{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025551684088269456, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010452961672473868, 'mean_word_length': 4.904109589041096, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Which Way Out of the Impasse? The Politics of Feminist Theory in the 1980's

One of the claims of feminism in the 1970s was to a close fit between theory and practice. Nancy Hartsock and others argued that feminist theory developed by means of exploring practical political issues raised by the women’s movement. Activist campaigns on matters such as rape and abortion, and specifically feminist practices, most centrally consciousness-raising, were the primary source of theory.1 In recent years, however, this &dquo;fit&dquo; has become less readily apparent, in no small measure because of the many varieties of feminism now extant. In this paper, by examining three recent texts, I want to raise the question of that fit between theory and practice, and to look again at some of the categories into which it has become customary to classify feminist theory.