A propos last week’s post, this remark from Jake McNulty’s very good book on Marcuse (in my Routledge Philosophers series) is also apt:

A final observation: Marcuse’s profound investment in psychoanalytic thought appears to have no parallel among the analytic critical theorists [e.g., Haslanger, Manne, Stanley]. In leftist thought and practice, psychoanalysis has often served as an antidote to pathologies of traditional religion and morality that persist in secular societies. Unfortunately, some of these pathologies are present on the left today, within the academy and outside. One sees them in a moralistic fixation upon the individual; upon individual choices; upon the individual’s inner life (or soul), where precursors of these choices are found; upon the need for public confession; and perhaps also in an understanding of prejudice as sin‐like, an undetectable but dangerous contaminant diffused throughout the social body.To this secularized puritanism, always a standing threat in capitalist societies that draw their sustenance from the Protestant ethic, we might counterpose the psychoanalytical view of human beings; in particular, a view of human beings as in the grip of irrational, unconscious forces, ones which are as much social as individual and therefore out of the control of any particular person. These forces do not excuse, but can help to diagnose and explain, the darker dimensions of human behavior. In addition to promoting a materialist, rather than idealist, approach, Marcuse’s correctives to contemporary leftist thought and practice might include this psychoanalytic rejection of moralistic politics, and the secularized religious impulse that lies behind it.  (p. 244)

Given Haslanger’s Christian Science background, the “securalized religious impulse” is particularly unsurprising in her case.