A chatty, questions and random comments thread

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

There used to be a lovely 'Chat' thread where we could all be silly or just comment/witter on about stuff, and I've not seen it since this place got renamed to 'Chat'. Would it be a good time to have another random chatty thread going? I think there are some newbies having a look around after the thread about calling yourself a feminist, so maybe it would be a nice thing?

So people can ask random questions or make comments without feeling they have to jump right in to an ongoing thread or write an OP, if they don't want to.

When I worked in an office briefly, at once stage there were two of us as general dogsbodies/data entry types, me and a bloke. It was the sort of place where they took on lots of students during the summer and we were both students. Boss used to get me to bring them a cuppa mid-morning and mid-afternoon, which I was absolutely fine with and did no trouble, until I found out that the bloke, who worked the two days I was working the other side of the building, didn't get told to do this. Someone asked the boss why and he responded '[blokesname] is a student, he'll be going somewhere in life so I'm not having him making the tea, he's here to pick up tips that will be useful'.

Your story reminded me of that OMC. Fortunately the bloke was as embarrassed as I was and made me feel a whole lot better, as did the other women in the office.

Hi joyful! I know a bit and will post tomorrow unless seine more knowledgeable comes before then!

Oh, sorry to hear that joyful!

I am not terribly knowledgeable, but I think there are lots of different schools of thought. Probably the most useful ones to know about are radical and liberal. A radical feminist is someone who thinks that the inequality of women is the root problem, and that the whole system of society needs to change in order to put right that deep-down inquality. A liberal feminist is someone who looks at things in terms of inequality between men and women, but who isn't necessarily convinced it's the root problem and doesn't want to restructure society completely.

I will write more in the morning when I'm more awake ... I just wanted to start the ball rolling a bit and no doubt someone will come along and disagree or modify what I've said! What it comes down to IMO is that we're all trying to work things out.

This short video explains the basic difference between liberal and radical feminism.

Am I being thick - but that's not a feminist group, is it? Or are they feminists as well as environmentalists?

I don't agree with her at all that the main thing is invidualism vs. groups. But I am biased because she is pissing me off referring to Marx's 'original' division of people into groups based on class. Someone mentioned that on here recently ... FFS, I have nothing against Marx, but Mary Wollstonecraft was referring to women as a class years before Marx and if we are feminists surely it's kind of worthwhile to read her instead of someone who never pretended or claimed to be a feminist theorist? In fact that is really annoying me - yet another 'he figured this out', yes, great genius ... but she'd figured it out for women already.

I do like what she says about society being organized by concrete systems of power. I think that is a really important thing, to me, that you can identify structures of power and oppression. That's why people may try very hard to be lovely, fair-minded types, but they can't change the whole system just by being fair and nice on their own.

Not sure if it is a feminist group or not, but she is a feminist. Yes I have read that Wollstonecraft talked about class first. But I think the video is useful in understanding the differences. There are 2 follow up videos explaining the differences that I have posted the links to on a separate thread.

Ah, ok, I will go and watch the other two, sorry, I didn't notice it had other parts.

I think she is very articulate and she explains very well, but I think perhaps she is skewing her explanation to apply to a context that isn't feminism.

I do think the 'this is what liberals don't understand' bit is off. I would say I'm a (really bad, very early-stages) would-be radical feminist, but I don't like the idea of saying to someone who identifies as a liberal feminist, or who has some liberal beliefs, that they 'don't understand'. They might understand and disagree. I may think they're wrong, but making out they're ignorant is off.

Personal taste, maybe.

There was a great thread a while back, about separatism, which is the feminist idea that women cannot really live as equals while they live with men, so lots of women went and lived in women-only communities. Someone had links to a group that's still going today and it sounded lovely and peaceful - it's a very peaceful concept, because you basically withdraw from society. But we were all talking about how exciting it was and I think most people on here could see why it would appeal - and there are places in the UK where you can go on a woman-only holiday, and that's appealing - but we pretty much all felt we just couldn't do it for ourselves. Most of us were talking about having male partners, or close male friends, or adult children who were male ... and I suppose a separatist feminist might say 'oh, but you're just not radical enough, you just don't understand'.

What I'm saying is, there's probably always going to be someone who is more hardline than you, and someone who is more willing to compromise and less willing to make a fuss. I don't think it's always about who understands things best.

Yes I agree with your point. I think the video is made from a speech given at a radical feminist event, so she will talk about radical feminism as the right philosophy. But I posted it as I think her explanation of the differences is very useful.

Sometimes it is about understanding, but quite clearly sometimes it is about differences of opinion - and that is fine.

Sure, yes, I agree.

I am trying to think of some good examples, because it's easier to think about something concrete.

The Pankhurst sisters ended up disagreeing over what are effectively radical/liberal lines. Emmeline and Christabel didn't identify with socialism strongly, whereas Sylvia did, and as I understand it, Sylvia felt that the best chance women had was by throwing in their lot with the socialist movement, whereas E and C didn't want to compromise away from women's issues.

Something I like about radical feminism, though, is that it does see misogyny as a system that is fundamentally damaging to pretty much everyone. Misogyny creates a world that is no good for men, either. I think liberal feminism sees that too, but to me it doesn't come over so clearly because often people explain oppression of men in terms of one power structure (eg., class, as on that video), and oppression of women in terms of another (eg., sex). Whereas radical feminists who write about this well, make it clear how all of this oppression is part of the same problem.

(I am not good on race, in this context, though. I don't feel very well equipped to discuss that, so I'm hoping someone else will. I'm not leaving it out to ignore it!)

I like radical feminism because it argues from a logical point of view, even when those views are unpopular. Liberal feminism seems too quick to side against the right wing for the sake of it - almost as a knee jerk reaction. Whereas sometimes the right wing are right to object to things - although their reasons for objecting to something are usually very different to radical feminists.

But take the trans issue. Both the right wing and radical feminists say it is not possible to change biological sex. Simply because someone who is right wing says something, does not automatically mean that they are wrong.

In terms of racism, most radical feminists see this as stemming from patriarchy, although some disagree. When someone explains it I understand it, but not enough to explain it to someone else - sorry

Oh, no, sorry, I wasn't meaning to demand you personally should explain it. I just know there are some women on here who are very clued up and very articulate about it who can explain. I just read my post and realized it looked as if I were not mentioning race because I'm unaware of it as an issue, and I'm not, I just don't want to presume to talk about it because I am white and British and so I don't have personal experience of it. So it feels a bit pretentious/arrogant to pretend I know what to say.

Its fine. One of the things I like about radical feminism and hate about some liberal feminism, is cultural relativism. So the idea you cant judge other cultures. In practice this means you get called racist for criticising female genital mutilation, child brides and other anti women practices.

Women in other cultures and countries are human beings like us. If we wouldnt want our daughters to have their genitals mutilated, or for them to be married to an adult man, why on earth should we think it would be okay for that to happen to other children?

I'm currently pouring through my collection of bell hooks. I recommend her work highly, very highly. It's not an easy read for a white person, but it damned well shouldn't be! It's reaffirmed for me the serious shortcomings of conceptualising racism and all other forms of social, economic and political oppression as simply stemming from patriarchal oppression and/or being something like "subsets" of patriarchal oppression. I don't believe it is diluting the significance of institutionalised misogyny, but rather acknowledging the parallels in the mechanisms of oppression employed by the "powers that be" to sustain the status quo.

I'd also recommend Karnthyia's tumblr "Esoterica." Pulls no punches, sometimes hits you in the gut though, but I think we all need to have the courage to hear these voices. karnythia.tumblr.com/post/26710204294/solidarity-in-feminism-or-how-white-feminists-fail This one isn't an easy read, but a very, very important one.

I don't find labels particularly helpful to be honest and I think there's a danger we can get a bit too preoccupied with these.. In my experience, not all those who call themselves or are seen as radical feminists follow one mindset, nor do liberal, marxist, conservative, environmental or any other "stripe" of feminism. I'm more interested in what people believe, why and how that translates into action to tackle oppression in the wider sphere.

And, I tend to think of feminism as being something of a journey rather than a destination. As you go through life, experiences you face, people you engage with, changes in the environment around you, what you read, etc., all shape what we feel, what we believe, what we do. I wish feminists could do a little more focussing on the common ground we share, seek to learn from each other (even if we won't always agree,) and let go of the exhausting and unproductive internecine rivalries.

Time for coffee now I think! :)

Thank you kri! Was it you who recommended Audre Lord to me? It was someone on here. I have only read a little bit but I she is Carribean-American and writes really complicated, serious, 'stop and think slowly about this' kind of stuff.

I completely agree about the 'not easy and it shouldn't be' bit.

And about it being a journey. We're all giving each other little pushes/hands up/ whatever along the way.

Enjoy the coffee!

(Oh, and I discovered talking to my mum that there's a generation of women in the UK who know nothing about Lorde as a feminist, but know of her because she wrote about cancer while suffering from it. Very sad. My mum was saying how the Guardian columnist Dina Rabinovitch who died of cancer a few years ago reminded her of that writing, and we were reading that when my granny was dying of cancer. This sounds as if it should be depressing, but it actually wasn't, it was one of the few times I've really noticed my mum and granny discussing things as women, not ignoring the fact of it.)

Hiya LRD! I was at a wee seminar last night talking about women's political "activism" in Britain in the 20th century and how much actually happened that many feminists today don't actually know about. Experiences weren't necessarily recorded or circulated and don't form part of the "orthodox" histories of political movements. It's not surprising that the memory of American or other non UK feminists have been somewhat "lost" as well.

Yes, Audre Lorde's work is very powerful. I'm eagerly awaiting the publication of a book by Kimberle Crenshaw as well (a proponent of "intersectional" feminism from the 80's.) I'd somehow forgotten bell hooks until recently when I ordered practically her whole back catalogue and I'm picking through now.

I think my perspective might be a bit different having grown up in America, but having lived most of my adult life in different parts of the UK, so it may be that I can relate more on some levels to American feminists generally. But, the overarching themes of colonialism (including colonialism of the mind!) are applicable none the less.

I hope there's never a day when I don't think there is anything new I can learn! :)

Oooh .... oh, that sounds like a great seminar! I wish I'd been.

So much stuff I need to read ... I'll get to it one day!

Liberal feminism is not renowned for its hostility to the right wing at all, quite the reverse, if one way of understanding its aims is to create a level playing field for both women and men to become successful under capitalism. Yes, some liberal feminisists are left-leaning, but my understanding is that they want to adapt the system to women's needs rather than to smash it. Often, this translates into supporting the kind of boardroom feminism which continues to exploit working class communities and therefore other women. Thatcher was a darling of many liberal feminists.

I think there is a confusion going on here between feminist who are genuinely 'liberal', and people who claim to be/are labelled as 'liberal' simply because they reject radical feminism.

A lot of women in my generation want nothing to do with radical feminism, often because they perceive it to be anti-sex (it's not). I don't think they are liberal feminists at all, they're just keen to differentiate themselves from radical feminists. IIRC leningrad, on here, would identify as a liberal feminist (forgive me if you're reading and I'm wrong) - there are lots of people who are very well aware of exactly what they're doing, who're liberal.

Joyful "Are there separate schools of thought/doctrines within feminism and how do they differ from one another?"

Yes there are many different schools of thought and I think most people eventually find the theory that suits.

A bit of a whistle-stop - (please jump in to correct me people.)

Marxist feminism: I think this is essentially about economics - i.e.- things don't need to change between the sexes, except women should be seen as 'workers' and paid to do the things they have historically done for free - housework, childcare - most controversially- sex.

Womanism: feminism that examines the intersecting oppressions of race and sex and (I think) it views a shifting model of oppressed/oppressor dependent on situation rather than the rigid patriarchal model.

Radical feminism: feminism that views the broader class interaction of the two sexes and how one dominating the other must be eliminated from all aspects of our lives, which requires radical change. The initial radical step is to 'put women first' which means at times wilfully excluding men where their presence is disruptive or inhibiting.

Sex-positive feminism: Feminism that says broadly 'if it is sex it is good' including S&M, prostitution and other dangerous practices, though they are anti-rape.

Liberal feminism: Feminism that seeks sexual 'equality' within male-formed structures and hierarchies, rather than to view the system itself structured in a way that puts females at a disadvantage (the way radical feminists do). This is the most most popular feminism I think - since it welcomes men in to call themselves feminists on equal terms with women.

.... oo I'm tired, who am I missing out....?

eco-feminism, which we've pretty much covered I think? And is fairly self-explanatory.

There are the most beautiful quotations about womanism by Alice Walker. 'Purple is to lavender what womanism is to feminism'. I don't know what I think about her ideology(-ies), but I love the way she writes.

Btw, I am sitting here watch Great British Bake-Off with DH who has the afternoon off work as he has just taken and passed his 'Life in the UK' test which is the next step along the road to permanent leave to remain/citizenship (yay!). It feels very nice contributing to a feminism thread while looking like such a pattern of domesticity.

Oh yes LRD... And how about political lesbianism?

Political lesbianism: The idea that any woman can be a lesbian - involving a process of ridding herself of misogyny by loving herself as a woman first, which then can extend to loving other women.