How can contemporary feminists learn from the history of women’s movements?

[This blog post is an edited essay of mine from my final year at University of Birmingham©]

‘Feminism’ advocates women’s rights in order to bring about equality between men and women which is typically achieved through pro-women movements. Contemporary feminism is encompassed by the academic construct of third wave feminist ideology which includes numerous diverse strains of feminist thought, influenced by first and second wave feminism (detailed further on). The third wave is often used as a basis in which to critique some of the perceived ‘less successful’ aspects of second wave feminism as well as challenge ongoing societal and cultural sexism (on a smaller scale) within our everyday lives that can be viewed as still inhibiting the equality of women to men. Modern feminism is heavily impacted by the major revolutionary changes established by historical women’s movements within both first and second wave feminism. As well as this, various constructs of Socialism have also influenced feminism with both these ideologies coinciding with each other effectively in order to allow contemporary feminism to successfully evolve and improve under current developed systems of government.

Feminism has been continually promoted through the many campaigns carried out within the waves of feminist thought. First wave feminism consisted of groundwork feminist literature (such as those by Mary Wollstonecraft) which advocated women’s rights through written work. The ‘New Woman’ was created and “female warriors whose pursuits reflect some of the concerns of Victorian feminist reformers and political activists: dress reform (the divided skirt), marital reform, moral reform” (Heilmann, 2000, p4) were formulated within prose, infiltrating societal norms and expectations placed upon women. The British Suffragettes became the movement for the defence of a woman’s right to be considered equal in society, in particular giving women the opportunity to vote. The suffragist Millicent Fawcett campaigned for a woman’s right to vote under the ‘National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies’ (NUWSS), whilst the ‘Women’s Social and Political Union’ (WSPU, led by Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst) formed due to a split from the NUWSS. The methods the suffragettes would use secured this movement as one of the most famous campaigns ever carried out in British political history. Militant groups such as the WSPU would often use violent direct action tactics such as breaking windows by throwing stones, bombing and committing arson on properties as well as assaulting police officers in order to be sent to jail to generate media coverage. They would also interrupt political meetings and go on hunger strikes for their message of equality to be heard. In contrast, constitutionalist groups would use “new methods of campaigning, such as tours of the country in a horse-drawn caravan to deliver open-air speeches, something which would have never been before the advent of the WSPU.” (Joannou and Purvis editing Leneman, 1998, p41). The stark contrast in campaigning between militant and constitutionalist feminists and the inconsistent use of tactics contributed and ultimately created division and confusion around the campaign’s aims. This could be argued was an ineffective aspect for the overall movement whilst adding towards a negative public image. However, it can be perceived that in actuality, these numerous groups provided the movement with various, diverse and innovative methods all for the furthering of women’s rights. The differing ideals along with varying forms of campaigning were a necessary aspect in reaching the different sentiments of the general public. One could even argue that militant methods were the most significant and successful form of campaigning because “by insisting on the need for gentle self-effacement, (this)…inadvertently validated the argument for militant action: the point of the suffragettes was precisely that the constitutional suffragists had permitted their demands to be ‘forgotten’; it was only by making a public nuisance of themselves that women could hope to achieve their political ends.” (Heilmann, 2000, p28). The beginnings of the relationship between socialism and feminism started within first wave feminism; “socialist feminists who advocate alliances between women’s movements and working-class struggles with the goal of overcoming both patriarchy and capitalism” (Motta et al, 2011, p5) were becoming a frequent and significant theme. This initial coinciding ideology, as well as first wave groundwork ideology and public campaigns are extremely influential to modern feminists. It gives historical validity to third wave ideals and legitimises the broad spectrum of the female struggle, particularly the issue of class. “Revisiting the values of our first wave foremothers and seeking to understand the complex history of feminism can help contemporary feminists to redefine and revise the feminist movement.”(Allen, 2008, paragraph 9). The breaking away from archaic expectations of female docility and politeness is also an important notion for contemporary feminists to remember as their foremothers before them provided them with confidence from which to keep fighting for equality, whether that means violently or peacefully. “By reclaiming the feminist public image as a meaningful portrayal of female social power, representative of the diversity in background and thought that feminism welcomes, current feminist projects can redefine their missions based on the gaps between the past and the present. What has been left undone, incomplete, or unsatisfactory from past efforts can be redressed by present-day feminists.” (Allen, 2008, paragraph 9).

Second wave feminism was heavily influenced by the rise of the New Left and “…refers to the European and North American women’s liberation movements of the late 1960s and 1970s” (Heilmann, 2000, p12). The New Left brought with it an increase of reforms over civil rights, gay rights, drugs and in particular for the fight for equality; reforms over gender roles and abortion rights. “The interest in social class on the part of many socialist-feminists during the second wave of feminism…was also linked to a dislike of the hierarchal and violent behaviour that was seen to characterise the WSPU but which was considered to be inimical to the women’s liberation movement…” (Joannou and Purvis, 1998, p8) of the second wave, but with a different ethos. There are many ways in which the first and second waves could be seen as similar; a “close relationship can be seen in analyses and activism on more specific themes such as equal pay for equal work in the liberal tradition, anti-pornography and sexual objectification campaigns in some strands of radical feminism, or wages for housework campaigns and socialist feminist writings.” (Motta et al, 2011, p10). It is often believed that this socialist aspect within both waves was encouraged more strongly within second wave feminism, meaning it was explicitly “geared to alliance-building: theory was as much a tool for convincing people and making connections as it was a badge of affiliation or identity and thus persuasiveness and accessibility were the order of the day.” (Motta et al, 2011, p10). The second wave’s New Left approach for an egalitarian democracy was also influenced by many new contextual factors such as the personal control of reproduction and female sexuality due to the manufacturing of the combined contraceptive pill, the increase of women in the workplace and the new emphasis placed on personal fulfilment and individual success all gave women more independence and emancipation from patriarchal governance. With the increase of freedom and control over one’s life and the consequent responsibility, women had more expectations than before but with the difference of not needing to be ‘traditional’. The focus on social equality in terms of domestic life also differed in comparison to first wave suffrage in France to second wave feminism. For many French first wave feminists, “women were organizing publically in political and quasi-political organisations for the defence of ‘motherhood’, that is for the defence of an ideal vision of France” (Foley, 2004, section 8). Maternalism was emphasized as an important aspect of womanhood and the role of a mother was to be protected and regarded as significant to society. This was in contrast to second wave concepts such as the woman’s ‘right to an abortion’ and various critiques of the ‘traditional family and motherly role’ due to its newly-perceived limitations placed on women from participating in the workforce or losing control over their own lives in order to suit an ‘outdated ideal’. Progressive liberal thought was becoming more mainstream, which in turn created a new major divide within the second wave; ‘equal rights’ feminism (such as the National Organization for Women or NOW) and ‘radical’ feminism. Radical feminism began taking shape and taking on mass mobilization through numerous groups such as ‘The Terfs’ (or RadFem) as an example. Radical feminists are often seen as extremists as some seek to exclude and condemn all men, exclude all Transwomen (as is with the case for The Terfs), denounce heterosexual marriages (the opinion of the Women’s International Conspiracy from Hell or WITCH) or even expect women to change their sexual orientation to lesbianism (Lesbian feminism) as a logical reaction to patriarchal oppression. This is arguably the least desirable feature associated with second wave feminism. Extremism in any form is often not taken seriously as it is heavily criticized for encouraging segregation, hatred and fearmongering, violence, superiority over others and intolerance. Thus, “while it is hard to deny the important contribution of radical feminists in challenging rape and domestic violence…the pursuit of entirely separatist organising…seems ever more disconnected from the daily lives of many women. Moreover, the tendency of radical feminists to privilege patriarchy in their analyses as the most basic form of power has now been thoroughly criticised for ignoring the ways in which gender hierarchies are intertwined with race and class in mutually constitutive ways.” (Motta et al, 2011, p6). Some even go as far as paralleling radical feminism to patriarchy as it can favour one gender over the other. Contemporary feminists ought not to adopt radical ideologies if they wish to live in a truly equal and integrated society. The adaptability of second wave feminism meant women could continue to make demands in the fight for gender equality. A movement’s ability to successfully evolve its demands due to its social and political context is a characteristic third wave activism must replicate within modern feminist campaigns.

Third wave feminism encapsulates contemporary ideologies surrounding feminism and has brought topics such as sexuality, race, LGBTQ rights and class more to the forefront. Equality through this progressive social thinking is as a result of successes of first and second wave campaigning. Female diversity is celebrated and taken into account more in feminist discussions than seen before. It focusses primarily on a cultural critique involving individual acts of resistance rather than institutional changes. Though, it is often criticised for involving many condemnations of the previous waves, “Third wave is often portrayed as a reaction to what went before, sometimes seen to be based on simplistic critiques of second wave feminism as racist, prudish, restrictive and focussed on women as victims” (Motta et al editing Mackay citing Scanlon, 2011, p155). Nonetheless, third wave feminism seeks to infiltrate any lingering oppression, inequality or injustice which has been established through years of systemic patriarchy. Domestic violence, sexual harassment, rape, chastising female sexuality, eating disorders and general learnt societal prejudices are just some of the deep-rooted issues third wave feminists endeavour to challenge. Third wave feminism is necessary in order to unite different groups of women as well as encourage younger generations of girls to represent the evolving concerns of women in the modern day. Moreover, “the notion of a ‘third wave’ has come to have strong associations with a specific form of youth subculture (sometimes called the ‘Riot Grrrl’ movement) with its roots in a pro-feminist punk ethos, and associated with particular styles of music and clothing.” (Dean, 2009, p339). In terms of success, all waves have been effective however it can be said that without the first wave of feminism there would be no other waves, only a stagnant existence of continual oppression. Thus, this wave was the most successful in breaking the barrier for future generations of women to demand equality and voice their problems with patriarchy aloud. Yet, some argue that the wave approach itself is theoretically erroneous. As Cathryn Bailey explains, the diversity of females is ignored within this approach as race, ability, sexuality and class are just some of the topics left out. Many argue that up until now, feminism has been solely for white, middle-class, able-bodied heterosexual females, while other women have been disregarded. Whilst this is a legitimate criticism as some women have to endure oppression in a different and perhaps more extreme way due to other factors that would work against them such as being lower paid, transgender, disabled, a lesbian or an ethnic minority, this does not mean that the ‘waves’ is a failed approach. Perhaps in the case of first and second wave feminism, the issue of being diverse was not being addressed enough, and so third wave feminists have tackled this issue by targeting and incorporating more diverse types of women. Nevertheless, it can be argued that in order for first and second wave feminists to have even made any real breakthrough, a primarily top-down approach (with the helpful mix of elite-lead as well as grassroots protests) was a necessary aspect of change. It is a harsh reality that white, bourgeoisie, middle-aged and educated women were, and perhaps still are, most likely to be listened to in a society that was, and still can be, intolerant of certain groups and the particular difficulties they face. Due to the enormous headway created by the first two waves, third wave feminism has been able to incorporate more diverse concerns, both enriching and at times confusing the overall movement, “Many of the younger feminists really do seem less concerned about forging a monolithic identity and more interested in ‘weaving an identity tapestry’” (Bailey quoting Curry-Johnson, 2008, part 4). Another critique of the wave approach is that it misconceives ‘newer’ waves as actually new. Certain themes that are tied to specific waves were actually included within all the waves such as sexual exploitation, the gender-pay gap and so on. Thus some argue that the wave approach is too unclear to use. However, the waves are merely there to generally reflect the movement’s approximate time period, context, and relative significant thematic change. For many, it is not meant to be seen as a precise categorising system in which to sort such fundamental feminist social issues. Overlapping themes are typical of most social movements as any social change involves many ‘controversial’ matters that are subsequently not easily solved, rendering this criticism as seemingly trivial. The various successes made within first and second wave feminism have influenced third wave contemporary feminism. Nonetheless, these historical developments in conjunction with feminist socialist ideals are the most essential lessons modern feminists can learn in order to inform on the third wave.

‘Socialist feminism’ began in the first wave, notably with Clara Zetkin (socialist campaigner and activist) and Alexandra Kollontai (people’s commissar for social welfare in Soviet Russia). Closely related to Marxist feminism which is described as “holding to the view that gender oppression will be overcome with the end of capitalism and class society, and distinguished in this from socialist feminists who advocate alliances between women’s movements and working-class struggles with the goal of overcoming both patriarchy and capitalism.” (Motta et al, 2011, p5). The proclivity towards lower paid women and the overall commitment to collective action are positive features of socialist feminism, which ought to be replicated within modern feminist ideology. Despite being a theme explored from as early as the first wave, the beginnings of feminism were criticized for being a movement only associated with white, bourgeoisie women as this specific group of women had the opportunity and freedom to exert the small amount of power they had to demand equal rights. The contemporary socialist feminist following (for example ‘Sisters of Resistance’) include working class women who may have otherwise experienced exclusion from certain elite-led campaigns and so their rights are still protected and their suffering is acknowledged. ‘Capitalist patriarchy’ is often used by both Marxist and socialist feminists alike to describe “the existing mutual dependence of the capitalist class structure and male supremacy. Understanding this ‘interdependence’ of patriarchy and capitalism is essential to the political analysis of socialist feminism” (Eisenstein, 1977, p3) and arguably feminism overall. Modern socialist feminists often demand that “Gendered practices within activist communities are politicised and challenged, particularly around questions of intimate partner violence and behaviours that reproduce capitalist, patriarchal relations between movement participants.” (Motta et al, 2011, p8). Furthermore, socialist ideology has been incorporated into many feminist anti-racist campaigns; “Black feminists are then perceived to add racism to this mix, perceiving it to be deeply intertwined with both capitalism and patriarchy within a complex matrix of domination” (Motta et al, 2011, p5). For many, “Racism is an issue for the working class. They must deal with it, as an obstacle to their progress to a sane, free, humane social system. Having no basis in biology or any other physical science, in concept and operation it is a social matter. Like all the other ailments of capitalism it has a political solution and will disappear with the socialist revolution.” (The Socialist Party of Great Britain, 1988, part 4). In these ways, socialist feminism highlights the key societal issue oppressing women; “The capitalist class structure and the hierarchal sexual structuring of society” (Eisenstein, 1977, p3). This form of feminism offers the most satisfactory analysis of the current gender-oppressive system due to its representational qualities, as it does not exclude those also experiencing oppression in the form of racism and more specifically, classism.

Overall, contemporary feminists can learn from the past waves of feminism that have made the movement what it is today, whilst being informed and studied through socialist feminist thought. The initial breakthrough campaigning during the first wave (supported by foundational feminist literature which included the beginnings of socialist feminism) has allowed for third wave contemporary feminists to have a voice grounded in historical academia. This has allowed modern feminists to revisit core values that have defined the feminist movement as well as help change various aspects of first wave standards to fit the evolving demands of this extensive movement. The achievements of first wave campaigns can help contemporary feminists focus their attention on fundamental principles that will positively affect perceptions of the overall movement, whilst also continually stimulating feminist activism. Moreover, the ideological divisions within this wave only demonstrates how diverse the movement is even from the start. This conceptual diversity inspired numerous means of getting the main feminist point of gender equality across. Contemporary feminists ought to embrace any divisions within the movement as this diversity only aids in spreading the key value of equality to as many different people as possible. Second wave feminism reiterates that the women’s movement is not just for privileged white women as it began to recognise the enriching diversity within this vast section of society. This lesson is often replicated within third wave campaigns which allows for it to be more representative and encourages community, harmony and ‘womanhood’ as positive characteristics of this social movement. The emphasis placed on socialism is a feature of second wave feminism that ought to be emulated within contemporary feminist campaigning. It is an alliance-building strategy that gains attention and persuades more types of people by appealing to other oppressive factors of society other than gender alone. The birth of radical feminism may at times prove successful to the furthering of the movement’s aims, nevertheless the extremist opinions of these groups prove far too fundamental, aggressive and fanatical for contemporary feminists to imitate within modern campaigns as it is often ironically criticized for being narrow-minded and rigid. Most importantly, the increase of socialist feminist thought would create stronger alliances within this fractured, diverse and vast movement. Thus, contemporary feminists ought to replicate these ideals within modern campaigns so to combat historical lessons of unfair and undemocratic instances where patriarchy and capitalism have solely thrived off and served one another.

xx

Bibliography

Allen, E. J. (2009), First Wave Wisdom for the Third Wave World, in thirdspace: a journal of feminist theory & culture (Vol.8 issue.1), posted onto thirdspace, accessed by http://journals.sfu.ca/thirdspace/index.php/journal/article/viewArticle/allen/220, paragraph 9. 

Bailey, C. (2008), Making Waves and Drawing Lines: The Politics of Defining the Vicissitudes of Feminism- in Hypatia (Vol.12 issue.3 pp17-28), published by Wiley Online Library, part 4- Healthy Complexity.

Dean, J. (2009), Who’s Afraid of Third Wave Feminism? On the Uses of the “Third Wave” in British Feminist Politics- in International Feminist Journal of Politics (Vol.11 issue 3 pp334–52), published by Routledge Taylor and Francis, page 339.

Eisenstein, Z. (1977), Constructing a Theory of Capitalist Patriarchy and Socialist Feminism- in Critical Sociology (Vol.7 Issue.3 pp 3-17), published by Sage Journals, pdf accessed by http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/089692057700700301, page 3.

Foley, S. K. (2004), Women in France Since 1789: The Meanings of Difference, published by Palgrave Macmillan, part 3 section 8 pages unknown.

Heilmann, A. (2000), New Woman Fiction- Women Writing First-Wave Feminism, published by Macmillan Press Ltd., pages 4, 28, 12.

Joannou, M. and Purvis, J. (eds.) (1998), The Women’s Suffrage Movement: New Feminist Perspectives, published by Manchester University Press, chapter 2- A truly national movement: the view from outside London pages 41, 8.

Motta, S. et al. (eds.) (2011), Feminism, women’s movements and women in movement-Interface: a journal for and about social movements (Vol. 3 issue. 2), published by WordPress, pdf accessed by http://interfacejournal.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Interface-3-2-Full-PDF.pdf, pages 5, 10, 6, Mackay, F., A movement of their own: voices of young feminist activists in the London Feminist Network (pp152-179)- page 155.

The Socialist Party of Great Britain (1988), Racism, posted onto worldsocialism.org, accessed by https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pamphlets/racism, chapter 8 Why Racism? - part 4 The Myth of Scarcity.