The Radical 2nd Wave
Read the article in the Independent's magazine today. Brought back quite a few memories. 2nd wave feminism was born out of the changes in society in the 1960/70s when women found that they weren't being accepted as equal members in society in general or in their own peer groups and at a time when this came as a rather a shock.
I wouldn't have been seen as a radical feminist, regardless of what on line quizzes tell me, though I did hold some views that veered that way. I was more interested in politics across the board and I suppose the woman I was most interested in here in the UK was Barbara Castle.
Feminism was often separatist by default, in that only women were interested in actually doing anything and that it was born out of a knowledge that in lots of situations women were just ignored on the work and political side.
Unfortunately the different factions in feminism often meant that there was no contact on points that people would have agreed upon. It might have been that which caused the movement to flounder or it might have just been that a new generation of women felt that things had progressed enough not to need a political movement like the 2nd wave.
Spare Rib was very inclusive for its time. I was re-reading some of the magazines at The Womens Library a few years ago and I was quite surprized because I had forgotten what a broad spectrum it covered. Unfortunately this wasn't reflected out in the movement very much.
I was interested to see in the quote about Socialist Feminists that men often marginalised womens rights, and indeed they did, which was why the 2nd wave took off anyway. But the feminist movement itself made people feel marginalised too. This was in the main because a lot of middle class, white, straight women weren't interested in black, lesbian and other social structure politics so it made people feel as if they were being marginalised from the movement.
I would have separated Socialist and Marxist feminism of the time. I saw myself as a Socialist feminist but I don't think I could've been described as a Marxist.
Most feminism around that time revolved around consciousness raising. I remember the joy of discovering the book Our Bodies Ourselves. And a lot of women were just getting themselves out into the new society and figuring out how to do it the best.
I wasn't a separatist but I suppose that some women found that the best way to get to grips with how they were feeling and thinking.
I also wouldn't have been considered very pc by some of these women regardless of how committed I was to womens rights. I have been told that I was letting women down because my interests were too diverse. Well, that I was interested in human rights in general. Some people saw this as not giving enough time and energy to the cause. I saw it as supporting women in different situations.
And my "hippiedom" wasn't exactly a selling point either. I also used to read the magazines that Germaine Greer contributed to. (etc)
Even though I wasn't considered radical in my outlook, I did see women as a class in society, I just thought there were a lot of subsections too.
It would've been interesting to have seen the more radical side of feminism along with other forms. Especially as Socialist feminism was mentioned as not being acceptable to other sections at the time.
A mention of SisterWrite and The Silver Moon, the latter sometimes condemned for not being radical enough, though unnerving enough to be attacked in its early days. Perhaps a comment from Jane Cholmeley. Sue Butterworth, the other owner of The Silver Moon, has sadly died of cancer quite recently.
Spare Rib wasn't radical in comparrison to a lot of things that were written. Well, it was but I feel by virtue of its inclusion at times which wasn't always seen as necessary by some.
I wouldn't have been seen as a radical feminist, regardless of what on line quizzes tell me, though I did hold some views that veered that way. I was more interested in politics across the board and I suppose the woman I was most interested in here in the UK was Barbara Castle.
Feminism was often separatist by default, in that only women were interested in actually doing anything and that it was born out of a knowledge that in lots of situations women were just ignored on the work and political side.
Unfortunately the different factions in feminism often meant that there was no contact on points that people would have agreed upon. It might have been that which caused the movement to flounder or it might have just been that a new generation of women felt that things had progressed enough not to need a political movement like the 2nd wave.
Spare Rib was very inclusive for its time. I was re-reading some of the magazines at The Womens Library a few years ago and I was quite surprized because I had forgotten what a broad spectrum it covered. Unfortunately this wasn't reflected out in the movement very much.
I was interested to see in the quote about Socialist Feminists that men often marginalised womens rights, and indeed they did, which was why the 2nd wave took off anyway. But the feminist movement itself made people feel marginalised too. This was in the main because a lot of middle class, white, straight women weren't interested in black, lesbian and other social structure politics so it made people feel as if they were being marginalised from the movement.
I would have separated Socialist and Marxist feminism of the time. I saw myself as a Socialist feminist but I don't think I could've been described as a Marxist.
Most feminism around that time revolved around consciousness raising. I remember the joy of discovering the book Our Bodies Ourselves. And a lot of women were just getting themselves out into the new society and figuring out how to do it the best.
I wasn't a separatist but I suppose that some women found that the best way to get to grips with how they were feeling and thinking.
I also wouldn't have been considered very pc by some of these women regardless of how committed I was to womens rights. I have been told that I was letting women down because my interests were too diverse. Well, that I was interested in human rights in general. Some people saw this as not giving enough time and energy to the cause. I saw it as supporting women in different situations.
And my "hippiedom" wasn't exactly a selling point either. I also used to read the magazines that Germaine Greer contributed to. (etc)
Even though I wasn't considered radical in my outlook, I did see women as a class in society, I just thought there were a lot of subsections too.
It would've been interesting to have seen the more radical side of feminism along with other forms. Especially as Socialist feminism was mentioned as not being acceptable to other sections at the time.
A mention of SisterWrite and The Silver Moon, the latter sometimes condemned for not being radical enough, though unnerving enough to be attacked in its early days. Perhaps a comment from Jane Cholmeley. Sue Butterworth, the other owner of The Silver Moon, has sadly died of cancer quite recently.
Spare Rib wasn't radical in comparrison to a lot of things that were written. Well, it was but I feel by virtue of its inclusion at times which wasn't always seen as necessary by some.
posted by Zeb at 2:46 PM
<< Home