I sincerely appreciate the critical engagement with my tweets on SRT, as they have helped me better understand both SRT and my critiques of SRT. Two thoughts: (1) SRT has fairly successfully claimed the entire history of Marxist-feminism as falling under the banner of "SRT" 1/6

Doing this erases the debates, disagreements, & inconsistencies between various Marxist-feminist theories... including ways in which some Marxist-feminist theories contradict key assumptions/emphases in SRT. I prefer to refer to SRT as a "recent offshoot of Marxist-feminism" 2/6

(2) Many Marxist-feminist theories develop social and economic theories of capitalist society, however this appears not to be SRT's goal. SRT is *not* a theory of society. Instead, SRT is about political/revolutionary strategy from a Trotskyist/Marxist-Leninist perspective. 3/6

SRT borrows from Dalla Costa and James the idea that women who perform tasks on an unwaged basis related to the reproduction of labor-power are members of the working class and thus capable of participating in class struggle. And from Vogel they borrow the notion that 4/6

labor-power is reproduced not only in the family-household on an unwaged basis by mothers and wives, but also on a waged basis by unproductive workers in schools, “labour-camps, barracks, orphanages, hospitals, prisons, and other such institutions.” SRT combines *aspects* of 5/6

these two contradictory theories to argue for the working class position and revolutionary capacity of people outside the “productive” economy. However, the purpose of this piecemeal mashup for SRT is political strategy and *not* a coherent theory of capitalist society. 6/6