Reply to comment

In Moya's article, she discusses different views of "difference", and how these views relate to feminism and identity.  Towards the beginning of the article, she discusses the fact that postmodern theorists want to shows that " 'difference' is merely a discursive illusion'" (126).  What does this mean for the feminist movement.  It seems that historically, one of the key points of the feminist movement has been that women occupy a different place from men in society.  Would a postmodern theory erase this difference?  In another one of the classes, we have been talking about postmodernism and poststructuralism, and the ways in which these theorists deal with words, groups or categories.  From my understanding, postmodernists believe that categories, and reality in general, is constructed.  If we are to say that the idea of male or female is constructed, and that in reality, everyone is the same, is there a need for feminism?  As a point of clarification, I would like to discuss what exactly postmodern feminist theory is.  

I am also interested in the claim that Moya makes that "the feminist scholar who persists in using categories such as "race" or "gender" can be presumably charged with essentialism..." (126).  Can feminism be called essentialist?  This makes me think back to Three Guineas, when Wolf questions her ability to even respond to the man's letter because she is a woman.  It seems to me, though, that by fighting for equal rights, women are combating this essentialist notions by saying that there is nothing that is completely male or completely female.   

Moving on through Moya's article, I found the section on Chicana history most interesting.  In order to consider anyone's identity, it is essential to consider where that person came from.  To me, it should be these different identities, these different backgrounds, that form a modern feminist movement and make is special and unique.