Can we talk about liberal feminism?

[JigglyTuff]

It's late and I've had wine and so this is probably a bit disjointed. BUT liberal feminism seems like a complete clusterfuck to me. It's all about 'reflecting on things' and apologising. God, so much apologising. I don't think white heterosexual lefty men spend their lives saying 'mea culpa' do they? But white het women seem to be on a mission to self-abase. It's really fucking odd and quite disturbing.

Is anyone else seeing this or do I need to start wearing a tinfoil hat or something?

I haven't, and think it is very misleading.

Each to their own.

I assume it is some kind of cultural residue from religion

Pretty much all liberal belief systems are a 'cultural residue from religion' .

Rad fems are not so much "hating" others for "doing feminism wrong", but criticising libfems for not doing feminism at all.

Back in the day, when I was young and thought the world could still be saved ... back then, actual feminism was just called feminism.

Nowadays, you have to put a "radical" in front to show that you actually do actual feminism, you know, for women. The kind with vulvas, not penises.

Conservative women who support the Nordic Model are more feminist than libfems who call prostitution "sex work" and claim that it is empowering.

Feminism is about wanting to do something for women.

If I tell someone that I don't think outlawing burkinis will benefit Muslim women, then I tell them that they are doing feminism wrong.

If I tell someone that I don't think having your husband bottlefeed your baby while you work 10 hours a day is a thing women should strive for, then I tell them that they are doing feminism wrong.

But in those cases, those people actually do feminism. They want to improve women's lives. I may just be of the opinion that they are doing it wrong.

Wanting to centre males, and calling porn and prostitution - things created by men, for the benefit of men, that harm women - "empowering" is not feminism done wrong, it is not feminism at all.

If prostitution were empowering, women would be plenty empowered by now, after at least 3000 years of it.

Nowadays, you have to put a "radical" in front to show that you actually do actual feminism, you know, for women. The kind with vulvas, not penises.

Yes. As I and some others on this thread mentioned we would not necessarily have thought of ourselves as particularly "radical" in the past. But it's polarised more now, and it's the only label which fits at all.

I also think that I didn't really understand radical feminist analysis until I questioned more and looked at it more closely.

Actually, for all I'm an FWR regular, and for all I agree with much of what's posted here, I wouldn't necessarily label myself a radfem. I probably am a liberal feminist, IF (and only if) it still had the connotation of being somebody who is broadly happy to work within existing social structures to effect change that liberates women from patriarchal constraints and allows us full access to and benefit from public life. But it doesn't seem to mean that any more, because it's been hijacked/bastardised/reframed (as you wish) to mean a form of feminism which celebrates choice uber alles, and has forgotten that women ought to be the centre.

So now I tend to style myself an old fashioned women's liberationist. And when it comes to issues of gender identity, I'm 100% onside with the radfems. I find the question of age a fascinating one - there have been several hefty debates with younger libfems of the "if my feminism isn't for everyone then what is it even FOR?" genre, who, while excoriating radfems for their lack of understanding of gender issues, seem blissfully unaware of the ageism dripping from their posts.

"...given some of the sneery, holier than thou comments by lib fems on this thread. Wheeling out tired old shit like rad fems are humourless prudes."

You couldn't quote it and attribute it to lib fems on this thread because it wasn't said by liberal fems on this thread.

OK. I'll bite. I see liberal feminism as focusing on gender equality in the public sphere equal access to education, equal pay, ending job sex segregation, better working conditions won primarily through pressure on the state, and forming alliances with others who support these legal changes. Where liberal feminism looks at issues in the private sphere, it tends to be in terms of equality: how does that private life impede public equality, e.g. heterosexual marriage should be an equal partnership, men should be more involved in child care. So Millicent Fawcett, the Women's Equality Party etc. And there is still a long way to go there.

Radical feminism, as I understand it, sees women as a class oppressed by men as a class, with oppression based in biological differences, so the focus is on issues such as violence, particularly sexual violence (in which prostitution is usually included). Andrea Dworkin, Reclaim the Night marches, women's refuges, (sometimes) political lesbianism etc.

I'd say I was somewhere in between (with a light dusting of socialism). I don't think liberal feminists are 'doing feminism wrong'. I think they've achieved important victories for women - as have radfems. This all seems a bit reminiscent of the in-fighting on the left - when the real argument is with patriarchy / the right...

To me liberalism is the advancement of the rights of the individual over collective ethics. Many (though not all) feminists and leftists insist on both, which is problematic. For instance, a woman should be a free, autonomous subject AND beholden to a set of collectively agreed social and political ethics.

"I'll never be pure enough for the rads, so will hang out with wine, laughter and sisterhood with my fellow wishy washy libs grin"

Happy to quote and attribute this, Dione.

"I'd say I was somewhere in between (with a light dusting of socialism). I don't think liberal feminists are 'doing feminism wrong'. I think they've achieved important victories for women - as have radfems. This all seems a bit reminiscent of the in-fighting on the left - when the real argument is with patriarchy / the right"

Nan- what important victories for women have specifically liberal feminists achieved?

"This Lib Feminist will leave you rad fems to your bitching thread about other women. Sure that's what feminism is about, right?"

You've got a short memory, Dione

For 10 points, can you tell me who I'm quoting here? Now, I'll grant you, you didn't use the exact phrase "humourless prudes", but I'd say it's scoring high on sneery.

For someone who spends a lot of time ripping in to how awful it is when feminists tell other feminists they're doing it wrong, you surely do spend a lot of time telling feminists they're doing it wrong.

Nan- what important victories for women have specifically liberal feminists achieved

Old or new? In the 60s and 70s liberal feminists did quite a bit, especially in the US where that ideology 'worked' in the context of their legal and political systems. Betty Friedan was a liberal feminist and the National Organisation for Women achieved quite a bit. Yes, granted they were also contentions, but they did have their wins.

I'd say that the right to vote, laws against sex discrimination in employment, increased representation of women in Parliament and in the professions were specifically liberal feminist achievements (although - I assume - rad fems would also support much of this). Legal measures to ensure sufficient personal autonomy for caregivers including (male and female) parental leave, state subsidized, high quality day care, and flexible work schedules would also fit here.

I don't understand why they are liberal feminist achievements? Particularly the ones that happened before feminism was a "thing"!

Then whose achievements are hey? I agree re suffrage and other ristaronte wave achievements, although many openly embraced liberal enlightenment ideas (and some socialst).

Hi Bertrand (I always really like your posts btw!) As far as I'm aware
the word 'feminism' meaning 'the emancipation of women' goes back to the mid-C19. I think what makes these specifically 'liberal' feminist achievements (though as I've said, others, particularly socialists, have often been supportive of the reforms themselves) is a focus on personal autonomy and a (probably naïve!) view of the state as a potentially liberatory ally - others have sometimes seen, e.g. Parliamentary representation, as having to ape men in an irredeemably patriarchal institution. The emphasis on personal autonomy is usually given as one reason that liberal feminists tend to favour the legalization of prostitution. I have reservations about this, given the pressures that lead to women being involved in prostitution may mean that it's not in reality a free choice (aware I am preaching to the choir here!)

Again, coming from an archaic perspective, what makes them liberal feminist achievements? The fact that they were accomplished by women working within the system to change it, rather than opposing with the objective being to overthrow the system.

They are lib fem achievements because they weren't aiming to overthrow societal structures but rather give women equal access to the levers of power and opportunity.

I do find this thread divisive and depressing, I think there has been a fair bit of misogyny & gas lighting (no one called anyone a humourless prude FFS. Really what was it hoping to achieve? If the aim was to pit women against each other I suppose it has succeeded in that sad and pointless end.

I think you don't understand what gaslighting means. It's not just a buzzword. It is an abusive psychological tactic.

Yes agreed. Very divisive and depressing.
Trying to think of more to add, but not sure what the point is.
I really don't understand why dione is so ganged up against.
Because she's 'only' a liberal feminist so her face doesn't fit?

Sophocles, that was in response to the OP and posts preceding mine on this thread.

Quotes
"Liberal feminism seems like a complete cluster fuck to me. ... But white het women seem to be on a mission to self abase. It's really fucking odd and quite disturbing."

"I agree with you..."

"There's a weird masochistic element to it which I think is really unhealthy."

There followed a lengthy post that completely dismissed lib fems contributions to the progression of women's rights and feminism.

I didn't use the words "humourless prudes", because they never entered my head. I wasn't "sneery" (unlike you when you said "For 10 points can you tell me who I'm quoting here.") I called it out for what it was.

do find this thread divisive and depressing, I think there has been a fair bit of misogyny & gas lighting (no one called anyone a humourless prude FFS. Really what was it hoping to achieve? If the aim was to pit women against each other I suppose it has succeeded in that sad and pointless end."

And nobody did say anyone called anyone a humourless prude. However, there have been several posts like "'ll never be pure enough for the rads, so will hang out with wine, laughter and sisterhood with my fellow wishy washy libs grin"..................

Apart from that, it's been a very interesting thread, surely?

Yes dione. As I saw it you were responding to the start of this thread where posters were mocking liberal feminists.