gender 1061 a tacit assumption runs through the volume that Marxism can be expanded te include discussions of ideology, culture, and psychology and that this expansion will happen through the kind of concrete examination of evidence undertaken in most of the articles. The advantage of such an approach lies in its avoidance of sharp differences of position, the disadvantage in its leaving in place an already fully articulated theory that leads back from relations of the sexes based to relations of production A comparison of American Marxist-feminist efforts, exploratory and relatively ide-ranging, to those of their English counterparts, tied more closely to the politics of a strong and viable Marxist tradition, reveals that the English have had greater difficulty in challenging the constraints of strictly determinist explanations This difficulty can be seen most dramatically in the recent debates in the New Left Review between Michele Barrett and her critics, who charged her with abandoning a materialist analysis of the sexual division of labor under capitalism. 22 It can be seen as well in the replacement of an initial feminist attempt to reconcile psy choanalysis and Marxism with a choice of one or another of these theoretical positions by scholars who earlier insisted that some fusion of the two was possible. 23 The difficulty for both English and American feminists working within Marxism is apparent in the works I have mentioned here. The problem they face is the opposite of the one posed by patriarchal theory. Within Marxism, the concept of gender has long been treated as the by-product of changing economic structures, gender has had no independent analytic status of its own A REVIEW OF PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY REQUIRES a specification of schools, since the various approaches have tended to be classified by the national origins of the founders and the majority of the practitioners. There is the Anglo-American school, working within the terms of theories of object-relations. In the U. S, Nancy Chodorow is the name most readily associated with this approach. In addition, the work of Carol Gilligan has had a far-reaching impact on American scholarship, Johann and Maria Ramas, Rethinking Women's Oppression, " New Left R 144 (March-April 1984): 33-71; Michele Barrett. Rethinking Womer A Reply to brenne and Ramas, " New Left Review, 146(July-August 1984): 123-28: Al d Elizabeth wilson The British Womens Movement, Nea Left Review, 148 (NG berl984):74-103; Michele Barrett, "A Response to Weir and Wilson, New Left ReT April I985:143-47 e Lewis. " The Debate on Sex and Class so Hugh Armstrong and Pat Armstrong, " Beyond Sexless Class and Classless Sex: Towards Feminist Marxism, " Studies in Political Economy, 10(Winter 1983): 7-44: Hugh Armstrong and Pat mstrong, Comments: More on Marxist Feminism. "Studies in Political Economy, 15(Fall 1984) 179-84; and Jane Jenson, "Gender and Reproduction; or, Babies and the State, " unpublished paper. June 19 eoretical formulations, see Papers on Patriarchy: Confere I am grateful to Jane Caplan for telling me of the existence of this publication and for her ally alexande Women, Class and Sexual Difference, " History Workshop, 17(Spring 1984): 125-35. In seminars at Princeton University in early 1986, Juliet Mitchell seemed to be returning to an emphasis on the priority nde or a f marxis feminism, see Coward. Patriarchal Precedents. See also the this direction by ologist Gayle Rubin, " The Traffic in Women: No "Political Economyof Sex R. Reiter, ed, Towards an Anthropology of Women(New York, 1975): 167-68