this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)

Feminism

1676 readers
3 users here now

Welcome to the feminism community on Lemmy.World!

Rules:

  1. This is a feminist community, meant for discussing issues around equality and gender. Disagreement is acceptable but anti-feminist statements are not. Similarly, TERF-aligned comments, including anti-trans or other anti-LGBTQ+ sentiments are not allowed. This does not preclude debunking anti-feminist talking points.
  2. Posts must be related to feminism, gender issues, or related content. Topics can include current issues/news, historical topics, personal questions/thoughts, or discussion threads. If you are unsure if your post is on-topic, feel free to message the mods before posting.
  3. Memes and humor are allowed but should not be excessively posted.
  4. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Utilizing such language in your username will also result in a ban.
  5. Follow site-wide rules.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the works written over the last decade and a half, Fraser has elaborated upon this key insight. Building on classical Marxist feminism, she argues that capitalism is a social order that institutes a historically arbitrary divi­sion between paid labor and unpaid social-reproductive activities (such as childrearing and caregiving), with the latter being inherently gendered and assigned to women.

The capitalist economy depends on the free reproduction of labor power. At the symbolic level, however, such dependence cannot be acknowledged because it would mean admitting that reproductive labor is a highly valuable form of work and should be compensated. The capi­talist economy therefore has a systemic need to disavow its depend­ence on the sphere of social reproduction.

How is this disavowal achieved? Precisely through the culturally elaborated gender subtexts of key economic phenomena such as the “family wage” that rein­force and naturalize the gender division of labor, obscuring its arbi­trary character.

no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here