Reply to comment

I don't understand the need of these two scholars to isolate parts of themselves from the rest. Kauffman wants us to be able to, on command, rip our personal tetimony from what we talk about and write. I get her arguments about using personal testimony as a tol; it stops conversation and is a crutch that feminists are especially prone to use. I know that I've been faced with the stereotypes that all feminists actually do is sit around and talk about feelings. Fine, tell ACADEMIC feminists to stop using personal testimony. What Kauffman does is actually invalidate all personal testimony by deconstructing the personal aspect of herself and others. Allen, while her article is sharp and interesting, also attempts to divide herself into manageable categories. Feminist, tribal, tribal-feminist. United these characteristics make a full and unique point of view SO WHY SEPARATE THEM? It's important to acknowledge, but it really doesn't do anyone any good to separate the personal testimony from the intellectual, the feminist from the race/ethnicity/class etc.