I accidentally put this up as a reply to Anon's related post, but it was intended to be an independent post. Anyway, here it is again.
Haraway identifies a problem inherent in previous feminisms: that they construct their revolutionary subject by inserting a subject constituted by oppression into Western ontological systems – cf. the creepy result of swapping ‘labor’ with ‘women’ and ‘alienation’ with ‘objectification’. Haraway’s alternative is to disintegrate the subject by swapping ‘identity’ with ‘affinity’. I understand affinity basically as partial identification with multiple identities. My first question is whether or not this is correct. My second question is what positive goals these affinity-subjects could share – is the statement “insist on noise and advocate pollution” a goal or a prediction for cyborg politics?