Liberal Feminism - what's it all about? And who wants to discuss it with me?

[Beachcomber]

This is a subject I have been thinking about for a while. I have been wondering if Liberal Feminism has taken a bit of a hit from the 'backlash'. I'm interested in what Liberal feminists think and how they see the movement at the moment.

I thought maybe we could explore the focus and aims of the Liberal movement as it exists in the world today. My understanding of Liberal feminism is that it uses democracy and laws (i.e. the existing structures) to gain equality for women. This is a very pragmatic approach IMO and certainly measurable gains have been made for women (in the UK at least) with regards to reproductive rights, suffrage and equal pay. What seems to be harder is the struggle for affordable childcare and issues of domestic and other violence.

What do others think?

My understanding is that Liberals are very political in the sense that;

Liberal feminists believe that ?female subordination is rooted in a set of customary and legal constraints that blocks women?s entrance to and success in the so-called public world? and they work hard to emphasize the equality of men and women through political and legal reform.

Do people think that this is currently the case for Liberal feminism? Where do we see the future - what reforms/changes are needed for women currently? Do you think Liberal feminism has evolved with regards to how it has been criticised in the past for emphasis on the individual and a lack of inclusion (in particular of women of colour and the women most disadvantaged by society)?

thanks for starting this thread beachcomber

I think if I were to label myself I'd call myself a liberal feminist.
But then again I'm the kind of person that likes policies and procedures .

On a serious note I think feminism is perfectly compatible with a lot of liberal thought.

If anyone fancies some liberal feminist reading (it's a bit dry and academic but I like it) I'd recommend Susan Moller Okin's 'Justice, Gender, and the Family' - especially the bit where she critiques Rawls.

Ah, whatmeworry, you are my ideological twin according to that Bedanged quiz.

Hadn't seen this thread, but it's only of late that I bothered to realize the suffragettes were liberals. It's only of late that I realized people (well, mners) were so het up about what exactly constitutes a rad or lib fem. for me, fem is enough.

I am a liberal because I believe in engagement in order to overthrow the patriarchy. No, there is not equality, whatever the current law says.

I am liking the idea of militant liberals, though. I suspect that's what some folk who identify as radical are, really, when it boils down to absolutes.

Do I have to decide between lib and rad as labels? Or is a little bit of me picturing a bloke somewhere rubbing his hands thinking "that'll distract them from equal pay"...

I can't help thinking that if you decide to work exclusively within a system you're going to inevitably find a glass ceiling built in.

That's why stone throwing it's sometimes the only answer. To extend a metaphor.

Thanks, glasgowwean, that's an interesting post. Just a coupla points;

I don't want to replace it with a system that favours women but with once that treats all as equals. I'm not aware of any brand of feminism which wants a system that favours women.

I know that some Liberals think what you say about prostitution potentially being a choice but AFAIA there are also lots of Liberals who don't hold this view.

I would argue that it comes from a woman centered view but that it looks to achieve an equality for all.

I'm surprised by this - I wasn't aware that Liberal feminists wish to achieve equality for all.

there is, I think from reading so far, not that much difference between radical and liberal feminism - they are certainly not opposing views are they? There is a broad common basis and I have hopes of finding out a bit more about liberal feminism and the sort of achievable changes it seeks

we do quite obviously need a massive range of ideas and thought, as long as it is about improving women's lives in real and forward looking ways that bring about actual change (such as demand reduction for prostitution) rather than merely propping up the status quo (giving out condoms instead of a way out for those who want it) then it has to be welcomed?

You're welcome Alameda (always makes me think of that Billy Connolly sketch when I post that)

Thanks for the book recommendation LaFataTurchina.

TheWonderfulFanny, no I doubt think you have to be either or. I think lots of us are a bit of both. I like your glass ceiling/stones metaphor.

I think it's working within the system to change it, though. Ie to eradicate any ceiling, glass or otherwise, for anyone.

Not to keep the original demarcation lines and juggle positions within. Removing patriarchy would remove those barriers.

This is what I find so contradictory, tbh.

I don't see any realistic way of removing the patriarchy except by engagement, and from the starting point within what we already have.

I was pondering the boy children issue in the shower, as you do. And consciousness raising. As you do. A few times on here there has been a discussion about the end game, and the long game, and that raising your son consciously could help change society over time etc. it still puts the onus on the mother, doesn't it? But I can't help but feel that our sons really hold the key to the success of this, much as I hate to admit it. So liberals need to keep campaigning and engaging to try and change existing structures, but until we get a new wave of boy children (and a good schwack of women) into decision making positions, ultimately we don't stand a lot of chance to change the status quo.

And I'm aware that's not woman centred. But i do see men as being key stakeholders on the removal of patriarchy, however fucked up that sounds.

God, I've got an English degree, and I can barely understand my own writing. Apols for complete gibberish.

I actually agree and I think that's part of the reason for some of the friction on this board.

Although I identify as a liberal feminist, I have my own views that don't quite fit, usually shaped by my own personal experiences. I think it's difficult to pin down any branch of feminism as having a strictly defined viewpoint or aim. I see feminism as being more fluid and evolutionary than that but sometimes, I feel forced to take my orginal stance as a liberal feminist when being accused of being an antifeminist. One of the problems with liberal feminist is that it can appear quite cold and analytical. I might be wrong but radfems appear to argue more from a passioned point of view and find the liberal tendancy to stand back, ponder and analyse a little bit frustrating. The vocalisation of the thought process by liberals seems to irritate while the radfems are trying to urge us on to action or to voice a stronger opinion.

There's obviously consensus on the fact that the system is broken but strong disagreement on how to effect change. It sometimes feels like the different strands of feminism are like political parties on differing ends of the spectrum which I don't think is truely the case.

And it would help if this liberal feminist could spell....

But I think sometimes those that identify as liberal see that, but those that identify as radical don't? Which seems to cause even more friction.

That's a really sweeping statement. Sorry. I just wondered if it might explain why so many liberals are going 'but I am a freaking feminist!' in the face of radical supposition otherwise?

Now that we have enticed some Liberals onto the thread could you take a bash at answering my queries about the backlash/women are equal now thing?

Do you think this is a challenge for Liberal feminism?

Certainly I think the backlash is problematic. (And not just for Liberals)

For me, in a sense, "liberal feminism" (if that is what I am - I don't really identify with a sub group but still), is often about realism.

Prostitution as an example:

I do not see how Radfems will achieve thier ideal of eradicating prostitution. Yes you could make it illegal everywhere in all forms, but drugs are illegal, speeding is illegal - still happens.

You could increase the punishments involved, but then murder has pretty severe punishments (in some cases death) and it stiil happens.

Yes, you could make it socially unacceptable....like say, drink driving (which still happens).

Yes you could (and should) raise the expectations and power of women along with their value in society. Well I think all feminist agree with that - rad, lib or whatever, but will that totally eradicate prostitution? Hard to say.......maybe, hopefully......but won't to take a long time? Yes.

So given that there is so clear, sure fire way of eradicating prostitution, no matter how much you may want to, and given that even if that goal could be achieved it will take a long, long time, shouldn't we consider the current reality?

What about the women who work in the sex industry now? Is it right to eschew any attempt to safeguard their rights and well being within the current reality? I don't think it is. I think you can look to the longer goal (if you wish) but still work to improve the current situation within the system short term and work to change it long term.

It's a great ideal to want prostitution eradicated, but should the pursuit of that goal (which IMO is possibly no achievable and certainly not in my lifetime) be of greater value than the lives of people currently working in that industry? I do not think it should be, so I think that makes me a liberal feminist.

As far as I can see, women aren't equal. Not sure what the q was about a backlash? I have the faludi book, but it's been a long time since I read it, well over ten years... As someone else said, I think I identify with liberal fem as a default position, but tend to speak as an individual, rather than espousing group think? Women are systematically oppressed in pretty much every way. Not sure if that answers your question, or not... I see a lot of lip service paid to equality, but not much of it in reality.

Strikes me that we are possibly discussing a different backlash. or are we back to the early nineties?

Catgirl - I really don't wish to make this thread into one about Radical feminism. However I just wanted to say that I think you are misrepresenting the radical view on the value of the women who are currently in prostitution. Enormously.

Am I? Then I apologise. I must have misunderstood

I thought that the radfem view was that any debate / idea of legalising prostiution in the short term in order to improve the safety, rights and status of women working in it meant that the longer term goal of eradicating prostituion held by many feminists and all (?) radfems was damaged too much and therefore such an argument / idea was non-feminist at worst and liberal feminist at best

Sorry if I have got that wrong

I mean the backlash to second wave feminism.

How do Liberals feel about it? I think it has been an aggressive reaction to the gains made for women within the system. I think it is the status quo readdressing itself, and I'm interested in how Liberals react to that/analyse it.

I wasn't aware that Liberal feminists wish to achieve equality for all.

That was a joke, wasn't it, Beach?!

Liberal feminists believe that you can work with the system to change it but that the individual also has certain responsibilities for themselves.

Agree, agree, agree! And what you said about understanding the system in order to change it, Glasgow, plus your analogy with relationship abuse. I don't agree with everything you've written but am grateful for your posts.

you're going to inevitably find a glass ceiling built in. That's why stone throwing it's sometimes the only answer

Agree with this, too, Fanny. I don't understand why some of this board's radical voices disapprove of legally-imposed quotas on top-level boards, for instance. As the chaps won't do it for themselves, I'm bloody glad the lawmakers are willing to make them do it.

Beach, can't speak for others but I absolutely do NOT think "women are equal now"! I can't see that anyone with even a tiny bit of feminism in them would think that

Catgirl, you are right that radical feminists don't support legalised prostitution.

That doesn't mean that they don't place value on the women currently in prostitution though. Quite the contrary.

I also agree that I do not think women are equal now. I don't think that's a lib fem viewpoint at all. And yes, of course I want equality for all. I think most right thinking people do.

I am surprised either of those things need saying as they appear to do.

I wasn't aware that Liberal feminists wish to achieve equality for all.

That was a joke, wasn't it, Beach?!

No, it wasn't. Are you saying that classic Liberal feminism is about fighting men's battles too?!