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)?

Yes, it does make sense, Garlic.

Hester, I kind of see it this way. I'm a woman and I'm affected by institutional misogyny. There are other aspects of my identity - how I see myself and now others see me, that mean I experience other kinds of oppression, but also other kinds of privilege, vis a vis some other women. But for me, because I am a woman, "feminism" is my "specialist subject," so to speak.

But, I can also see parallels in the mechanisms used to exclude and control other people that aren't specifically or solely related to misogynist oppression. I can also see parallels with the experience of people at the sharp end of other forms of oppression. In fact, such engagement has helped me to recognise examples of indirect sexual oppression that I hadn't really been aware of before. It's also helped me realise that many of my assumptions (based on my own experiences in particular) don't necessarily apply to all women, and challenged me to be aware of when I might be speaking from my own position of privilege, even unconsciously (but still causing hurt for others.)

I like to engage with others, even where I may not agree with their views. I want to learn from them. Sometimes the learning as led me to consider new and at times unpalatable truths from others, helping me to reshape my own perspective and how I engage with others.

I can fight against other forms of oppression those without feeling I have to compromise on my feminist ideals, and can gain new insights and ideas to strengthen my own fight against patriarchal oppression.

Heck, I'm cross posting all over the shop! :)

I kind of see feminism as a journey rather than a destination. As garlic mentions, our experiences as we go through life continue to shape how we interact with the world. I've often heard women say they've become feminists when they became mothers because that experience put into sharp relief just how many ways women are oppressed as a class. Others may find their views shift in response to other life-changing experiences - a sexual assault, being passed over for promotion at work, ageing, all sorts.

Although I've seen myself as a feminist since at least about 1981, my thinking has evolved, has developed, in response to the stuff that life has thrown at me, the choices I've made and how I've engaged with other people. Changes in technology as well have had an impact on my own evolution. Twenty years ago, the idea of being able to discuss stuff like this with people from all over the world in "real time" would have just been unimaginable!

Thanks, Kritiq, interesting. Are intersectional feminism and liberal feminism connected or overlapping or is it seen as a separate strand?

Agree about the evolution over time and about the role of technology.

I see it differently Hester

I dont think being a feminist means you can't be anything else

I see being a feminist as one facet of me as a person

So the fact I can recognise and oppose other forms of oppression is not a part of my feminism or a feminist act / belief

Does that make sense?

No idea! :) I'm not convinced that there is a consistent or agreed definition of what "liberal feminist" is.

Maybe it's like a massive venn diagram. There are certain things that all feminists agree on and prioritise, but some things that are more prominent features of some strands and not others. And, of course there can be quite opposing views on some issues amongst those who still identify as feminists.

I'm not that sure that pinning down exact labels is the important thing - it's more about finding where those bits of common ground are and working on those. Through that kind of engagement, some folks might shift their thinking so that there are even larger patches of common ground to work on.

I don't think we can ever eradicate all the differences of view any more than we can assume completely shared experiences amongst all women. But, I still think there's much more that unites feminists than divides them and that's the "bit" that I hang on to myself.

Yes, that absolutely makes sense, Catgirl.

Kritiq, how do you/can one reconcile the issues that arise when the beliefs, needs or fights of different groups come into conflict? Does your feminism remain the primary ideology at that point?

In what circumstances would the come into conflict Hester

(genuinely interested and struglging to think of likely sceanarios where this would happen)

The labels thing is quite fascinating because it's become such a big issue on this board whereas in my real life engagement with feminism it's rarely even come up. Maybe it's also a geographical thing and is more prevalent in the UK.

Must get my skates on, and hope this final point isn't too off topic, but I don't think we can estimate the impact of technology on our lives and on the mechanisms of oppression. Just some random examples . . .

• We can now communicate with feminists of all strands, from all points around the globe in real time.
• However, there are many women who are completely excluded from such engagement, or all the other information and learning opportunities that come with new technology.
• Also, those who benefit from male and other forms of privilege can likewise get together, share ideas and tactics, gee each other up and feel emboldened in the assertion of their privilege.
• We can find out about things that are happening around the world almost instantly, often with first-hand accounts from the people it's happening to. That was unheard of even a couple decades ago.
• Mobile technology can be used as a tool to oppress and control women in relationships - thinking particularly of young women and "sexting."
• Technology has enabled the spread of porn, particularly extreme and violent porn, reaching more people, including children and its pervasiveness influences other aspects of our life (e.g. music, advertising, entertainment, etc.) and has led to the "normalisation" of attitudes and practices that are harmful to women and girls.
• But, technology has enabled those who are oppressed to share information and join forces to form a stronger voice against that oppression.

That's just the tip of a huge and deep iceberg. Other kinds of technological advances including automation of production, medical treatments, warfare, genetic modification of foodstuffs, just all sorts of things have also had an impact on who we are, how we live, how we relate to one another. Therefore, they have also had an impact on the mechanisms of oppression AND the means of fighting against it.

It's neither all good or all bad, but definitely a force to consider.

Bye now.

Good posts KRITIQ. I think I must be an intersectional feminist. I look at feminism as a part of a bigger picture. I don't think of the problem as all men oppressing all women, but as society being set up to fit the needs and concerns of the group that's historically been in power - white able-bodied straight men. They controlled politics, business and so on, and made laws and customs that would benefit themselves and people like them: sometimes intentionally, sometimes unthinkingly. Because they had more influence in the cultural sphere, books and plays portrayed them as nuanced, capable and generally good characters, whilst other people were reduced to stereotypes. And because we absorb these portrayals, and the views held by those around us, we all end up to some extent believing the stereotypes about other oppressed groups, and internalising the ones about our own. So most people are privileged in some ways and oppressed in others, we can't avoid privilege, but we can and should work to understand it so that you we avoid oppressing people and so we can see people as they really are and not through the stereotyping lens of the media.

hester - I think a lot of people , myself included, also feel the labels thinkg is an "only on MN" thing.

IRL I am a feminist. It's only on here that people have felt the need to label, define or categorise that.

Hester, quite. In rl, no one has ever queried what flavour fem I might be. It is enough that I am a fem, ergo I must be a militant loon. It's bizarre that on here, people are expected to pick and choose and then defend a really fairly meaningless label. In the grand scheme of things, the minute differences in ideology, and individual perceptions, are pointless, save that they exist, and should be respected, not denounced.

Okay, one more thing :) in response to Hester's post Thu 28-Jun-12 20:41:11, I suppose on issues that directly conflict (e.g. reproductive rights,) I'd have to agree to disagree and keep "doing my own thang" on those issues, perhaps seeking out other allies for those efforts, if that makes sense.

I think you're right. I've never been to a meeting of feminists where people have felt the need to declare their "label." You can usually work out the differences in perspective and priority from the discussions, but if everyone is committed to the issue at hand, it's definitely possible to focus on that common ground and get stuff done!

A religious group who experienced oppression whose beliefs included the oppression of women might be one example, Catgirl. The transgender debate recently where there were many who articulated that their issue was that the legislation enshrines gender as being intrinsic to sex whereas they saw feminism as fighting to break that link another.

Not every belief or ideology is compatible in my opinion. However you define feminism, simply by defining it you're by default saying there are beliefs that it excludes, the belief that men are naturally superior to women being a crude and obvious one.

Kritiq, I appreciate the time and thought you've put into all your answers. I keep thinking of more questions but have to get off the computer now. Thanks to everyone who has engaged with this, in fact.

Ah - I suppose I hadn't thought of the religious angle as I am very far from religious myself.

The trans one is interesting but again, my own personal beliefs wouldn't lead me into a conflict

I can see that that is personal to me and that other people might find conflicts.

I suppose in that situation, one would simply follow the belief they held most deeply and champion the cause they felt to be most important. But that is a moral judgement and always going to be personal to each individual.

catgirl - There's quite a few examples where different anti-oppression movements come into conflict. For example:

• The debate about the rights of transwomen to access women's spaces, which has been covered a lot on other threads.
• Some African-American activists criticise gay rights activists for appropriating a lot of the language of their struggle, whilst not doing enough to combat racism within the gay community.
• Gay rights activists obviously want to fight the laws against homosexuality in many parts of the world. But part of anti-racism is the criticism of cultural imperialism: westerners considering their culture superior and trying to impose it on the rest of the world. In many African countries, homosexuality is viewed by most straight Africans as a western imposition.

x post with everyone!

Yes - as I say I can see where conflicts could exist - just not for me.

In many African countries, homosexuality is viewed by most straight Africans as a western imposition.

Didn't know that! I guess it makes sense - you don't like it, you blame the enemy for it. Doesn't help anybody (except homophobic, anti-white Africans) but I sure as hell see how intersectionality raises further boils on the face of prejudice. Dammit.

As a rambling aside, I've been the target of race hatred two and a half times: twice in predominantly, fiercely, black cities overseas and my 'half' is from living in Brixton, when a minority of very angry black people were very nasty. That said, the same Brixtonians were just as nasty to my black friend for being a coconut (she had a professional career) so that was probably class hatred disguised as race.

I have now fried my brain G'night!

• I dislike the word 'race' btw, as there is only one human race. it's just easier.

KRITIQ, thank you for elaborating on intersectionality so well. I agree with everything you wrote.

For me, it's probably because of growing up working class and living most of my life in majority-black cities. I believe women are oppressed and I try to fight that but I have a hard time privileging that struggle above all others, not when I have seen firsthand the godawful effects of other forms of oppression. I want to fight for the people who are suffering the most and that is not always a class composed solely of women.

I don't see why this would mean I'm not a feminist. Do we really want the feminist identity to be so narrow? So that really only activists could claim it?

I always thought of feminism more as a belief system -- you believe in the patriarchy and try to oppose it. To say that no, you have to put that struggle above all other concerns, feels a bit too much like a loyalty test for me.

garlic - In fact, many historians now think that same-sex activity was tolerated or accepted in some pre-colonial african societies. These articles are fascinating: "Certain tribes in pre-colonial Burkina Faso and South Africa regarded lesbians as astrologers and traditional healers. A number of tribal groups in Cameroon and Gabon believed homosexuality had a medicinal effect. In pre-colonial Benin, homosexuality was viewed as a boyhood phase that males passed through and eventually grew out of." and "The Nigerian anthropologist Ifi Amadiume?s study of Nigerian Igbo society shows how the fluidity of gender construction meant that females could become ?female husbands? as long as they had acquired the same amount of status and wealth as a male." Arguably homophobia itself was the western import: westerners introduced penal codes that criminalised homosexuality.

To complicate the issue further, whilst western governments are telling african governments to improve gay rights, some American evangelical christians are travelling to Uganda and giving anti-gay speeches.

It's a really tough one, because whilst I'm very concerned about gay rights, and gay people are suffering terrible situations in places like Uganda, I have to recognise that as a white westerner I have very little understanding of their society and no moral authority given the awful history of colonialism. Also there's a very real chance that western meddling without understanding could cause a backlash against African gay people, and end up doing more harm than good.