Recent work in feminist logic is inspired by Plumwood (1993). In this talk, I want to unpack the Plumwoodian argument against classical logic. The thrust of the argument is that the prominent role of classical logic in science perpetuates toxic modes of cognition and social injustice. This is meant to promote wider use of non-classical logics for tackling philosophical issues, especially social and political issues. Many commentators suggest that the success of this project depends on assumptions of the strong normativity of logic, classical recapture results, or logical pluralism. My goal is to unravel these threads. I will argue for an ameliorative reading of Plumwood's project on which the question of correct logic is irrelevant.