The leftist thing seems to be an attempt to ad academic legitimacy, borrowing the tradition of philosophy, while also making use of &#x2F; abusing the tradition of ambiguity. The political advantage of this is never having to commit to saying anything concrete - a boon for practitioners of &#x27;Motte and Bailey&#x27; rhetoric - <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;slatestarcodex.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;slatestarcodex.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;11&#x2F;03&#x2F;all-in-all-another-bric...</a> .<p>That said, I find this is more the case with <i>lit crit</i>, than philosophy. Perhaps in Academic Feminism?