race, & Class’ (1981).

Marxist feminism may also be criticized as not being relevant in today’s society. Since more women have the opportunity to work and have the choice as to whether to bear children, they are not necessarily restricted to being a traditional housewife, unless this is what they choose to do.

Thus, many aspects of Marxist feminism may now be outdated.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between marxist and socialist feminism.

Marxist and socialist feminism can often be confused and sometimes used interchangeably. While they may be similar, a way to distinguish between them is by their view on women’s oppression.

Marxist feminism considers capitalism to be the root cause of women’s exploitation, which is analyzed through the construct of social classes. However, socialist feminism takes both class and gender factors into account when it studies how patriarchy-capitalism articulate (Cottais, 2020).

How does intersectionality relate to Marxist feminism?

Intersectionality acknowledges that everyone has their own unique experiences of discrimination and oppression based on factors such as gender, race, class, sexual orientation, and disability, among others.

While intersectionality views all forms of oppression as equally important, Marxists highlight how class is the fundamental dividing line in capitalist society.

Marxist feminism is intersectional since it considers how women are double oppressed under capitalism. First by being a woman, and second by their social class.

Are women in paid work still affected by capitalism according to Marxist feminists?

Many may criticize Marxist feminism by stating that it is not relevant to modern day society since more women are able to work in paid jobs and do not have to be restricted to staying in the household, doing chores, and caring for their children.

However, for women, there are some barriers which can make it harder for them to have a career and children at the same time.

Women who work in paid jobs are often still required to complete their ‘second shift’ when they return home (housework, childcare, and home management), which uses up more of their time and energy (Arruzza, Bhattacharya, & Fraser, 2019).

While it may not be the case for every household, heterosexual women are still shown to complete more hours of ‘unpaid labor’ compared to their male partners (Seedat & Rondon, 2021).

Likewise, the jobs which are typically undertaken by women (e.g., care work and teaching) are often underpaid meaning that they may not sufficiently cover the costs of raising a child.

To make life easier, many women may resort to working part-time or quitting work completely, falling back into the role of a housewife while relying on their husband’s income.

Althusser, L. (1969). For Marx (B. Brewster, Trans.). London: Penguin Press. (Original work published 1965)

Althusser, L. (1971). Lenin and philosophy and other essays (B. Brewster, Trans.). London: New Left. (Original work published 1970)

Althusser, L., & Balibar, E. (1970). Reading Capital (B. Brewster, Trans.). London: New Left. (Original work published 1968) Brown, H. (2012). Marx on gender and the family: A critical study (Vol. 39). Brill.

Armstrong, E. (2020). Marxist and socialist feminism. Study of women and gender. Faculty Publications, Smith College. Retrieved August 8, 2022.

Arruzza, C., Bhattacharya, T., & Fraser, N. (2019). Feminism for the 99 Percent . A Manifesto. London, New York.

Davis, A. Y. (1981).  Women, race, and class . Vintage.

Delphy, C. (1980). Sharing the same table: consumption and the family. The Sociological Review, 28 (1_suppl), 214-231.

Grayzel, S. R. (2013).  Women and the First World War . Routledge.

Johnson, D. P. (2008). Contemporary sociological theory. An Integrated Multi-Level Approach . Texas: Springer.

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1848). THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO. Selected Works by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels. New York: International Publishers, 1363.

Seedat, S., & Rondon, M. (2021). Women’s wellbeing and the burden of unpaid work.  BMJ,  374.

Stern, B. J. (1948). Engels on the Family. Science & Society , 42-64.

Tilly, L. A. (1978). The family and change .

Thompson, K. (2014). The Marxist Perspective on The Family .

Zaretsky, N. (2010). No direction home: The American family and the fear of national decline , 1968-1980. Univ of North Carolina Press.

Marxist Feminist Theories and Struggles Today

• August 2020
• Publisher: ZED Books
• ISBN: ISBN 978-1-78699-616-9 hb ISBN 978-1-78699-615-2 pb ISBN 978-1-78699-617-6 pdf ISBN 978-1-78699-618-3 epub ISBN 978-1-78699-619-0 mobi

• Stellenbosch University

• Lund University

• Umeå University

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

Supplementary resource (1)

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Brill | Nijhoff

Brill | Wageningen Academic

Brill Germany / Austria

Böhlau

Brill | Fink

Brill | mentis

Brill | Schöningh

Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht

V&R unipress

Open Access

Open Access for Authors

Transformative Agreements

Open Access and Research Funding

Open Access for Librarians

Open Access for Academic Societies

Discover Brill’s Open Access Content

Organization

Stay updated

Corporate Social Responsiblity

Investor Relations

Policies, rights & permissions

Review a Brill Book

Author Portal

How to publish with Brill: Files & Guides

Fonts, Scripts and Unicode

Publication Ethics & COPE Compliance

Data Sharing Policy

Brill MyBook

Ordering from Brill

Author Newsletter

Piracy Reporting Form

Sales Managers and Sales Contacts

Ordering From Brill

Titles No Longer Published by Brill

Catalogs, Flyers and Price Lists

E-Book Collections Title Lists and MARC Records

How to Manage your Online Holdings

LibLynx Access Management

Discovery Services

KBART Files

MARC Records

Online User and Order Help

Rights and Permissions

Latest Key Figures

Latest Financial Press Releases and Reports

Annual General Meeting of Shareholders

Share Information

Specialty Products

Press and Reviews

Marx, Women, and Capitalist Social Reproduction

Marxist-feminist essays, series:  historical materialism book series , volume: 169.

Prices from (excl. shipping):

• Hardback: €174.00
• E-Book (PDF): €174.00
• View PDF Flyer

Copyright Page

Acknowledgements, notes on essays, introduction, part 1 marxist-feminist theory, chapter 1 marxism and feminism, chapter 2 structuralist marxism on the oppression of women, chapter 3 marxism and class, gender and race: rethinking the trilogy, chapter 4 reflections on intersectionality, chapter 5 what’s material about materialist feminism a marxist-feminist critique, part 2 capitalist social reproduction, chapter 6 population and capitalism, chapter 7 feminism, pronatalism, and motherhood, chapter 8 reproduction and procreation under capitalism: a marxist-feminist analysis, chapter 9 the feminisation of poverty: myth or reality, chapter 10 the dialectics of waged and unwaged work: waged work, domestic labour and household survival in the united states, chapter 11 loving alienation: the contradictions of domestic work, chapter 12 self-sourcing: how corporations get us to work without pay, chapter 13 from social reproduction to capitalist social reproduction, part 3 whither feminism, chapter 14 connecting marx and feminism in the era of globalisation: a preliminary investigation, chapter 15 global capitalism and women: from feminist politics to working-class women’s politics, chapter 16 capitalism and the oppression of women: marx revisited, bibliography, biographical note, review quotes, table of contents, share link with colleague or librarian, product details.

• Critical Social Sciences
• Sociology & Anthropology
• Gender Studies
• Economics & Political Science
• Global Studies

Collection Information

• Social Sciences E-Books Online, Collection 2019

Related Content

Reference Works

Primary source collections

COVID-19 Collection

How to publish with Brill

Open Access Content

Contact & Info

Sales contacts

Publishing contacts

Stay Updated

Newsletters

Social Media Overview

Terms and Conditions  

Privacy Statement  

Cookie Settings  

Accessibility

Legal Notice

Terms and Conditions   |   Privacy Statement   |  Cookie Settings   |   Accessibility   |  Legal Notice   |  Copyright © 2016-2024

Copyright © 2016-2024

• [81.177.182.174]
• 81.177.182.174

Character limit 500 /500

• < Previous

Home > Study of Women and Gender > Faculty Publications > 15

Study of Women and Gender: Faculty Publications

Marxist and socialist feminism.

Elisabeth Armstrong , Smith College Follow

Document Type

Publication date, publication title.

Companion to Feminist Studies

Beginning in the 1840s, Marxism has analyzed unpaid, reproductive “women’s work” as an integral part of capitalism. Marxist feminism historicizes reproduction in relation to production to better understand women’s exploitation and oppression in capitalism. Marxist feminism also theorizes revolutionary subjectivity and possibilities for an anti-capitalist future. Particularly important to Marxist feminism are its theories of imperialism and primitive accumulation, or theft, of land, resources and women’s unpaid labor to the reproduction of lives and generations.

Social reproduction, Primitive Accumulation, Imperialism, Feminized Work, Global Division of Labor, Value, Reproductive labor

Peer reviewed accepted manuscript. From the forthcoming book:

Elisabeth Armstrong, “Marxist and Socialist Feminisms,” in Companion to Feminist Studies , edited by Nancy Naples. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2020.

Recommended Citation

Armstrong, Elisabeth, "Marxist and Socialist Feminism" (2020). Study of Women and Gender: Faculty Publications, Smith College, Northampton, MA. https://scholarworks.smith.edu/swg_facpubs/15

Since May 22, 2019

Included in

Feminist, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Commons

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately, you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines

Author Corner

• How to submit FAQ
• Open Access FAQ
• Open Access Policy
• Study of Women and Gender Department

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

bepress Privacy bepress Copyright

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Marxist Feminism and its Importance in Today's World of Intersectional Approaches

2021, Contemporary Literary Review India

This paper deals with the relevance of Marxist Feminism in the 21 st century. It begins by talking about Marxism and Feminism as independent schools of thought and then goes on to discuss how their amalgamation is the need of the hour since disparities based on class structures is something even Intersectional Feminism doesn't delve into. This paper tries to critique both through the lens of the other and aims to prove how at the point of their intersection we can expect a change. It also discusses the struggles of the working class and their revolution within the feminist framework.

Related Papers

ΚΡΙΣΗ / KRISI

Angela Dimitrakaki

Opening with a discussion of the relationship and tension between Marxism and feminism, the article argues for the specificity of Marxist feminist analysis in relation to other currents of feminism on the left. Drawing on Susan Watkins, the article contends that capitalist strategy has contributed to shaping the intellectual trajectory of feminism as known today. This trajectory developed under a complex hegemony that entailed, among other things, the Cold War and the end of Bretton Woods in relation to postmodernism and cultural imperialism, ideological uses of the 'middle class' , and technologies that increasingly challenge the clear distinction between production and reproduction. The analysis is specifically concerned with (a) how histories of reactionary but also progressive ideas formed under this hegemony (b) the pull of/ to immateriality in a perceived 'post-industrial' society, and the relevance of both to feminism. The article revisits the debate of Judith Butler and Nancy Fraser from 1997 as encapsulating the roots of a divide within left feminism-one related to understandings of intersectionality, a popular concept also in Marxist feminism. Intersectionality brings together salient political categories (such as gender, race, class), the question for Marxist feminism being: how? It is argued that intersectionality, coined at a specific moment of American cultural history and in relation to postmodernism's spatialising imaginary, is not always and necessarily compatible with Marxist feminism's focus on a social totality forming out of a mode of production and reproduction. To demonstrate this, the article concludes by considering Ashley Bohrer's influential interpretation of intersectionality. Overall, the article argues for a Marxist feminism that attends closely to the key tendencies, possibilities and contradictions of 21st-century capitalism and what hegemony consists of-as a first step towards re/thinking the priorities and specificity of struggle. Reference: Κρίση 13-2023/1, 9-44 Journal: ΚΡΙΣΗ - Εξαμηνιαία Επιστημονική Επιθεώρηση / KRISI - Biannual Scientific Review

Capital &amp; Class

Heidi Hartmann

This paper argues that the relation between marxism and feminism has, in all the forms it has so far taken, been an unequal one. While both marxist method and feminist analysis are necessary to an understanding of capitalist societies, and of the position of women within them, in fact feminism has consistently been subordinated. The paper presents a challenge to both marxist and radical feminist work on the “woman question”, and argues that what it is necessary to analyse is the combination of patriarchy and capitalism. It is a paper which, we hope, should stimulate considerable debate.

Ashley Bohrer

In recent years, there has been renewed interest in conceptualising the relationship between oppression and capitalism as well as intense debate over the precise nature of this relationship. No doubt spurred on by the financial crisis, it has become increasingly clear that capitalism, both historically and in the twenty-first century, has had particularly devastating effects for women and people of colour. Intersectionality, which emerged in the late twentieth century as a way of addressing the relationship between race, gender, sexuality and class, has submitted orthodox Marxism to critique for its inattention to the complex dynamics of various social locations; in turn Marxist thinkers in the twenty-first century have engaged with intersectionality, calling attention to the impoverished notion of class and capitalism on which it relies. As intersectionality constitutes perhaps the most common way that contemporary activists and theorists on the left conceive of identity politics, an analysis of intersectionality's relationship to Marxism is absolutely crucial for historical materialists to understand and consider. This paper looks at the history of intersectionality's and Marxism's critiques of one another in order to ground a synthesis of the two frameworks. It argues that in the twenty-first century, we need a robust, Marxist analysis of capitalism, and that the only robust account of capitalism is one articulated intersectionally, one which treats class, race, gender and sexuality as fundamental to capitalist accumulation. Keywords Marxism – Marxist feminism – intersectionality – decolonisation – identity politics

Michael Braverman

Arguing that it is too easy to release postmodernism as just another example of Western intellectual's separation from activism, this essay considers the connection between feminism and postmodernism as a largely anti-Marxist endeavour. The type of post-modern feminist theory that has blossomed, has presented distinct and well-documented challenges. It has destabilised previously secured categories and encouraged theorists to analyse meaning and relationships of power in a way that has called into question unitary, universal concepts and radically opened discussions concerning subjectivity, sex and gender. Taking into consideration postmodernism as a historically-situated occurrence rather than an intellectual abstraction or movement, the author contends that feminists and their allies need the fragmentation of identities not as a cause for celebration or an oppositional strategy, but rather as an effect of oppressive structures that must be analyzed within the context of their historical, political and economic specificity. It is this tension in postmodernism (between what is expressed and its expression between the latent and manifest) and its parallelism in feminist theory that is the interest of the study. It is the contention of the study that feminist postmodernism, like any other system of thought, has internalised contradictions that heightened during the 1980s and are now becoming self-evident.

Céline Hequet

I would like to come back to a debate that took place in the ’80s as it is still pertinent today, both in academia and activist circles: it is the debate between Marxist and radical feminists. The disagreement between the two groups is important for feminists who start with the premise that women’s subordination has material bases; in other words, feminists who think that someone, somewhere, is benefitting from the inequality between men and women. Once we agree on what these bases are exactly and who are the beneficiaries, the struggle can be more clearly oriented. For now, because there is no consensus, strategies deployed to improve women’s status tend to spread in different, sometimes contradictory, directions. I want to demonstrate here that Marxist feminists have failed to provide a truly materialist explanation of women’s condition, that is an explanation of how the subordinated group “women” is socially formed. Consequently, because radical feminism provides a more meaningful analytical framework, I believe it also offers better guidance for women’s struggles.

Lee E. (1996) Marxism and feminist theory. In: Wolton S. (eds) Marxism, Mysticism and Modern Theory. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London.

Questioning old assumptions is central to much feminist thought today. In the past feminism relied on the assumption that all women had something in common. In current feminist literature, by contrast, it is suggested that to talk of ‘woman’ is problematic. The idea that women can be discussed in general, as a group in society with something in common, is said no longer to hold. Keywords Modern Theory Feminist Theory Capitalist Society Marxist Theory Feminist Thought

The International Marxist-Humanist

Eleonora Roldán Mendívil

Gender Class and Sexuality Under Contemporary Capitalism" examines whether or not the book succeeds in providing an unifying analysis of intersectionality and revolutionary Marxism-Editors Intersectionality has become one of the most important leftist terms of reference in recent years. Politics should be thought intersectional, that is, inclusive activists and/or scholars cry out. Social difference is not perceived as an obstacle but as a possibility for a diverse left political practice. Divided into three sections, Ashley J. Bohrer attempts to bring Marxist analyses into critical conversation with analyses stemming from an intersectionality theory approach. To do so, she traces the histories of the respective political traditions, as well as the dominant debates surrounding Marxist approaches to gender, "race" or sexuality, and intersectional approaches to social analysis. Her focus is largely on the United States, even if this is not explicitly made clear as a specifically historical-geographical lens throughout the book. This makes the historical tracing seem like a global-historical one - something it does not deliver.

Capital & Class

Mònica Clua-Losada , JULE GOIKOETXEA

The fourth international Marxist feminist conference was the most international and best attended with around 700 participants, including Silvia Federici, Nancy Fraser, Tithi Bhattacharya, Lorena Cabnal, Ochy Curiel, Ana Cecilia Dinerstein, Elsa Dorlin, Jules Falquet, and Frigga Haug. The main themes of the panels established continuity with the previous conferences, from debates on intersectionality which overlap in various fields with practical and theoretical issues such as value, the state, law, care, production, and social reproduction to those that were closely linked to the thinking of new organizations and repertoires of struggle. This Special Issue is based on the plenary titled: the Thirteen Theses of Marxist Feminism. Frigga Haug, the author of The Thirteen Theses, considers all of them in her opening interview. The most widely debated theses by the Special Issue contributors are Theses I, II, and III on relations of production and the production of the means of life followed by theses from V to VIII which deal with intersectionality and how to study race, class and gender, the role of labor movement in the process of emancipation, and the issue of primary and secondary contradictions which is closely related to the development of an effective political emancipatory subject. The Special Issue closes with an interview with the philosopher Nancy Fraser on the three faces of labor.

David Camfield

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Farnella Husseini

European Journal of Social Sciences

Fidel Azarian

Sona Kazemi

Studies in Soviet Thought

Philip Kain

Susan Ferguson

Ana Cecilia Dinerstein

Studies in Political Economy

Mary E John

Against the Current (ISSN: 0739-4853)

Hardy Hanappi

Monthly Review

Leontina Hormel

Linda Gordon

Brinda Karat

NORA - Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research

Christian Lotz

Feminist Dissent

Stephen Cowden

Liza Sengupta

Journal of Education and Social Studies

Paulina de los Reyes

Metacritic Journal for Comparative Studies and Theory

Ana-Maria Deliu

Zena Spiers

Maria-José Magalhães , Salomé Lopes Coelho

Stathis Kouvelakis

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Jump to navigation

Tawaifbaazi: Courtesans and Prostitutes in Urdu Hindi Literature

Call for Chapters

Tawaifbaazi : Courtesans and Prostitutes in Urdu Hindi Literature

Editor: Farkhanda Shahid Khan

The intersection of literature and societal issues has long served as a platform for introspection, critique, and exploration. In Urdu Hindi literature, the portrayal of courtesans and prostitutes has been a source of both fascination and controversy, reflecting the intricate interplay of culture, ethics, and human existence. Ismat Chughtai, Sa‘adat Hasan Manto, Krishan Chander, Rajinder Singh Bedi, Agha Shorish Kashmiri, Munshi Premchand, and many other writers of Urdu and Hindi literature have intricately depicted the human experiences, societal norms, and individual choices through their literary works. This call invites scholars, researchers, and practitioners to contribute chapters to an edited collection that scrutinizes the depiction of courtesans and prostitutes in Urdu Hindi literature, exploring contemporary themes and critical perspectives.

This volume intends to make a substantial contribution to the academic field of gender studies, social discourse and South Asian literature.

Chapters are invited that explore, but are not limited to, the following themes:

• Historical Context and Evolution of Prostitution in Urdu Hindi Literature
• Courtesans as Patrons and Practitioners of Art Forms
• Transgressive Narratives in Urdu Hindi Literature
• Eroticism, Desire and Sensuality in representation of Prostitution
• Intersectionality, identity and Marginalization of Courtesans and Prostitutes
• Forbidden Love and Tragic Romance between Courtesans/Prostitutes and their Clients
• Global Perspectives on Courtesans and Prostitutes in Urdu Hindi Literature
• Agency and Voice of Courtesans and Prostitutes
• Feminist and Postcolonial Perspectives on Courtesans and Prostitutes in Urdu Hindi Literature
• Transnational prostitution as a form of Female Migration
• Feminist debates on Prostitution, Pornography and Women
• Health Humanities: Reproductive Health and Prostitution in Urdu Hindi Literature
• Social Commentary on Prostitution and Reforms  
• Courtesans, Prostitutes and International Human Rights
• Urban Spaces and Modernity Shaping Narratives on Courtesans and Prostitutes in Urdu Hindi Literature

 Authors are encouraged to submit original chapters that deepen our comprehension of courtesans and prostitutes in Urdu Hindi literature, providing insightful analyses and fresh interpretations. Contributions from diverse disciplinary and methodological approaches are encouraged, including literary studies, cultural studies, gender studies, history, sociology, and anthropology.

Important Dates

September 05, 2024:  Abstract Submission Deadline

September 19, 2024:  Notification of Abstract Decision

November 25, 2024:  Full Chapter Due

Please submit an abstract of 200-250 words to [email protected] .

Submission guidelines will be provided upon acceptance of the abstract. Each submission will undergo a double blind peer-review process and the book will be published by a prestigious academic publisher in June 2025. For inquiries and further information, please contact us at  [email protected]

We look forward to engaging in a rich and thought-provoking dialogue on this significant yet understudied aspect of Urdu Hindi literature.

About the Editor

Farkhanda Shahid Khanis a feminist researcher, activist, and academic. She teaches contemporary English literature at Government College University Faisalabad. Khan works on Feminism, Marxism, Culture, and Gender & Sexuality with a focus on the Global South. Currently, she is a doctoral fellow in the School of Literatures, Languages & Cultures at the University of Edinburgh and her research delves into the red light districts and brothel quarters in South Asia.

• Share full article

Trumps of the Tropics: Brazil’s Far Right Plots Its Return

Bolsonaristas are (still) taking their cues from America’s MAGA movement.

Credit... Photo illustration by Alex Merto

Supported by

By Vincent Bevins

Vincent Bevins was the Brazil correspondent for The Los Angeles Times from 2011 to 2016. Over the next few years, he covered the rise of Bolsonarismo for The New York Review of Books. For this article, he made several trips to Brazil over the past 11 months.

• Aug. 1, 2024

As president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro was often called the Trump of the Tropics, an association the Bolsonaro family actively cultivated. From the moment he was elected in 2018, he loudly celebrated the United States — in his first year in office, he even saluted the U.S. flag — but he saved his most intense loyalty for one American. When he met President Trump at the United Nations in 2019, he told him: “I love you.”

Before assuming power, Bolsonaro was an anti-democratic ideologue and former military man with a decades-long career in politics; Trump was a real estate developer and a media personality. But over the six years that Bolsonaro drove the news cycles in Latin America’s largest nation, he gave journalists a long list of reasons to equate the two men. Both made a show of praising authoritarian leaders, past and present, and liked to style themselves as defenders of law and order while acting as if the rules didn’t apply to them. Both formed an alliance with the religious right late in their careers and enlisted their sons to help push their respective agendas. Both frequently took to Twitter to attack their enemies, troll traditional media and rile up their supporters. And both retreated to Florida when things got tough.

For decades, the Brazilian right had looked to the United States, and when Donald Trump began to transform the rules of political discourse, it took note. “We learned to have the courage to speak up,” says Damares Alves, an evangelical pastor who served as Bolsonaro’s minister of human rights, families and women. “We began to be more incisive on the question of abortion. We learned we could be more direct about the question of arming the population. We realized we could take a tougher stand against the left-wing transformation taking place across our continent.”

As president, Bolsonaro seemed eager to import as much of the MAGA movement to Brazil as possible. So when Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, to protest a “stolen” election, many Brazilians worried that Bolsonaro supporters might try something similar. That’s exactly what happened. On Jan. 1, 2023, when Bolsonaro’s opponent, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, leader of the left-wing Workers’ Party, took office, Bolsonaro skipped the ceremony, holing up instead in the Orlando suburbs, at the home of a mixed-martial-arts fighter. For weeks, Bolsonaristas had been camping out around the country, under banners calling for an “intervention.” In an echo of Jan. 6, they chose Jan. 8 to occupy and attack government buildings in the capital, Brasília, even though the transition had already taken place and the buildings were largely empty. Military police officers arrested more than 1,000 people, and Lula quickly reasserted control of the country.

Bolsonaro, like Trump, now faces a host of criminal charges for trying to impede democratic elections. Trump has been convicted in one case, but only Bolsonaro has been deemed ineligible to run for president. In June 2023, Brazil’s electoral court ruled that his attacks on the voting system disqualified him from running for any political office until 2030. He is now facing hundreds of other court cases. In February of this year, authorities confiscated his passport after arresting several former aides accused of plotting a coup, making another escape to Florida impossible. Bolsonaro took refuge for two nights in the Hungarian Embassy in São Paulo, perhaps hoping to leverage his relationship with Prime Minister Viktor Orban (one of many friends he shares with Trump) if flight became necessary.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Advertisement