Communication

Science & Society, Vol. 79, No. 1, January 2015, 114116

MARXS UNIVERSAL CLASS, RELATIONS

OF PRODUCTION, AND RELATIONS
OF SEXGENDERAGE

Renzo Llorentes recent article, Marxs Universal Class (Science & Soci-
ety, October, 2013) consists of an excellent presentation of the theoretical
reasons why Marx, Engels, and contemporary Marxists have considered the
working class to be the universal class, whose self-emancipation will lead
to an emancipation from all class domination, exploitation and oppression
(551, emphasis in the original).
But from this he draws the incorrect conclusion that we should privilege
the struggle for the emancipation of the working class over those of other
groups subject to more particular forms of oppression. He characterizes
these other forms of oppression as patriarchy and racism and argues that
the struggles against these, although important, should, in general, be sub-
ordinated to the struggle against class oppression.
In support of this, he makes a very different assertion, omitting the term
class: Marx and Engels [claim] that proletarian emancipation will elimi-
nate all oppression, exploitation and domination (551, emphasis added).
The difference between the two is significant. Will the emancipation of the
working class end class oppression, or all oppression? To put this another
way, are all forms of oppression class-based, i.e., derived, ultimately, from the
relations of production?
I will address here the issue of gendered oppression, and leave
for later discussion the impermissibility, for very different reasons, of

114

G4344-text.indd 114 11/18/2014 2:56:33 PM

 marxs universal class 115

systematically subordinating the struggle against racial oppression to

class struggle.
Marx wrote:

In the social production of their existence, men inevitably enter into definite relations,
which are independent of their will, namely relations of production appropriate to
a given stage in the development of their material forces of production.

It takes little theoretical effort, apart from those hampered by ideological

constraints, to recognize that the social relations into which people enter
that are necessary for the social production of their existence involve not
one but two sets of social relations. Marx focused on the relations that result
in the production necessary for the physical maintenance of the members
of society. But the other set of relations is those that result in the reproduc-
tion of the human race from one generation to the next. The first can be
termed the social relations of production while the second can be termed
the social relations of sexgenderage.1 A materialist study of any form
of life, whether human, animal, or vegetable, must include both of these.
Together they constitute the study of life. The two clearly interact, and their
interaction is important to study, but it is impermissible to privilege one
over the other. A study of the reasons for the endangerment of a species
would be considered seriously flawed if it looked only at their food sources
but not their mating and nesting behavior.
The oppression that characterizes relations of sexgenderage takes a
fundamentally different form from the oppression that characterizes rela-
tions of production. The extraction of surplus from the laboring people in
all class societies constitutes exploitation and provides the material basis
for their domination and social oppression. The oppression of women is
based on control of relations of sexuality, rather than relations of produc-
tion, and this provides the basis for their domination and oppression. Rape
constitutes an act of aggression that cannot be described in the language
appropriate for relations of production. It constitutes a fundamentally dif-
ferent category of oppression than the receipt of lower wages than men.
It requires a correspondingly fundamental theoretical analysis. (The most
valuable introduction to this analysis that I am familiar with is the article by
Gayle Rubin, cited just above.)
The interaction between these two categories of social relations leads, in
capitalist societies, to such well-known phenomena as lower wages for women

1 I add the concept age to Gayle Rubins (1975) formulation of relations as those of sex
gender to allow for an inclusion of the relations that affect both children and the aged in
the structure of social familial relations. See Rubin, 1975.

G4344-text.indd 115 11/18/2014 2:56:33 PM

 116 SCIENCE & SOCIETY

and the poverty of single-parent families (although obviously every child has
two biological parents). Income inequality between men and women results
more from the ways in which relations of sexgenderage are structured,
than from discrimination by profit-seeking capitalists. Llorente looks at
the possible reorganization of the gendered division of labor and the non-
discriminatory integration of women (and men) into production in a social-
ist/communist mode of production as the solution to the oppression of
women. This could indeed address the class/production-based aspect of
gender inequality. Yet the solution to womens oppression requires more
than their equality as the performers of unexploited labor in a socialist/
communist mode of production. It requires more than the emancipation of
the proletariat. It requires a revolution in the relations of sexgenderage.
In practice, all working-class revolutions, in Russia, China, Cuba and oth-
ers, have resulted in enormous steps forward for women, and working-class
movements today support not only the struggle for gender equality, but also
the GLBTQ (Gay/Lesbian/Bisexual/Trans-sexual/Queer) movement. But
our theoretical understanding of these relations of sexgender has lagged far
behind the massive social movements that have challenged, with significant
success, the oppressions related to sexgender. We have yet to formulate a
Marxist/dialectical materialist understanding of the goals of this revolution,
as distinct from opposition to the oppression that characterizes existing re-
lations. We are even further from understanding the relationship between
class struggle and struggles over relations of sexgenderage. Llorentes
article represents a coherent presentation of an old approach to the issue
of gender relations. It is long past time to move on.

Paddy Quick

Department of Economics
St. Francis College
180 Remsen Street
Brooklyn, NY 11201
pquick@sfc.edu

REFERENCES

Llorente, Renzo. 2013. Marxs Concept of Universal Class: A Rehabilitarion. Sci-

ence & Society, 77:4 (October), 536560.
Rubin, Gayle. 1975. The Traffic in Women: Notes on the Political Economy of Sex.
In Rayna R. Reiter, ed., Towards an Anthropology of Women. New York: Monthly
Review Press.

G4344-text.indd 116 11/18/2014 2:56:33 PM

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.