Can we talk about liberal feminism?

[BertrandRussell]

Can I say what liberal feminism means to me, then can others tell me whether I am understanding it properly?
My understanding is that liberal feminists believe

1. There are no-or very few structural or societal barriers in the way of women's progress. There were, but since the passing of equality legistation they have been almost-if not completely removed
2. That any choice a woman makes is by definition a feminist choice.
3. That women hold the keys of their own empowerment in their own hands- they have nothing to fear but fear itself, to coin a phrase- and realising this is the touchstone to progress.

Is that broadly it? Or am I madly wide of the mark......

so the idea of cleaners mostly being low paid women is a perfect example of that system, especially the idea that women are just naturally suited to that job. Changing that is breaking a bit of the patriarchy
Oh, absolutely agree Goody.

I think that men probably can be feminists on at least some issues. Maybe I'm not as radfem as I thought I was!

I see it as men can be allies to feminism, but they can't actually be feminists.

You're totes allowed an opinion, Effic, and we, evil scary radfem witches (should I be wearing some fake warts on my nose for this?), are also totes allowed to point and laugh at what a petulant baby you're being. Isn't the internet awesome?

Liberal feminist = I’m allowed an opinion and it might not be the same as yours

Libfems - I'm allowed an opinion and I will dox and threaten you if yours is not the same as mine. Also my opinion has to be pre-approved by a man.

Oh well-it had to happen, didn't it? Quite surprised it took so long!

Effic = radical feminists tell me I’ve misunderstood radfem theory so I cry about it

There ya go.

Oh well-it had to happen, didn't it? Quite surprised it took so long!

Haha! Never mind!

Well, I can tell you where I part company from dyed-in-the-wool radfems if you like?

I don't really believe in blank slatism and that socialisation plus brain plasticity in early childhood accounts for all population average differences between men and women. Many, even most, but not all. I just don't think that in an advanced technological society like ours, it should matter at all.

And I don't always want to centre gender imposition in my politics. For example, if all else was equal, I would likely centre the political needs of a working class man from a sink estate in a deindustrialised town over those of a public school to Oxbridge middle or upper class woman.

So y'know. I ain't no libfem but I'm not that consistent about radfemming either!

Lol, oh Effing you made me laugh! Not because I agree (don't eat me Mumsnet!), and not just the nervous laughter (although quite a lot that)... but because I do think you're touching on a real phenomenon of popular perception.

Particularly the but about radicals casting women as victims. So for example women may be within an exploitative situation (porn, prostitution, whatever) and a libfems might say that those women can be protected in or "freed" from that situation through education and empowerment. Whereas as radical might say that women should not be in that situation at all because some will not be able to be protected/protect themselves in that situation for whatever reason.

To the outside that can look like radicals infantilising all women for the sake of a few, but conversely it can look to radicals like liberals are throwing a few women under the bus so as to not upset the patriarchal applecart.

It also reminds me of a definition of liberal Feminism which said that libfems broadly believe equality can be achieved primarily through education and policy changes.

Not just a few. Studies of prostitutes consistently find that the majority want out (99% in the last study I saw). Liberal feminism looks at that and says, well what about the women who do want to be prostitutes? We must respect their agency and support their choices. Radical feminism looks at that situation and says, what about the 99% who don't, and why is protecting the choices of the tiny minority who're already in the best position to advocate for themselves more important than helping the majority who want out?

What study was that Angry?

It's all over Tumblr, I know Appropriately Inappropriate ends up reposting the summary constantly so maybe check her account.

Even if it weren't a question of a minority of majority Angry I think the liberal side of the coin is that it's better for women to be the architects of their own liberation than for them to be liberated as such. Obviously there are nuances specific to each particular issue; porn, prostitution, whatever.

tbh kittens, the idea that penis = rape is one I often interpret from a 'radfem' perspective.

Penises do not choose to rape. The man makes that choice. Rape/DV etc is a choice. Every time. And yes, men are capable of not making that choice. Just about every rape myth going blames the victim because men are so bloody reluctant to 'fess up and admit that even with the biggest boner, they can choose to walk away, and not even feel aggrieved about doing so.

I really do thank God for my old Granddad because he was the one who sat me down one day and had the same talk with me he had with my mum, which was tell me exactly that.

As a kind of lighthearted (and to lighten the mood here a bit perhaps) description of what I mean, you could do worse than watch 'Robin Williams Live at the Met' (1986). At around 27 (ish) minutes he riffs on this relationship between a man and his penis. Its sooo funny (it was one of his best stand up's), but it illustrates how essentially we have all 'othered' the penis as something independent of a man.

There does seem this overwhelming sense sometimes that radfems have wholly bought into the idea that men are utterly incapable of making any choices once his body reacts in certain ways. However, as I have earlier pointed out, both the use of 'libfem' and 'radfem' on this discussion are both hazy undefined terms given that - as I mentioned on my previous comment - these are umbrella terms for a wide variety, in both camps, of different feminist disciplines. And I think the one thing that we can all agree on is that any transformative justice for victims of rape/dv etc has to be rooted in men collectively taking responsibility, given that there is this whole culture of myths that are all about blaming the victim.

(Just quickly - somebody a couple of pages back challenged my use of the word 'theology': I originally (I think) used theology/theory. But both are correct, since Christian Feminist and Muslim Feminist theologies are both things that exist. There are Christian Feminists, for example, who have done a lot of work in the field something called 'purity culture' in conservative Christian cultures, and continue to do so. Queer Christian/Muslim Feminist theologies are similarly both also a thing. )

Like many people said above, individualism versus class analysis, it's the basic dividing line. You can see the difference in perspective in every single comment people on either side of that line write.

By which I mean the current version of liberal feminism, historically speaking it wasn't always as self focused as it is now.

There does seem this overwhelming sense sometimes that radfems have wholly bought into the idea that men are utterly incapable of making any choices once his body reacts in certain ways.

I always see that more as a MRA/conservative view, that men just cannot help themselves.

Though I can see how the radfem position can be viewed that way, because it focuses on how men are socialised to believe that they are entitled to just think with their dick. This isn't the same as saying that they can't help it. They absolutely can, but while society is telling them that they don't have to then they will continue to use it as an excuse not to.

“There does seem this overwhelming sense sometimes that radfems have wholly bought into the idea that men are utterly incapable of making any choices once his body reacts in certain ways”

Blimey, really? This is certainly an aspect of radical feminism I completely fail to recognize!

There does seem this overwhelming sense sometimes that radfems have wholly bought into the idea that men are utterly incapable of making any choices once his body reacts in certain ways.

Honestly, although this is more politely phrased it's no closer to understanding the radfem position then Effic's comments were. I guess pretending that radfems of all people think men aren't responsible for choosing to commit rape is at least a relatively original way of attempting to demonize us.

Would help if so many "male feminists" didn't turn out to be absolute turds in the long run (hello there Hugo Schwyzer, living cautionary tale) but yes, agreed, that's one of the clear dividing lines.

From my experience, a lot of male feminists are only feminists while the discussion stays sex positive. Praising porn and the likes. As soon as the conversation turns to something that may actually benefit women , they tend to show their hand. And actually often show a quite misogynistic side too.

Not All Male Feminists Are Like That.

Like many people said above, individualism versus class analysis, it's the basic dividing line. You can see the difference in perspective in every single comment people on either side of that line write.

You really, really can. For one side to understand the other - whether it agrees or not - it has to let go of the prism through which it views the world.

And, biased though I may be, it seems to me that one side is willing and able to do that and explain why they don't subscribe, while the other just is not and therefore spends a lot of time misunderstanding then misrepresenting what the other side has said.

Radical feminist = You are not allowed an opinion and we are right and you are wrong/handmaiden/patriarch supporters etc

Also false. Again, from experience it has been 'liberal feminists' (or more like, people saying they are liberal feminists who are not even bloody feminists) telling me I had to have a certain opinion, else I was a TERF/SWERF.

I have seen people dismissed as handmaidens before though. Not sure if it was by radfems or libfems but I have seen it, a lot. Sometimes its deserved I think but sometimes its not.

Every rad from I have ever read has made the point that men do not inevitably commit sexual violence, those that do choose to do so and more importantly could have chosen not to, and are therefore entirely culpable for their actions. In fairness that is also a position I'd say lib fems hold. The only women I've seen argue against this are a small subset (not all) of right wing women who come out with all the "men are just like that", "they can't help themselves", "they have needs" shite.

On prostitution I prefer to describe myself as a PPERF - pimp and punter exclusionary reasonable feminist. I save my ire entirely for the men who choose of their own free will and in the absence of coercion to abuse women.

I think that men probably can be feminists on at least some issues. Maybe I'm not as radfem as I thought I was!

I would say men can be feminist. Just, it doesn't seem many are, at all. they are happy to be included whilst everything is basically, centered on men and what they would like. But anything else, they want nothing to do with.

Actually, most of the people dismissing me as a TERF/SWERF whilst I was actually leaning closer to libfem than radfem were 'male liberal feminists'

I, Male Feminist, totally support your right to suck my cock! Wait, you don't want to do that? Obviously you don't understand feminism, let me explain.

And, biased though I may be, it seems to me that one side is willing and able to do that and explain why they don't subscribe, while the other just is not and therefore spends a lot of time misunderstanding then misrepresenting what the other side has said.

To be fair it probably helps that a lot of radfems started out as libfems.

Thank you to rat who took the time to explain far more rationally that I can be bothered to (because these threads are always echo chambers for radical feminist). I’m relatively new to ‘active’ feminism so to speak but the constant infantilism of women by radical feminism has sent me firmly down the lib fem route. It seems that any poor decision or poor choice made by women (either individually or as a class) is ALWAYS due to the ‘patriarchy’. There is never a call from radical feminist for women to take responsibility, for women to make better choices - it seems it’s always the ‘patriarchy’ fault. However, paradoxically men’s behaviour is never attributed to this - they apparently have free choice and are not affected by it????
Sorry but I will not be a ‘victim’ and I will not cast my whole class as victims. I will take responsibility for my choices - good and bad.
Some delightful posters decided that I couldn’t have ever read any radical feminist theory ...... well sorry to disappoint but I have. Not a lot - I’m still reading and learning but again I’m sure they’ll come back to tell me I’m too stupid to understand how right they are.

Interesting Bertrand that there are elements of radical feminism that you can “fail to recognise” but you can hold that same thought for women who chose liberal feminism? Just because I choose to support a particular political party - I don’t agree with every damn policy and idea they have .....