In Not Only for Myself, Martha Minow invites the traditional combatants in the identity politics debate to consider the perspectives of the other, for the sake of the national community. Minow's articulation of the origins and value of identity politics is pointed. She writes: “Contemporary identity politics seems to offer people life rafts in the turbulent search for meaning, home, acknowledgment and redress... Recognition, of course, is not the only stake. Physical safety, when you are gay, or brown-skinned, or female, in the contemporary United States, is definitely at stake...when some people have specifically targeted others because of their race, or gender, or sexual orientation, or religion, or disability, demanding redress and acceptance on those very grounds is the only way not to concede those are natural or legitimate targets for injury. Hence, out of this arises identity politics. (Minow, 1997)
Minow's primary question is whether we can "find a way to acknowledge the complexity of identities without pretending that race, gender, disability, religion and sexual orientation do not matter in American society." (Minow, 1997) By not pointing an accusing finger or according victim status to identity-politics proponents, Minow changes the terms of the discussion about the continuing utility of identity politics, and enables it to go forward less fraught with anger (on the part of the gay or brown-skinned or female people on one side of the debate) and defensiveness (on the part of the people feeling threatened and bewildered by the claims and assertions of solidarity of the angry identity politics advocates).
Moving beyond analysis of the social and political forces that give rise to identity politics, Minow also considers the limits to "thinking, advocating, litigating and politicking along lines of group differences.".......
