.
Kate Millet argues, "Individual heterosexual relationships were at the core of the reproduction of the system of male power, whereby every avenue of power within the society is in male hands." (Millet, Sexual Politics 1970). Feminists however as their theory has developed have encountered many problems in finding a specific identity to unite around. For example, they could be lesbian, disabled, black, of a different religion or indeed economically poor. All these struggles are an example of struggles within one identity group (women) who wish to end oppression and subjugation but have other identities in addition to just being a "woman". However there are other questions that arise from categorising someone into a common identity, with the best example being the simple question of what is identity? Use of the controversial term "identity" raises a host of philosophical questions. As a result of post modern theorists such as Foucault and Butler feminist claims made about the oppression of women founded in a notion of shared experience and identity are now invariably greeted with philosophical suspicion. Its is this I will look at in my essay drawing research from Judith Butler's fascinating book "Gender Trouble".
Twentieth century feminism and post-modern thought has consistently opposed biological determinism, which is the view that shared biological features among a certain group lead inevitably to certain social roles or functions. This is where Butler's theory becomes apparent and interesting. "The very subject of women is no longer understood in stable or abiding terms (Butler, Gender Trouble, 1990 p. 1)." This quote from Judith Butler's book "Gender Trouble" highlights one of the most important ideas behind Butler's theories on post-modern feminism and the relationship of women's bodies to gender. Butler maintains that women can no longer be categorised as a grouping because they have so many alternate "subject positions" other than being women, such as race, economic status, etc.