Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

What is Lib Fem?

73 replies

ThursdayWeld · 11/06/2021 18:55

I've seen the term Lib Fem mentioned on a couple of threads today, what is it?

It seems to be counter to what we're currently calling Gender Critical?

OP posts:
EmbarrassingAdmissions · 12/06/2021 11:35

Liberal feminism demands that women get half the pie.

And is very flexible about the category of "women" when it comes to appropriating that half of the pie.

WinterTrees · 12/06/2021 11:42

So many brilliant, articulate replies here. My university 'images of women' module was back in the 80s so I'm really not well informed about this and it's so useful.

My homespun definition only got as far as feeling that liberal feminism empowers those women who already have a degree of advantage. So, it's 'empowering' to say that women should be able to make shedloads of cash as lap dancers, for example, if you're 25 and a size 8 with pert, symmetrical breasts. Or that women should be kind and compassionate and make room for men in single sex spaces, when the only single sex space they're likely to have to share is the changing room in Topshop, not a mental health ward or prison cell. Liberal feminism allows an awful lot of poor and multiply disadvantaged women to slip through the cracks and go unsupported. It's a sort of 'survival of the fittest' feminism.

I really appreciate posters who have taken the time to set out the background and analyse the details far more fully.

Waitwhat23 · 12/06/2021 11:55

For me, it's the epitome of the 'be kind' mantra

Libfem - 'Sex work is so empowering! Only fans gives women a chance to make money without any risks'

Second wave feminist - 'I don't think women who are having to have sex with strangers so that they have enough money to feed their children feel very empowered. Only fans surely perpetuates the idea that women's bodies are commodities and that women have it 'easy' because they are able to capitalise on their bodies?'
Libfem - 'you're so mean! It's their choice. #bekind'

Waitwhat23 · 12/06/2021 11:56

@WinterTrees I think you've put it very well

InspiralCoalescenceRingdown · 12/06/2021 12:43

@cakedays

That’s interesting *@InspiralCoalescenceRingdown* - do you have a link to the talk or where that was from?
Pretty sure it was this one:
GCAcademic · 12/06/2021 12:46

The short answer:

Radical feminism wants to dismantle patriarchal structures that oppress women.

Liberal feminism deals with the problems of patriarchy by labelling its various manifestations "empowering". Problem solved!

PerkingFaintly · 12/06/2021 13:22

Great thread – very informative and articulate. Thank you!

butwhatcanwedo · 12/06/2021 13:23

This is a really interesting thread.
I have wondered if there is a correlation between libfem/radfem and women who have either had children or not had children?

RoyalCorgi · 12/06/2021 14:16

Liberal feminism has been round since the 1960s. Its meaning seems to have changed over time. Back in the days of Betty Friedan and the National Organisation of Women, it was very focused on "equal rights": so equal pay for women, women being able to do jobs traditionally open only to men, women being able to rise up the career ladder.

In contrast, radical feminism starts with an analysis of power: it argues that there are two main classes in society, men and women, and men have power over women. Radical feminism is about dismantling that power structure.

Modern liberal feminism seems focused, as others have said, on being "empowered" through wearing high heels, embracing the joys of pornography, pretending that sex work is liberating, and colluding in the lie that men can be women.

stumbledin · 12/06/2021 18:58

Hello as someone who was part of 70s Women's Liberation many of the comment on here about 70s feminist are just wrong.

There was a strand of feminism at that time that was Marxist Feminist but because in fact its analysis of women gaining power was about economic equality it (strange as it may see) morphed into corpoate feminism - and the stranglehold on socialist feminism.

But the main wave of women's activism that made up the Women's Liberation Movement was recognising that men as individuals and as a class structure, partiarchy were the root of the problem. That is why the issue of women as a sex class oppressed by men as the dominant sex was the basis on which women organised. (And why Marxist feminist went out of their way to deride this analysis as it directly challenge their political model of the traditional class structure.)

But with a nod towards socialist feminists it was in fact many women in trade unions (and even the Labour Party) who organised and campaigned on equality issues. Not forgetting the Sex discrimination act. And of course abortion

The method of organising was grassroots local consciousness raising groups, which was copied from the US Black Liberation Movement. ie in sharing experiences of discrimination you can identity what is common, and then take that to build a campaign or direct action.

It was from this that rape crisis centres and women's refuges were created. ie a shared experience of male violence that women could offer support and help based on a personal understanding of that act of violence.

Within in that shared understanding of sex class discrimination there were of course not unanimous idea of how to move on from that.

But absolutely it was about women having the opportunity to come together and realise what they thought was their individual problem was in fact a common shared experience. In fact many women left their husbands and subsequently lost custody of their children because at that time courts would view it as a woman not behaving rationally and therefore not competent to be the main parent. And in some countries like France women were sectioned for daring to reject the traditional role, particularly if this meant they had recognised they were lesbian.

All of the work done on male violence against women grew out of 70s Women's Liberation, and all of that was based on the agreed analysis that it was the fact of a woman's sex that she suffered discrimination and violence.

I can not believe that everyone is not aware of this.

What happened after that is not being able to find a way to build of what had been achieved ie rape crisis, women's aid. And the opportunity of funding seemed the way forward. But the motive behind funding, as trialed by Ken Livinsgstone and socialist feminists at the GLC was a way of becoming the "owners"of the product of women's liberation, eg rape crisis centres and refuges. (And we all know were that ended up).

And at the same time Queer Polics (please note this in not the same as the label as used by Stonewall etc.) was taking hold in Universities. This coincided with the backlash against women's liberation so that Women's Studies became gender studies and so on.

So even if you remember nothing else about 70s feminism, it was called Women's Liberation for a good reason.

It was about liberating women from men and male structures, not an equality campaign asking women to aspire to be like men.

stumbledin · 12/06/2021 19:03

Sorry if that was a bit of a rant, but talk about having your actual live life being erased. And all the women you worked with and who help create many of the benefits we now have. Angry

I do hope these misleading ideas about 70s Women's Liberation aren't because of "learning" feminism at universities. Sad

MarshaBradyo · 12/06/2021 19:06

I understood it as feminism which works within the structures we have rather than overturn them.

The latter being radical feminism

Was over twenty years ago though now and also not sure how the trans movement fits into it

I just use feminist rather than break it down

MarshaBradyo · 12/06/2021 19:08

Btw I only mentioned that movement because I was confused by recent posts which seemed to prescribe what liberal feminists thought wrt them

cakedays · 12/06/2021 19:10

Stumbledin your perspective is v helpful as someone who’s lived it. Marxist-derived feminism was very much as you described your activism! It wasn’t about women gaining economic power at all - very much the reverse. Marxist-feminist thought is largely radfem, anti-capitalist and trade union based, not the reverse; and thinks of women as a sex class whose labour is co-opted by men - and as such, Marxist-feminist thought is actually largely opposed to Marxism in its unreconstructed form. It’s not at all the same as academic Marxism.

cakedays · 12/06/2021 19:15

There was a strand of feminism at that time that was Marxist Feminist but because in fact its analysis of women gaining power was about economic equality it (strange as it may see) morphed into corpoate feminism - and the stranglehold on socialist feminism.

This isn’t Marxist-feminist thought at all though - very much the opposite! Marxist-feminism was much more about collectivism, separatism and communal women’s spaces than this! It isn’t interested in gaining economic power, rather in uprooting economic systems and collective owning of women’s labour in childbirth, the home, and so on.

RoyalCorgi · 12/06/2021 19:20

It was about liberating women from men and male structures, not an equality campaign asking women to aspire to be like men.

Absolutely. And that is the crucial difference between radical feminism and liberal feminism. I think socialist feminism is a bit more complicated in a way and has a wider spectrum of views, because obviously social class is important to the socialist feminist analysis, and there is quite a bit of debate about whether social class is more or less important than sex as a power structure.

But a lot of what was achieved and understood in 70s feminism has been forgotten. Back in the 80s Dale Spender wrote very eloquently about how the efforts of feminists of previous generations were quickly erased and forgotten. And so we see it happening again.

youkiddingme · 12/06/2021 23:35

I think of it as supporting individual women to support and benefit from the patriarchy however they choose.

youkiddingme · 12/06/2021 23:37

Which generally benefits men as a whole.

PastMyBestBeforeDate · 13/06/2021 00:03

But youkiddingme why are we trying to win a race designed for and about men? Why aren't we looking at the structure of the race?

PerkingFaintly · 13/06/2021 09:19

stumbledin, thank you. That's really interesting to hear.

Actually, I wrote that sentence meaning, Thank you for posting.

But what I should be saying is, Thank you to you and the feminists of the 1970s for doing all that.

I'm just that little bit younger, and as a youngster stepped directly onto that path that you had made smooth(er). Couldn't understand the fuss being made in my circle that I was achieving X or Y, because surely this was normal for women? Which I guess is the aim: for the young 'uns to hurtle off confidently down the path, unburdened by the past. But for years now I've been old enough to look back and be very, very grateful to the women who made that possible.

Thank you.Flowers

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 13/06/2021 09:57

I'm a little disappointed that this thread isn't flooded with those posters who don't want to post on GC matters. This is an excellent opportunity to outlines suppressed thoughts and notions and I think a number of us would be interested to see them.

DialSquare · 13/06/2021 10:16

Good point Embarrassing.

youkiddingme · 13/06/2021 22:40

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

But youkiddingme why are we trying to win a race designed for and about men? Why aren't we looking at the structure of the race?
That's how I see it. I don't subscribe to it.
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread