FEMINISM IS DIVIDED BY RACIAL ISSUES

FEMINISM IS DIVIDED BY RACIAL ISSUES

1. ISSUES OF RACE DIVIDE WOMEN

Marilyn French, Feminist author, BEYOND POWER, 1985, P. 462.

The issue of race divides women for several reasons: women as well as men have been infected with the racism that is a disease of our culture, and which thrives among people of all colors. Since they themselves are similarly categorized, one might think that women would be immune to a way of thought that categorizes people by a physical attribute, and that ascribes to them qualities see as close to nature --animalism, lack of rationality, lack of a moral sense. But women are not more immune than any other underclass. It is a sad human fact that people diminished by a master culture reconcile themselves to their inferior status by ascribing an even greater inferiority to other groups.

Accounts by black feminists demonstrate the racism of some white feminists, who treat blacks as tokens, who do not listen to black women to understand the problems particular to feminists of color, yet who presume to speak for all feminists. White feminists often assume postures of condescension toward Latino culture, which they consider profoundly macho, as if their own were not. White feminists write books analyzing patriarchal culture, attempting to establish feminist theory, or examining a dimension of women’s condition without mentioning women of color at all -- women of color are as invisible in these works as women as a sex are in the work of many men. And indeed it sometimes seems that the gap between colored culture and white culture is as profound as the gap between white male and white female culture.

Marilyn French, Feminist author, BEYOND POWER, 1985, P. 463.

BETTY FRIEDAN

POLITICAL WRITER 1921 -

Life and Work

Betty Friedan, born and raised in Peoria, Illinois, is a product of classic episodes of the American experience in the Twentieth Century. The Great Depression contributed to a great deal of unhappiness between her mother and father. Her experiences of the rampant anti-Semitism of the time shaped her perspective on oppression. And her education made her aware of the noticeable absence of the women’s perspective in history, philosophy and politics. Fighting for inclusion, then, became her life’s work. It would remain so even after her long feminist career; her most recent work is The Fountain of Age, which extends her call for inclusion and nondiscrimination to the elderly along with other marginalized groups.
Friedan began her career as a journalist writing for her junior and senior high school newspapers. During her education at Smith College, she became the editor of the campus newspaper, where her aggressive investigative reporting led to the paper’s censoring by the school administration. Undaunted, Friedan did some graduate work at Berkeley and then moved to New York to become a labor reporter. This was during the Second World War, a time when women were encouraged to leave their homes and join the workforce. Although this allowed women to show that their abilities were equal to those of men, as soon as the war ended, women were largely forced back into their homes to make room for the returning male workers, effectively pushing back women’s labor gains.
This experience was part of what Friedan began to call “The Problem With No Name;” the unanswered desire of women for full participation in the American experience. She interviewed hundreds of women beginning in 1957 and ended up with a body of data which, along with her own observations and interpretations, became her master work, The Feminine Mystique, published in 1963. The book would turn out to be one of the many sounding calls for a new women’s movement that would draw upon both the Suffrage movement of the late 19th and early 20th Centuries, and the New Left activism of the 1960s. From then on, Friedan’s career would be that of spokesperson for the “liberal” feminist movement, demanding that women be granted full rights as American citizens. Friedan went on to found the National Organization for Women, today the largest political action group in the U.S.

A Practical Philosophy of Women’s Liberation

Friedan’s philosophy is neither radical nor conservative. Her concerns are (1) that women be assimilated into traditional American life, (2) that they be allies with enlightened men in the fight for full social liberation, (3) that women not fall into the trap of radical, ‘man-hating” feminism, and (4) the struggle for reproductive rights, such as the right to choose to have abortions.
The “liberal” feminist perspective is largely seen as the simple extension of traditional liberal rights, such as those found in the Constitution, to women. This perspective assumes that, in theory, the American experiment in individual rights is sufficient to liberate citizens. The right of equal opportunity to compete in society, of education and political participation, and freedom from brutality and discrimination are guaranteed to all Americans, but in practice they are often denied to women because of archaic attitudes of patriarchy. Friedan argues that women and men are essentially the same type of beings with the same needs. This can be counterpoised to those radical “separatist” feminists who emphasize differences between genders and call those differences “essential.” Friedan and her fellow liberals believe that those differences, even if natural, are ultimately social insofar as they have bearing on a woman’s political and economic life. The “politics of difference,” about which more will be said later, cannot liberate women if we accept Friedan’s definition of liberation as assimilation into the male political realm.
Similarly, Friedan has always been careful not to alienate men, whom she sees as important social allies. NOW’s political platform and statement of purpose emphasize that men as well as women can be in the organization. This is harshly opposed to the separatism and essentialism of radical feminism, and is, again, based on the assumption that men and women want largely the same things in life. The danger of alienating men is obvious: A serious threat of male backlash would undermine most feminist gains, since men still essentially control most political institutions. Moreover, liberal feminists frequently point out that patriarchy hurts men as well as women, preventing both from realizing their full capacities.
Some years after founding NOW, Friedan, while serving as the organization’s president, gave a series of speeches, quotations from which are found in the evidence here, warning against the dogma and narrow-mindedness of radical feminist rhetoric. She sees the goals of separatism as essentially unrealistic and as an invitation to the backlash mentioned above. Her goal, like that of most liberals, is cooperation and incremental change. Radical feminists, on the other hand, see patriarchy as embedded in the very structure of society, implying that it can only be ended by a complete overthrow of the system. This is the definitive difference between the liberal feminism of Friedan and the radical alternative: Liberals like the status quo, even if some changes need to be made, while radicals see the status quo as unreformable, inevitably poisoned by patriarchy.
Finally, Friedan has argued strongly for a woman’s right to control her own reproductive system, up to and including the right to choose abortion. This deserves some brief philosophical analysis. For liberal feminists, as for all political liberals, society can be divided into two parts, the public and the private. In the realm of public concern are laws designed to prevent harm to each other, to the natural environment, etc. In the private realm can be found the decision of what to do with ones body. Patriarchy often obscures the distinction between the public and private realms in contradictory ways. For example, patriarchy considers a husband’s treatment of his wife a “private” matter, meaning that spousal abuse, marital rape and the like should not be dealt with through the legal system. But patriarchy also considers women’s reproductivity a “public” matter, warranting repressive legislation.
Friedan argues that, women must have control over their reproductivity as a necessary precondition for their full participation in political and social life. Friedan points out that historically women’s pregnancy and childrearing has been the chief reason for their noninvolvement in society. But biology is not destiny, and with the advent of technology guaranteeing safe abortions and birth control, and with the growing participation in parenting by progressive-minded men, women will be able, occasionally at least, to shed their mother-role and take advantage of society’s opportunities.

Directory: uploads
uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10
uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers
uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It?
uploads -> For want of a nail
uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models
uploads -> Police Militarization
uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016
uploads -> Township of winfield
uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014
uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now!

Download 5.81 Mb.

Share with your friends: