While much theoretical and activist attention has been garnered by such an epithet, Braidotti foregrounds the problems with arguments that render the body obsolete or immaterial to the cultural processes which define it. When we are caught in a nature/culture or man/woman binary, what are the possibilities of shifting outside a system of knowledge that pays more attention to embodied difference(s)? This is where Braidotti provides an interesting response by thinking about the 'nomad' figure.
In this sense, it is important we pay attention to ontology or the specificity of our being, rather than try to assume we are able to think in the same intellectual or emotional levels because we all experience our biosocial existences (and I use this term to combine material and cultural existence) in the same way.So if men are to claim to be 'feminists', must we qualify that we have a distinct sexed difference (and hence philosophical) engagement to the term than women?
Does making a claim for 'ontology' just return us back to the essential biology trap, where women become seen only in terms of their body and men valued in terms of their intellect and mind? Is their such a thing as a distinct or bodily 'sexual difference' between sexes? If so, is it only limited to two (i.e. male and female)?