I’m very skeptical of such discourse. As I said, I never implied this was even the majority of feminist discourse. Indeed I believe, by my Ann Coulter analogy, that I argued against it.

As for whether it is “well informed” I don’t think most “po-mo” discussion is terribly well informed either. Yet that crap that goes under the rubric tends to make up the majority of “po mo discussion.”

care to elaborate? It doesn’t exactly sound like the makings of a well-informed opinion about feminism (any more than talking with 5 self-proclaimed Mormons would give you an adequate idea of Mormon theology)

Ahem.

In any case, what’s being discussed is less the particular writings in question that public perception of them. So, I might reject out of hand most peoples perceptions of Derrida and postmodernism as representing good exegesis of his writings. Yet I have to fully engage with how they are read and received. (Which, coincidentally is why I’d never call myself a “deconstructionist” or “postmodernist.”) There is very good reason why postmodernism has a bad rep just as there is very good reason why feminism has a bad rep.

But I fully admit that I read the figures in question 15 – 20 years ago, have fragmentary memory of them and can’t debate the particulars. (I think I made that point in a few of my posts)