r stands open but they won't walk through.
The radical feminists retreat into their own ideology, their feminist purity. They are desperately afraid of contamination by the real world.
And so there is an obsession with finding a pure, 'un-co-opted' radical feminist strategy.
Many of the popular strategies and practices of the past few years have been well criticised in current WL literature. Kerryn Higgs and Barbara Bloch, for instance, talk about how the movement has developed its own orthodoxy. Instead of freedom and individual expression there has often been conformity and compulsive behaviour. They discuss various conformities, such as sharing, autonomy personal harmony, spontaneity and lesbianism. Their conclusion is depressing. p> Kathie Gleeson criticises the way the movement ignores its development out of the left, and the refusal to see how all our personal life is influenced by the political and economic reality around us.
Lesbianism is no longer regarded as a strategy for all feminists.
Barbara W. and her friends also make a number of specific criticisms of the movement's practices in their long article, which I have already quoted.
But radical feminism today is no closer to providing workable strategies than it was in 1974. The women who so well criticise and analyse past problems either admit their impotence, or have nothing to suggest but more of the same.
Barbara W. ends her article with 16 В«practical and organizationalВ» proposals. But looking closer it is dear that they are really nothing more than a statement in point form of the need to deal with the problems set out in the article. There is only one actually concrete proposal - to change the name of the coordinating committee!
With all the detailed analysis of mistakes and problems, there is no real attempt to work out why there were such problems. To the radical feminists they are simply the result of being В«misguidedВ», having the wrong В«attitudeВ», or В«understandingВ». Over the years, В«many of our fine original insights have become distorted (and) our practice has ended up conflicting with our theory. В»Why? Because of В«errors in judgement В»!
Is it simply the result of a few errors of judgement that В«we keep making the same mistakes over and over again В»? Why is it that so many women find that after 6 years of the movement it gets harder and harder to reconcile their theory with their practice? Surely at this point there should be some questioning of radical feminist theory itself.
«The idea that sexism is the basic oppression, that the basic class system is one between men and women. »This is the fundamental idea of ​​radical feminism. In the article reprinted here, I have shown what happens if you follow this idea through to its logical conclusion. I hope it will be of use to radical feminists who do want to start questioning the theory itself.
NOTE: In the original article, and in this new introduction, I haw concentrated on quotes and examples from the Australian movement. This is not because I think Australian radical feminism is different - quite the opposite. I believe radical feminism is pretty similar everywhere, and I could have written a similar article based on literature from Britain or USA. But this way there is no copout for Australians; no one can say, В«Radical feminism is different - we haven't made the same mistakes as overseas. В»
Radical Feminism, a comparatively recent trend in the Women's Liberation Movement in Australia, is based on the theory that women's oppression is the fundamental political oppression, that women are a class and that they are В«engaged in a power struggle with menВ». Furthermore, according to ideas of radical feminism, the purpose of male chauvinism is primarily to obtain psychological ego satisfaction and is only secondarily found in economic relationships.
This article will attempt to show that defining women as a class brings the Radical Feminists back to affirming the one thing all women do have in common - the female role; that the a-historical approach of personal politics is part of this female role, and that the lack of a strategy has meant the movement has reverted to those activities traditionally open to women - for example В«self-helpВ» which is no more than charity dressed up.
AFTER the initial stages of consciousness-raising, after the first rage had died down, the Women's Liberation Movement had begun to question, to ask where the oppression had come from, and try to work out the wax forward. Radical in its belief that a new society was necessary, the movement was strongly influenced by the New Left with its emphasis on conscious and experience. The social group of which the New Left was composed - white, middle class, students and the intellectually inclined - Had weighed the В«afflue...
