Butler and Dietz

Butler and Dietz both criticize labels in their own ways and ultimately call for a political challenging of labels in their own way. Dietz forms oppositions to viewing feminism and women as either entirely individualized or generalized.  This becomes clear as she debases both Marxist and Materialist Feminists on their ideals (and lack thereof) of citizenship. According to Dietz, "equal access" is not enough because the structure of access and that which access is given of is inherently limited, but rather citizenship should be the ultimate goal of the feminist. 

Dietz points out early on "an important truth: at each moment our lives, our every thought, value, and act--from the most mundane to the most lofty--takes its meaning and purpose from the wider political and social reality that constitutes and conditions us" (Dietz 1). Butler further develops this idea and takes it one step further, claiming that there isn't a separation between the self and society's norms: "I cannot know who I am without drawing upon the sociality of norms that preceded and exist within me" (Butler 32). Butler calls for all who are oppressed due to sexuality and gender to "assert an entitlement to the conditions of life" which are considered to be distinctly human and to "subject [their] very own categories [of humanity] to critical scrutiny" (Butler 37, 38).

While Dietz and Butler call for a focus of inclusion of women (and other groups) into new categories, their language (and approach) differ. Dietz calls for a more universal "citizenship", but Butler's focus on "humanity" relays this sense of citizenship in that all humans have certain natural rights. The language "humanity" gives insight to the social aspects of the feminist battle. Butler, also, practices the inclusion principles she teaches by discussing how one must continue to redefine what humanity is, and whose lives are valuable, as new social and political contexts arise.