IN MY contribution I want to take on the whole argument of class versus gender, because it is a central argument in the Labour Party. think it is a central argument both between women, and between men and women, on the left. In my view this has to be taken on or women are not going to be able to sort out where we go from here.
I am particularly moved to do so because, just before the Labour Party conference this year, I went to address the Campaign group of MPs. And it turned out to be quite an unpleasant experience. I had gone there to ask them to support WAC's demand that, between now and the end of the selec6 Women have to come up front far more with our demands because we've been pushed onto the defensive, into the background, by our own refusal to say that our demands are truly revolutionary and truly tion process, CLPs should draw up women-only shortlists. We asked for this because the number of women be. ing selected for parliamentary seats is so pathetically low that there is a very strong possibility that we may end up with fewer women in the next parliament than we have in this one.
When I said this I came up against wall of resistance and which was led by the Militant MPs and the Militant representative of th YS, who accused WAC, and me l particular, of not being socialists, not having 'socialist' objectives as our key demands. At one stage one very prominent member • of the Campaign group very woundingly The trouble with you is that you are just a radical feminist!' And of course I said: "no, I'm a socialist as well.
I went away worrying about why I had felt the need to say that. This argument is now not only occurring between Militant and other the left but in secuUlls groups, like the SWP, who seem to see women's demands as diversionary and indeed reactionary.
I want to say here that I am going to come out today and admit to being a radical feminist. And I'm going to go further and say that describe myself as a socialist feminist or a revolutionary feminist, because I believe that by doing so I imply that there is something that is not socialist revoluonay about feminism. I believe radical feminism is both. And I think that it is about time that women said so.
confronted men in the Time ta we movement with that truth If we look at the divisions in society we can see why we are facing this problem as feminists. For most men on the left, and some women, important division horizontal one, the class division. But what we are contronung as women Is a division which is actually vertica., which runs through classes.
people. unites the struggle of The first tion, 1840. This was Slavery convention. women Cady Stanton and Susan who had they were women convention they what happened:
ladies socialist. 9 A merca Anti-Slavery inviting ladies. that this dissolved at this adopted.' hostility, should be of as they said to me:
ana exclusion or women terribly tical alvisions those whose other horizontal divisions into class.
because I think that are absolutely fundamental, don't Movement le which that horizontal division can radical the oppression of all.
It's about will aren't the ward.
argument inside the of Decause Ann Pettifor This vertical division on which oppression by gender is based is similar to another division, that is the divi- women. sion of oppression suffered by black This is the main thing that women blacks: that their oppression is a vertical question and not simply based on class. It curves through the classes.
liberation movement was triggered into life by the campaign against slavery. The one single event which set moving the first women's liberation movement, which led to the 1848 Seneca Falls conventhe first one of the women's movement, took place in London in the AntiTwo American the come rele "Anthony, been fighting slaverv America and receiving much abuse and contempt for doing so because When they arrived at the London were barred from glossy entering by English Liberal men. I'll just quote from their own history of 'The Rev J Burnett made a most touching appeal to the conform English prejudices and customs so far as to withdraw their credentials, as it pictures never did occur to the British Foreign Society that thev WCIC It is better, said he, convention should be moment than that this motion to invite women should be The women refused, but were nonetheless excluded and forced to sit in the gallery where they were fenced off behind a bar and a curtain.
Their supporters, the men on the conference floor who had moved they included, said that the 'ladies had graciously accepted' being placed behind this curtain. So they were as angry with their 'supporters' were with anyone else. The very Liberals who were recognising the oppression of black slaves were refusing to recognise the oppression It is this recognition of these ver- about can bring both blacks and women into conflict with sole concern 1S the The reason I address all this is not Fi the horizontal divisions in our society along lines of class are not important. I think they and it is TION impossible for the women's liberation work from anywhere more except within the framework of class as well. But ways have to be found in vera cal division be brought alongside each other to fight against It seems to me that the only way they can be brought into line is for the class struggle to be led by women, and La truly revolutionary force. But until we do that womer going to be able to move forI'm saying all this because of the labour Party the defensiveness that women feel about being feminist and about being radical feminist. We are embarrassed by supporting women as We are constantly thrown back by the men onto the issue of I am very, very active in the Labour Party, so active that 1 rarely see anything beyond it. And right now the Labour Party has a big marketing So much of male revolutionary theory makes it seem as though we are only around for some great climax in the future which I won't necessarily be around to be part of.9 effort on. Like many other sections ot the left they are suddenly becoming aware of the question of style, of how to project themselves in a more popular way. We were all circulated with a leaflet our wards women's sections recently advertising Party products. Included amongst them were bread-boards and tea-trays all of which had nostalgic pictures of Labour women in 1914• women making bread, making tea, women in the home.
There is nothing at all surprising about this. what the Labour Party understands about the role of women. This is as much as political statement about the Labour Party's understanding of the role of women as any academic tome could tell you the Labour Party's view women at the moment. For me it is a great sadness. It shows how little we women have gained and achieved as feminists in the party. By 1985 we have to say we have failed dismally to transform and alter that political view in the Labour Party, more than 150 years after the Seneca Falls convenWomen have to come up front far WILS demands. we've been pushed onto the defensive, into the background, by our own refusal to say that our demands are truly revolutionary and truly socialist.
In order to unite the working class it is going to be necessary for women to lead the struggle of the working class.
Only then will verital horizontal divisions be overcome to make the struggle against any of them effective.
We must also assert what it is that women saying about change, about revolutionary change.
want to say that 1 am a radical feminist for ouck because radical feminism is truly revolutionary in its practice. It is a revolution that is taking place now.
myself, my le and esse lives of ofte the business women. Radical feminism enables me to see the possibility of doing that in the here and now, in a way that a lot of other revolutionary theory So much of male revolutionary theory makes it seem as though we are only around for some great climax in the future which I won't necessarily revolutionary argued ANN PETTIFOR, Labour Women's Action Committee national organiser, at a workshop debate on what alliances for women. JUDE WOODWARD, also a member of the WAC executive, countered that socialists don't deserve the name unless be around to be part of. It is a event future, which will be the result of the tremendous inspiration of our heroes.
But it is not something that 1 can be part of on an everyday basis. Radical feminism is far more optimistic thar that, far more hopeful. It says that it is possible to change things in the here and now, and that women are doing That is an approach that I can relate to as a person in a way that I can't to other revolutionary theory.!
Women have to more assertively and forcefully about who they are and what they are doing, intimidated theories that place us the struggle and make us marginal We are not marginal. We are central And they need us. It's about time that we asserted that and stopped being defensive.
I am economic independence of women. I am not a woman who thinks our pro blems can be solved by a bit of legislation changing work patterns in the home, by persuasion, amontell. For me the that ever happen worthwhile tor witch ansc 6 We were all circulated with a glossy leaflet in our wards and women's sections recently advertising Labour Party products. Included amongst them were bread-boards and tea-trays all of which had nostalgic pictures of Labour women in 1914 — pictures of women making bread, making tea, women in the home. There is nothing surprising about this. This is what the Labour Party understands about the role of women. y economic independence and ending their dependence on men as What worries me is thạt the Labour of Party and the left don't really see that as an objective, as a demand of central importance. I think that is incredibly revolutionary. We are asking for both things simultaneously.
I call this radical feminism. I see no reason to be apologetic about it. It is not separate from are about, it is absolutely the most revolutionary because raised. categories and theories that have been previously developed by but we have to go beyond them to define new objectives, new strategies because women have been ignored for so long: anything to do with liberal feminism That is always the charge that is made by men in the movement to make women feel guilty TUC and the Labour Party said in 1901 when they rejected the demand pontica. for women's suffrage, saying it was a reason, dependent upon those two cannelle can't middle class demand. It made those women feel bad as well, because there doubt that women were going to be enfranchised sometime in the optimism come out much Mait way behind in fighting for the complete through only changes alre really women those from increasing their Photo: CM COOKSON such. what socialists was mel aemana Inal call Actress We have to use many of the socialists, I reject the idea that this has got That is what the 6 The way I see it, the liberation of all people is forces - women and the working class — working together and not against eachother.9 middle class if the demand for votes for women But we are not going to fall back Joan Collins might well benefit from our campaign. Yes, what we are doing about asserting women's rights, and about tighting for women, is benefitting people like Joan Collins who get big parts on our televisions screens every week as strong, assertive women who own oil companies. But that doesn't stop me from saying that our prime demand is to get economic independence for women, that this is a very revolutionary demand and men nave got to unaelstanu hills The only way we are going to overcome the prejudice that exists against women is by getting women standing together, experiencing collective action together, talking about it, organising together. That's the only power we have. It's the only power the working class ever had The way I see it. the liberation of all people is dependent upon those two forces — women and the working working together and not against each other. I suppose that what I am saying is that so much of what the labour movement does for the working class is done on the backs of half the working class. And we are not going to move forward until they get off our backs.
I AM not going to start by responding to what Ann has said, because there is much of it that I agree with.
Walt something of the enormity of what we caine will wich we say we lake on the whole question of how to fight cumstances it can be abolished.
went on to explain that is is not the nationalisation of the monopolies, democracy, or greater equality. These are a means to an end. The end, the goal, is the liberation of the whole of impossible to talk about discriminated against because of their face or colour, one nation is oppressed by another. If we are talking about nooza society where not woman is oppressed because of her ana 1 am not merested In setting a goal of anything less - then you have to grasp the enormity of the Moreover, has been around for a very, very long time. A lot of people who describe -themselves as Marxists think that the 'Marxist' view is that women's oppression somelling capitalism as such. All you have to do is get rid of capitalism and women's oppression will somehow disappear as a result. This is not what Marx or Engels thought. In his book The Origin of the Family, Property and the State - a book that is much maligned from virtually all points of view - Engels described the oppression of women as the first step out of 'primitive communism' He described the creation of a society in which women were oppressed as the result of the first class struggle. Or to put it another way, the first step out of primitive "communis. into 'civilisation' achieved on the backs of women, by what Engels described as 'the world historic defeat of the female sex'.
In other words, the oppression of women was the first real oppression to come into existence in the world.
And unfortunately I have every confidence in saying that it will be the last to disappear.
It will disappear long after nation has ceased to oppress nation. while the particular brutality of the oppression of black people is horrifying, and also involves a historic struggle to eliminate, I think sexism will even outlast that. The oppression of women is so built into the detail of our personal lives, so fundamentall! based within the family structure as that it will require, generations to have been brought ip in a different way to wipe it our.
I'll just throw in another point that Engels makes which many of our so-called Marxists seem to overlook because it touches a raw nerve.
says within analogy is that the man stands in the position of the bourgeois woman the proletarian. It is not just beration has to be central to the concerns of the labour that's Marxist orthodoxy!
Anyone who does not socialism without. tion' is true in a very basic way. is not UlIC the reat job.
of capitalism oppression with 'naturally' Mao s government, aller Private even being able lo walk into was •It is not just a problem of capitalism. Women were oppressed long before capitalism came into existence.
The struggle we are engaged in is nowhere near its conclusion, and it will not be ended by the overthrow of capitalism. In many respects we will only then start mental office (apart from number of queens) was China, the European countries, capilanst revoluton Many other literalis. union is the best.
women in He family the in society, have been made Jude Woodward the ruling class that oppresses us, but within the confines of the family it is truly men who are the problem! And place une question of fighting women's oppression centrally does not deserve the name socialist. lhe old slogan no liberaJuSt a problem of capitalism. Women were oppressed it, because of her sex. 9 long before capitalism came into existence. The struggle we are engaged in is nowhere near its conclusion, and it will not be ended ov the overthrow of capitalism. In many respects we will only then start getting down to However, all that said; getting rid will do women a gical deal of good. We have an absolute insocieties that have taken the first steps out of capitalism into a new kind of China. The most dramatic blow that has ever been struck against women's was hibited the binding of women's feet. A barbaric practice which more than anything symbolised the position of women in society. the aim of toot- better binding was to prevent women from A similar statement could be made USSR today are still grotesquely ophitle nas achieved on the road to women's liberation, certain things which we are still fighting for in the 'democratic' west were won at a stroke in 1917: abortion rights, complete freedom of getting down to the real job.?
divorce, and so on. Indeed, the first woman in the world to hold govern La small Alexandra Kollontai in the Soviet Union after There is one little fact which, as a member and enthusiastic supporter of WAC, I rather take note of. In Cuba, USSR, all the Eastern North Korea, Vietnam. Nicaragua. Yugoslavia. every country that has had an antieven muc worst of them there are more women in the central legislative bodies than in any country in the world. And I mean country. The Soviet with nearly 40 per cent women. The 3.5 per cent or so of Parliament here nakes rather sad reading compared to this. It's not that these are our models, but it is important to note the tacts.
have been really changing the position of women course of movements, struggles and described revolutions themselves. working socialists solutely women been diabolical, first Marxist • although died Marx had with Hynd.
the early Not only did the positions or as 'imperialist currents. They deserve name Marxism, stridently played an example, •own daughter, She in building tion to the SDF.
emerged The suffragette with her World War I disappear.9 It is to that kind of tradition tha: we have to look to in rebuilding a socialist tradition in the labour morement and in the Labour Party today It was a socialist traditior. understood that while the wortse class is the only force In capable of leading the struggle for the we first condition capitalism, with itself in against tionally view, in was innot just the own socialist. As socialists we shouldn't feel ashamed of the Terested that FO also is accused of it, and services.
higher wage cataclysmic al zullicill that.
because been achieved: the vote, some abor tion rights, more women are in paid work than ever before, and so on until we can get even a few women in positions of real leadership the understanding how we got the vote is a mystery. pessimistic. People's ideas do chang particularly in the course of struggi ple of that recently during the miners' A ferr Scargill was detencite a water!
to get rid of possibly be keeps interna- 1OU movewomen.
this is so little by himself the British communities.
But we points of view saying that. 9 dependence past.
Ten.
self'Impossibilism' fighting we de. until after from our The takes the already think If we have to wait for socialism more movement, then the fact that But, that is why I am not We've had a rather graphic examyears Arthur page three You compart. chet =es strike and Socialist Artin 29 Norember 1985 7 the role that women played, he considers the demand for women MPs to be quite justified, and indeed nobody 'is more fitted' to lead the labour movement than women. he very quiet about pin-ups, I'm sure he's changed his mind on that "If the organised labour movement wants to unite with women it can only be done on the basis of supporting the demands of That means in the here and now, and not just in some distant future.!
But he didn't change his mind all Women forced him to And many other people's minds were changed too, not just in the mining The Greenham womer made an enormous impact as well. I think we are making progress. It is slow, and we have a long way to go can't afford give precisely because we are socialists and feminists. Putting our demands women up front is vital from both I also agree with Ann that as ar off-shoot of our struggle, as a sort o ringe benefit, women like Joan Cr ins or indeed Margaret Thatcher ma gain. I don't believe Margaret Thatcher got there on her own, as she likes to claim. She got to be prime minister on the backs of all the predominantly working class women who have wag. ed a struggle for their rights, their intheir freedom Without the suffragettes, without the struggles for equal pay, without the women's liberation move. ment of the last two decades there would be no Mrs Thatcher at Number "In the end we have to rely on the women who have most to gain and least to Close — working class women. For them the interests of their class and their interests as women coincide.› But that WORl make stop We are not fighting for women like that — who make gains struggles, out use inost gains to push the majority of women What we are fighting for is the real economic independence of all women, not a privileged few — and to achieve that, in the end Joan Collins will have to give up her oil company So, to end on Ann's points about radical feminism - and this is where the crunch comes, although I don't for disagree. When it comes to it, which will be more important to a Joan Collins: the fact that she is a woman, or she owns an oil com pany? Which is more important to Margaret Thatcher?
In the end we have to rely on the women who have most to gain and least to lose — working ciass womeFor them the interests of their case and their interests as womer :3c: Women like Margare: our hypothetica passes tha: far: then i doc: ars » finally disagree
Socialist Action 29 November 1985
----- pull-quotes -----
"I am going to come out today and admit to being a radical feminist. And I'm going to go further and say that I don't describe myself as a socialist feminist or a revolutionary feminist because I believe that by doing so I imply that there is something that is not socialist or revolutionary about radical feminism. 9
by black women, because then we will have jelled together those forces and
hopefulness of radical feminism needed if we are to energise the work-
hey wage a serious fight for women's liberation. There was clear agreement on some fundamentals. Women's
movement, and if women don't wage that fight then obody else will do it for them. Women have come a long way - but they have even further to go.
It is impossible to talk about socialism coming into existence as long as one woman is oppressed
been made to really changing the position of women in society have been made in the course of movements, struggles and revolutions which described themselves as