Is capitalism structurally indifferent to gender?: Routes to a value theory of reproductive labour *

The contributions of Ellen Meiksins Wood to social property relations arguments have facilitated an enhanced understanding of the historical specificity of capitalism and its structuring conditions. Yet such arguments also have some questionable assumptions when it comes to theorising gender and so-called 'extra-economic' identities, most noticeably regarding capitalism as indifferent to gender relations. This article delves into such issues by delivering a set of quandaries about various aspects of the social property relations approach and its relevance to wider debates on economy and space. We contend that debates in Marxism Feminism and social reproduction theory therein should be elevated to centre stage in considerations of political economy and economic geography. Consequently, it is possible to dispense with the notion that capitalism is structurally indifferent to gender, which mars the social property relations approach. At the same time, however, there are tensions within Marxism Feminism, not least revolving around questions of value, the role of unpaid labour in the household, and wider theorising on the relationship between 'market' conditions and extra-economic relations of 'state' power. We explore two major contending routes to what we call a value theory of reproductive labour within Marxism Feminism and conclude that this reconnaissance provides an opportunity to initiate enhanced discussion on future political struggles against capital's requirements.

Automated summary

Ellen Meiksins Wood's contributions have deepened our understanding of the historical specificity of capitalism, but there are questionable assumptions in social property relations arguments regarding gender and non-economic identities. The article explores dilemmas in the social property relations approach and emphasizes the importance of Marxism Feminism and social reproduction theory in future political struggles.