Is feminism a left-wing thing?

Analysis comes from both sides of the politcal spectrum, surely?

As I understand it, the Democratic Party in the US is the "left wing" party but would be considered to be more closely equivalent to the Tory than the Labour Party here.

I think that this is true, in that the political center in the US is definitely to the right of the political center in the UK. Regarding feminism, however, I think it is very difficult for feminists in the US to be Republicans (and by definition right wing) because so many of the positions of the party and of individual Republicans are so avowedly anti-women and anti-feminist. That the Republican Party is the home of Christian fundamentalists (who believe that married women should "submit" to their husbands) says it all, really.

So in the US, most feminists are Democrats and on the left end of the political spectrum, although I think many would call themselves liberal rather than radical feminists, in the sense of the pre-"anything goes" liberal feminism that lightbulbon referenced in an earlier post: "20 years ago liberal feminism was easier to define as it was an umbrella term for campaigns to change laws, policies & practices."

But I have to say that, as an American, I am still trying to figure out how exactly the Tory Party is different from Labour. When I was a student in the UK many years ago, it was very obvious. Now, not so much.

Buffy there are many structural disadvantages, but the right wing remove structures and therefore remove the structural disadvantage.
How can building up a monolithic state structure remove structural disadvantage?
I give some examples below, but am interested in how a larger state helps remove structural inequalities for all.
If governments removed many barriers to entry for firms, many smaller firms could start which had women friendly policies, for example.
I had an idle thought about sexual equality in firms. At present, all firms must legally follow sexual equality, but many do not as the only enforcers are employees (who often need the job) through specific court cases, and the costs of non-compliance is small.
Imagine if the law was removed, but all companies were forced to publish thier equality policy.
Companies which chose to be sexist can be shamed/boycotted/ignored, whilst those who claim to be equal opportuities could be challenged through the court by campaigning organisations and fined (significant sums) for lying. IMO, this would make firms much more enthusiastic about getting it right.
Just one potential example where removing the role of the state could improve feminism.

Yes I don't really understand how you can explain inequality without structural analysis.

If structural factors don't exist, then there's no need to call for equality is there? Everyone can have equality just by deciding they're going to be equal and there will be no structural factors obstructing that decision.

I'm very right wing politically and an extremely active feminist.

Hadn't thought before about politics really coming into it. People from all sides of the spectrum can believe in equality.

I am definitely not left-wing but definitely think of myself as a feminist.

I think certain types of feminism are easier if you're left-wing though. If you like your structural analyses and your ideologies and your false consciousnesses and your discourses and all that schtick you probably have a generally fairly lefty outlook generally.

Surely socialism leads to a state run position with the lack of liberty of all within that strait-jacket. A right wing view (not necessarily espoused by the current govt), leads to a minimisation of state and large institutions by removing barriers to entry.
As such, the statist view is more likely to have a ruling class which hurts women than a small state which removes inherited benefits/positions.
Therefore feminists should be right wing.

But that's using "radical" as "extreme" not "at the root"...

Shall we take this to theory? Or just be Reasonable ?

"Ok, but then what is libfem? "

God now you're asking. I really have no idea. Labels are actually very useful (and essential) if they are applied in the same way to the same thing by everyone, but I agree with Sweetandfullofgrace that where they get troublesome, is when they mean something different to different people, which any label attached to feminism tends to and in fact the label feminist, without any other qualifier, also means different things to different people.

All those goals started off radical, until they became mainstream and suddenly everyone realised that they were sensible and they'd been in favour of them all along. Like every progressive measure, really. No major change, good or bad, has ever come out of the middle ground, has it? Hence that saying BoF referred to.

I'm never sure what "brand" my feminism is (lib, rad etc). Like politics, I focus on outcomes and tend to find labels troublesome.

"So can rad fems,can't they? You can have a practical approach and still have a structural analysis. "

Ok, but then what is libfem?

"So they work for change battle by battle, like equal pay, rape law etc. - all those reforms that were brought about by radicals."

Were they? I don't know enough to know one way or the other, but surely equal pay, for one, was a common goal of all feminists?

I think I shall continue to call myself just a feminist!

"And now I'm wondering if left wing and right wing are very useful terms anymore"

I would agree with this - most political commentary I hear on TV seems to be about "the battle for the middle ground" and I expect both Tory and labour high command would rather be called right of centre and left of centre than right wing or left wing.

i disagree that voting for a female candidate is automatically a feminist act. If that candidate advocates the austerity agenda, for example, they are supporting cuts which systematically disadvantage women.

AskBasil, there's a saying on the Left that revolutionaries make the best reformists.

I wouldn't vote for a woman if I didn't agree with her party's policies. But I would be more likely to vote for a woman than a man, all else being equal.

I'm a feminist and I've voted both Lib Dem and Tory in my time.

I'm a feminist and my politics are liberal, right of centre.

I voted Conservative for the first time at this years GE.

I am a feminist.

"I can look at the current set up of society, see how it disadvantages women and still think the most practical approach is to work to change it incrementally rather than trying to start again."

So can rad fems,can't they? You can have a practical approach and still have a structural analysis. Apart from separatists, I don't think many women who identify as radical, would say we have to just start again, because they know that's impossible. So they work for change battle by battle, like equal pay, rape law etc. - all those reforms that were brought about by radicals.

I agree that there's a difference between liberal feminists and lib fems and like so many terms, things are used interchangeably and confusingly and I sometimes find it all a bit angels on pinheads tbh. I also think the internet has confused things at the same time as opening things and making them more exciting, because a whole load of feminists with very different cultural assumptions are talking to each other and perhaps using terms differently to each other. And that also shows how much "feminism" as a movement, isn't necessarily leftwing. Except possibly radical feminism, I don't think I've ever come across a right wing feminist who identifies herself as radical. Although who knows, that might be a thing somewhere.

I just think as soon as a movement becomes a mass movement (which feminism did), it doesn't matter whether it started as a left or right wing movement, it can be influenced by and influence both left and right.

And now I'm wondering if left wing and right wing are very useful terms anymore.

20 years ago liberal feminism was easier to define as it was an umbrella term for campaigns to change laws, policies & practices.

The campaigns to criminalise demand, censor porn, close lap dancing clubs etc would all have come under this label.

However over the last decade 'lib fem' has becone used as a term to describe self defining feminists (eg women who are in favour of equality/equal pay & education etc) who are pro porn & pro sex industry/legalisation.

It's pretty confusing!

It gets even more confusing when rad fems find themselves 'on the same side' as right wing esp religious right wing women who want to restrict porn/sex industry, but for very different reasons.

I think this is where a lot of the misunderstanding of radical feminism comes from (usually by younger feminists who haven't read the classic 2nd wave texts) as they see (usually older) rad fems as being 'moralising', 'prudish', 'anti sex' etc without understanding that rad fems & the religious right are actually poles apart!

I see your point, people do tend to associate the two. But, as I said, these things are rarely black and white!