Abstract
Abstract Joan Hoff's rehearsal of the plagues of poststructuralism in her article, ‘Gender as a postmodern category of paralysis’, women's History Review, 3, pp. 149-168, breaks no new intellectual ground, but for anti-intellectualism, disingenuousness, and sheer incivility, her article stands apart. What she describes is not an accurate portrayal either of the variety of post-modern theory or of the important and thoughtful criticism that has been brought to bear upon it; she has caricatured and misrepresented the positions gender historians hold. Hoff's claim of poststructuralism's essential misogny, based upon an insupportable association of deconstruction and pornography, is, simply, irresponsible. Moreover, she has ignored the work of scholars who have sought to challenge the view that the poststructuralist critique of the myth of a stable, unitary subject obviates a feminist politics.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
