I think there is a lot of value in feminist post-structuralist epistemology. Which I define as sociologists / anthropologists do, namely as treating all truth claims to equal scrutiny, not privileging one method (positivism) above the rest.
Buffy, I don't know much about post-structural feminism, but my Honours thesis dealt in part with the post-structuralist and postmodernist critique of positivism in the social sciences, and I came down on the anti-relativist side. While there is certainly merit in questioning the positivist method, especially WRT to the way Western anthropologists have positioned themselves as objective observers of other cultures, I maintained (and still maintain) that we can nevertheless make judgements on the relative merits of conflicting truth claims.
Basically, I took a dim view of postmodernism then, and I take an even dimmer view of it now. Back then, my objection to it was based on finding the pure relativist stance essentially pointless, but since reading this brilliant radical feminist essay on the political function of postmodernism, I now see it also as a reactionary and sinister phenomenon, which pretends to champion marginalised voices, but in fact undermines the ability of oppressed groups to name the truth of what is happening to them (because there is no truth, right?)
What I find most interesting about postmodernism is not what postmodernists say about it, but how it functions in the real world (and I'm assuming there is one) in terms of social change. The effects of the intimidating and obfuscating writing style, of inhibiting generalizations and so the formation of commonalities between people, of ruling out binary thinking and so eviscerating impassioned convictions, and of overemphasizing individual rather than collective action is to create a multilayered system of disconnection, silencing, and disempowerment.
What is also interesting is the timing of the advent of postmodernist theory. As Somer Brodribb and Barbara Christian point out in Radically Speaking, postmodernism came into vogue in academia just when the voices of women and people of color began to assert a significant presence there. It seems that when groups other than those in power attempt to say things, suddenly truth dissolves into meaninglessness. This is a little too coincidental for my taste.
I suggest that postmodernism is nothing more than the new relativism and that relativistic theories emerge as a new line of defense when power structures are becoming threatened. It is a very insidious and crafty defense because it mouths the words of liberation while simultaneously transforming them into meaninglessness. The real agenda is masked in clever obfuscation--to preserve the status quo by rendering dissent meaningless and ineffective, unable to gather any social or political power. Notwithstanding postmodernism's purported intention to deconstruct social norms and by so doing, make way for changes, its actual effect is to atomize peoples' experiences, obliterate the potential for solidarity, silence articulate and forthright speech, and render passionate convictions meaningless. It leaves us unable to condemn anything as wrong or oppressive with clarity, certainty, or conviction.
offourbacks.net/index.php/featured-articles-1/85-let-them-eat-text-the-real-politics-of-postmodernism