Talk:Mary Joe Frug

Children : Stephen and Emily

Untitled
It seems inaccurate to say that Frug is considered the "mother of postmodern feminist theory" for two reasons. The first, and most basic, is that it's simply untrue. She may be the "mother" of postmodern feminist LEGAL theory, but certainly not of pomo fem theory as a whole.

Second, calling her the "mother" when her work specifically argues against the widespread maternalization of women is either painfully ironic or downright offensive. May I suggest that it be changed to "a central [or significant...or something like this] figure in early postmodern feminist legal theory"? Amanda —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.11.27.49 (talk) 05:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mary Joe Frug. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120717051039/http://neslwomen.blogspot.com/search/label/Mary%20Joe%20Frug%20Grant to http://neslwomen.blogspot.com/search/label/Mary%20Joe%20Frug%20Grant

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:07, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Gerald Frug and CLS
@Eikko Just a quick note on a small edit in the article, where you changed that Gerald Frug was a CLS "adherent" to "associated with". I then re-favored the word "adherent" ("supporter" would work as well). From my reading of the cited sources, it seems that Gerald's hiring was part of that clash between the Crits and the traditionalists, recruited at least partly because he was a Crit. That doesn't seem directly in the scope of this article, but does seem worth emphasizing in the above small way (and it gives a little more context to the objection to the publication of Mary Joe's essay in the Review). Anyhow, hahaha...just detail since you seem interested in tone. --Tsavage (talk) 20:04, 10 September 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you for noting it. I think you're more knowledgeable about the context and I'll leave it as is. I appreciate the collaborative spirit! Eikko (talk) 13:23, 11 September 2023 (UTC)