Abstract
In her provocative recent book, Split Decisions, Janet Halley argues that left political movements have suffered from a “convergentist” assumption: They assume that forms of critique or intervention that serve the interest of one group, for example, feminists, also serve the interest of other groups, for example, gay/lesbian or queer activists. She contends that we ought to set aside this kind of convergentist assumption in order to examine the ways in which our frames, premises, and strategies may in fact point us in different directions. In this Article, I pose a contrary hypothesis: Analysis of and organizing around gender and sexuality may be suffering not from too much convergence but from too little.
[pdf-embedder url="https://www.uclalawreview.org/pdf/57-5-2.pdf" zoom="120"]