Trying to figure out difference between liberal and radical feminism

They used to call Wolf's ideas "lipstick feminism".

When I was a student and women there all worshiped Sheila Jeffries, Naomi Wolf was the main libfemmy text I think.

Thanks but I am familiar with socialist-feminism, Anarcho-feminism, Marxist-feminism and old-school radical feminism. I've read/studied Engels, Mills, Dworkin, Spender, Butler, Paglia, Rowbotham, Segal and so on...I was really more interested in which current contemporary theorists best expressed contemporary liberal feminism.

Well Mills doesn't apply to me anyway, when Mills was talking about women, he meant 'white' woman. Similarly removing patriarchy doesn't equal demolishing racism too.

Just watched the video posted by funky - LOVE. IT. Who is the presenter?

PeachYogurt. She is wonderful.

MIll’s ‘Subjection of Women’ was based on his and Harriet Taylor-Mill’s ‘The Enfranchisement of Women’ and was completed after HT-M’s death by JSM and TM’s sister, Helen. HTM contributed significantly to JSM’s body of work including ‘On Liberty’.

Is privilege a weaker idea ? I don’t know the answer to that but my initial view would be that getting men to understand and and accept that they exploit women is a barrier. Getting men to understand their privilege is something I’ve found to be much more productive.

For me it’s about getting results rather than purity of debate. I’ll quite happily borrow from radical feminism if it helps women without feeling that i’ve sacrificed my own “brand” of liberal feminism.

Blistery . Cross posted. You've answered already. I agree mill is ace given the times.

My first experience of any type of feminism being claimed as superior was on here some years ago.

In RL, most of us centre and support women in my experience in very practical ways regardless of theoretical views.

Blistory I'd be interested in dottie's question too.
I'm no where near as negative lib feminism as some on here. I also think it comes from an individualist rather than collectivist place. Liberalism is a doctrine of individual freedom after all. It has therefore focussed on freedom of choice for individual women.

It's also interested in language and culture and how they uphold sexist assumptions hence the focus on representations in the media and not using implicitly sexist language. That may be part of a general shift towards a cultural rather than materialist analysis in the humanities.

Although the intersectional bit of mainstream feminism seems to recognise different 'axis of oppression' ie people can belong to more than one disadvantaged group- those groups seem to be viewed as parts of each individual's identity rather than a class which individuals have membership of. It's therefore lacking the idea of exploitation of a class. This has been replaced by the weaker idea of privilege.

I don't think lib feminism centres men. But it does analyse how some men also lose out in a patriarchal system.

You're not going to get a very balanced view about liberal feminism on MN. Already, the sneering has started.

The comments on radical feminism will be interesting and informative but you are best off doing some research of your own on liberal feminism.

Beware liberal and Liberal and neo- liberal are all very different. Also, a boomer calling herself a liberal feminist can be very different from a Gen X or a millennial liberal feminist.

FFS - the Subjection of Women

My starting point is John Stuart Mills, and whilst problematic in some ways , his “Subjugation of Women” was the first thing I read and identified with.

Liberal feminist theory has some deficiencies which radical feminism attempted to address. And I would absolutely agree that liberal feminism was founded by and for white, middle and upper class women but that’s how most political movements begin given the dominance of those classes. I would hope that any feminist interested in feminist theory would read a variety of texts, not just those that match their own views.

Just because it isn’t radical doesn’t mean it’s fun feminism or a lesser form of feminism. I have always argued that both theories have continuing value and impact and should be respected and not vilified.

Isn't she? She used to get mentioned with approval on a regular basis when I first started posting here about 4 or 5 years ago. Inasmuch as I could make sense of anything she said her notions of performativity and performing femininty seemed to go down well.

She seemed to go out of favour on here after an interview with a trans activist where she said everyone had misunderstood her.

Blistory what theoretical frameworks underpin contemporary liberal feminism? And what are the key texts? I ask because I'm familiar with Engels and texts that relate to radical feminism, also a lot of people who once were described as socialist-feminists are now part of that grouping. Is liberal feminism more aligned with people like Sara Ahmed and Judith Butler or is it more Martha Nussbaum?

I’m a liberal feminist.

I think women have the right to make their own choices and I accept that some of those choices will be anti women. I believe however that we can alter society by changing laws, social attitudes and institutions to ensure that we remove sexism and that once sexism is removed, women should have agency and be free to make their own decisions about their own lives as the structures in place in society will protect others from bad choices affecting them.

I think radical feminism makes a lot of noise that is hugely beneficial but offers no realistic way in which to put the theory into practice in any meaningful way that helps reorganise our laws and institutions.

I don’t think I’m a better feminist or worse feminist than anyone else.

Good series of videos here explaining the difference between liberal & radical (c. 20 mins total)

I didn't watch it. I see Lierre Keith has another video spouting a load of anti-
vegan/ anti- vegetarian nonsense.

The terms have shifted over time. Once, radical feminism was almost segregationist, desiring a complete withdrawal from patriarchal structures.

But now, roughly, the terms can be understood as follows...

Liberal feminism is elite feminism. It reads society, culture and politics from the perspective of a wealthy, highly educated female who generally has freedom from the harshness of the female experience due to wealth and privilege. So sex work is unproblematic because it will never affect these women in any way, either as a primary or secondary victim. Pole dancing is "ironic" because they will never actually be in a position where that is the only way they can afford to pay the rent.

Radical feminism is now street level feminism. It reads society from the perspective of the ordinary woman who does not have wealth and privilege, and thus faces the harshness of the female state within that structure. So sex work is problematic because radical feminism recognises the exploitation of the female in
sex work and recognises that females are harmed by this work and that those females are the same class as the radical feminist and this paradigm affects all ordinary women's lives outside of the elite bubble. For example, look at Leeds: the sex work in the decriminalised zone not only exploits trafficked females , but also disrupts the lives of non sex worker females and girls living in the area, and attitudes to females in general. Radical feminism sees this; liberal feminism does not.

I think, to some extent, radical feminism is an expression of communitarianist drives (ie. females as a class) whereas liberal feminism is pretty much neo-liberal and individualistic (the female as an individual).

In this way, today's radical feminism can be read as Marxist and liberal feminism as neo-capitalist, but I'm not sure how far those comparisons are actually useful, tbh.

Good series of videos here explaining the difference between liberal & radical (c. 20 mins total)

Most women wonder simply “am I /should I be a feminist?”. I have never read anyone using “liberal” before the word feminist when they are exploring in this way. So “liberal” seems to be mainly a word used by radical feminists to point out flaws in “mainstream” Theresa-May-style feminism.

(Caveat, That said, we do have one regular poster , Ratrolypoly, who calls HErself a liberal feminist. But only one I think)

OP, I think the problem with mainstream feminism is that it works on the basis of minimising/ignoring differences. That can work well when you are middle class especially if you haven’t had your life changed by your female biology much (endometriosis/childbirth).