The "religious and secular divide" cannot be understood unless we think about the way sex gets mobilized on both sides of this supposed divide. In our joint writing, we have resisted thinking of the religious and the secular as a divide; we have rather been interested to think them relationally—as relations. Thus, the larger suggestion of this paper is that we cannot truly imagine and practice democratic politics—to name some keywords for this discussion—unless we rethink the relations between sex, secularism, (...) and religion. (shrink)

Alliance politics is not always an easy proposition. In public discourses about sexualities, unexpected alliances and splits occur even as accomplished alliances fail to achieve their political goals. By considering the models of agency enacted in a series of these alliances, I question how lesbian and feminist and queer actors can more effectively pursue alliance politics in relation to U.S. public policy.

Feminist ethics has questioned the limits of and possibilities for the recognition of moral diversity within the Enlightenment legacy of Western rationality and modern universalism. I pursue this question by reading two contemporary theorists, Jürgen Habermas and Seyla Benhabib, who express a strong commitment to the recognition of diversity within a reason-centered reading of the Enlightenment. Despite their strong commitments, however, neither Habermas nor Benhabib can ultimately maintain a balance between the poles of egalitarianism and universalism within the framework of (...) Western rationality. As a result, they fail to recognize diversity fully. Through these readings, I suggest a feminist ethics which subversively appropriates the Enlightenment tradition. This feminist ethics de-centers rationality and dis-locates modernity in order to find an alternate path toward the fulfillment of Enlightenment promises of emancipation. (shrink)