Category: Issue 2

Contents

1. Editorial
2. List of regional co-ordinators
3. Women & Science Collective
4. Regional Activities
   1. Cambridge Conference
   2. Newcastle Workshop
   3. Manchester Women & Socialism
   4. Yorkshire Women & Socialism
   5. Paris Conference

 

 

EDITORIAL

 

A brief recap:-

We decided at the National Conference Workshop on the Women’s Liberation and Socialism that we ought to be developing a specific socialist-feminist analysis, because unless we had some worked out perspective as socialist feminists, we were in danger of dissipating our energies in a multiplicity of meetings.

It was agreed that as a first step we should set up a socialist feminist communication network which would link up those sisters involved in different activities and campaigns in and around the women’s movement, in a way that would promote discussion of practical and organisational problems arising out of our activity.

1. Help to overcome any feelings of frustration, demoralisation, isolation and aimlessness we may experience by enabling us to see the content of our work in some kind of perspective
2. Hopefully lend to the development of a theory closely related to our practise – we would be able to pool our experience, generalise, theorise our practise
3. Lay the basis for practical work and in this way help overcome factionalism

 

Sisters at the workshop agreed to take on the task of regional co-ordination – to be responsible for contacting socialist feminists in their areas and arranging regional meetings, conferences, to discuss topics and issues which people feel could well be taken up in their regions and/or also nationally.

We also decided to circulate a newsletter to provide a forum for discussion and to publicise and co-ordinate activities organised in the regions. The newsletter can be used to develop links between groups, individuals, etc., it can also carry suggestions for topics for workshops, conferences. Through the newsletter we can discuss what we are doing.

 

Scarlet Woman No.1 – included the paper for the National Conference Workshop and a report back on the discussion at that workshop. We, the Coast Women’s Group also published and account of our activities as a group – the problems we experiences arising out of those activities.

The first issue met with a good response, a lot of letters came saying that it was both interesting and relevant, in that the problems it raised, particularly in the section dealing with the Coast Women’s Group, were also experienced by other sisters involved in feminist and socialist activities and campaigns.

It was comforting to note that our problems as a group have some objective basis, are not simply the result of personal ineptitude and lack of organisation.

In this issue, we have published an account of the work of the Women & Science Collective. It would be useful to publish reports from other groups in future issues of Scarlet Women.

 

Other ideas for the future

1. Could regional co-ordinators or anyone else concerned send in reports of their activities to date – any meetings held or planned, topics discussed etc.
2. Maybe individual socialist feminists involved in single issue campaigns (NAC, Women’s Aid, Independent Campaigns) could write in explaining their rationale and perspective i.e. Why this campaign rather than any other, how do they see their authority in the context of the development of the women’s movement and the general struggle for socialism.
3. Sisters involved in ‘community’ and ‘trade union’ struggles are faced with specific problems in trying to raise ‘women’s issues’ in the course of their campaigns. How important is a feminist perspective for women working in these areas. In this issue of Scarlet Women we have included a report back of a regional workshop held in Newcastle on just this theme

 

For the next issue of Scarlet Women, we will be publishing papers and report back from the Cambridge Socialist Women’s Conference – and hopefully any other contributions that sisters care to send in!!

***

 

WOMEN AND SCIENCE COLLECTIVE

Who we are

 

We are a group of socialist, feminist women ‘in and around’ science. As individuals we came into the group with, and have maintained, different levels of involvement with the women’s movement, political activities, and science. We got together to share experiences and ideas about the capitalist and secist science by which we are confronted. In particular, we are concerned to examine how the individualism, competitiveness and sexism of capitalist science affects scientific practice and practitioners, and to explore how science affects/ignores women. We feel that the women’s movement is inconsistent in its attitude towards science and technology, and we want both to generate and participate in discussions about the potential contributions/threats which science offers to our liberation.

The group has been together 1½ years. We “closed” the group after a couple of months together. There were obvious contradictions in choosing to be “closed”. However, as we wanted to be primarily a “task orientated” collective, closing the group seemed necessary for the ……. (Cannot Read bottom of page 2) the required commitment and continuity. We tried to maintain contact, hold open meetings with all “interested” persons not in the closed group. After about one year when the group had dwindled down to a core of five, we opened the group again. We are still in the process if stabilising the new group.

 

How We Work and What We’ve Done

 

We work as a collective. Writing as a collective usually means an initial discussion of what we want to try and write, someone or a small group writing a rough draft, and further discussions with everyone contributing to the final copy. When we give talks we try to ensure that at least two of us go to the meeting and that questions be addressed to the group not at individuals. We feel that it is very important to try to challenge, and break down bourgeois individualistic ways of working, and individual ‘ego-involvement’ with particular ideas.

Most of what we have done so far, (and perhaps too much?) has been centred around examining sexism in science and has been related to the radical science movement (mainly through the British Society for Social Responsibility in Science). We presented a paper at the BSSRS conference ‘Is there a Socialist Science?’. We have travelled around speaking to BSSRS local groups. Our major achievement has been preparing an entire issue (from conception, writing all items, to the collective paste-up) of the BSSRS magazine “Science for People” where we dealt with the following issues: Why DOn’t Girls do Science, Power and Sex in the Laboratory, The Political Implications of Creches, Women, Food and Nutrition, Hazards of Home, Women at Work, Hair Dyes, (a few copies still available at 25p and postage from us or BSSRS). This spring we presented a seminar “The Politics of Contraception” at an ongoing series of Science and Socialism seminars.

We hope to do more in the future aligning ourselves more specifically to women and to the women’s movement. We have written one article for Spare Rib and plan to prepare other articles for them in the near future.

As we have several commitments and interests which we want to pursue in the near future, we are now trying the process of working in sub-groups which meet separately and relate to the larger group. Sub-groups are now working on a critique of The Biological Basis of Sex Difference, Politics of Contraception, and Women and Mental Health (obesity and anorexia).

 

Problems and Issues Which Have Come Up

 

1 TASK ORIENTATION vs CONSCIOUSNESS RAISING. We want to be a ‘task oriented’ group (we feel we have something to give!) and we work best when we have deadlines to meet, BUT we hate deadlines and feel they detract from meaningful, spontaneous conversations which can so easily arise in a group like ours. However, when we don’t have specific deadlines we easily become apathetic and disillusioned with the group and fewer meaningful discussion seem to emerge!

2 FAMILIARITY. We actually found that we worked best on ‘tasks’ when we didn’t know each other well. Now that we’ve become friends and care more about each other’s lives, it is harder to settle down to tasks we mean to be doing.

3 OPENING A CLOSED GROUP. We have found it difficult to ‘open’ a group once it has been closed. The tyranny of structurelessness prevails! It is difficult to integrate new individuals into the group in such a way as to make them feel a part of the group and appreciate the new ideas and experiences they bring with them without changing the values/orientation/goals which ‘OLD’ members still want.

4   PRESENTING IDEAS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD. There is a huge gap between working out our ideas and communicating them. When we recently presented our ‘Politics of Contraception’ seminar to a group, consisting largely of radical ‘aware’ (??) men, we were surprised by the defensive, hostile response. We must work out a better strategy for communicating our ideas!

5   COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCE. The chance to work as a collective has been a most rewarding experience for most of us and provides a striking contrast to the individualistic way we need to function generally. We would like to find more ways of integrating the collective experience into our daily lives.

However, problems in working through collective experience have pinpointed how much we have each internalised an individualistic response to society. Individual contributions to the collective still seem value laden, e.g. because many of our projects involve writing those of us least able to write still feel that we have less to contribute to the collective than those who can write well/easily.

In sisterhood,

The Women and Science Collective.

 

***

 

REGIONAL ACTIVITIES

Socialist Women’s Regional Conference, Cambridge, October 16th 1976

(extracted from the Cambridge Women’s Liberation Newsletter – August 1976)

The impetus for this came from the National Women’s Conference in Newcastle where it was suggested that women involved in socialist groups should get together and share ideas. We have been attempting to involved women from other towns in East Anglia in the planning but since no-one from elsewhere managed to get to the advertised planning meeting we’ve decided to go ahead with planning from Cambridge while inviting people from other groups.

The programme for the day will be centred round activities we are currently involved in with discussion aimed to define a socialist perspective for us to work from.

A brief introductory session will give us themes to think about throughout the day and for this we are using the points raised in the first national Socialist Women’s newsletter as guidelines.

Then there will be two sessions on major issues. Two small groups in Cambridge have been working to produce papers as starting points for discussion on women and changes in the law, and on self-help health groups.

Self-help Health Group. This group brings together people and ideas from several different groups: women who have been involved in the Cambridge pregnancy testing group and the National Abortion Campaign raised the question of what it means to be a socialist woman in such groups; other angles come from women involved in the university Women’s Paper working on mental health, and people involved in the proposed Women’s Aid centre in Cambridge. A critical question here is the politics of servicing.

Women and the Law. We’re trying to find a unifying socialist/feminist perspective, looking at how laws work and the question of how far to campaign in support of a better but inadequate law. We’re looking at labour law and welfare and family law.

Finally there will be an open discussion session, going back to the issues raised in the introductory session and tying them in with points raised during the day.

A general group has been working on ideas for this session. We think that if the open discussion is left entirely unstructured we may fail to achieve our aim of defining areas to work round in the future.

 

Extract from Scarlet Woman No.1

Points arising from our problems as a group:

1. What is the role of a Women’s Group – particularly a socialist-feminist group? How can it develop strategy so that its intervention in socialist activities can be fruitful both for itself and for the campaign/activity concerned?
2. How can we incorporate feminism into our socialist activities. So that our involvement in, for example, the Cuts Campaign, does not become a step backward into ‘real issue’ politics?
3. How should Consciousness Raising be integrated into the Women’s Group? Does it become dispensable for ‘older’ members? Can or should it be developed into a more theoretical approach? If so, how? Is CR integral to the autonomy of the Women’s Movement – essential to the creation of feminist consciousness, the means by which isolated women develop strength and an understanding of their collective power (just as participation in strikes is important for the development of class consciousness, i.e. the process by which workers realize their own power to change and control events)?
4. How can the WLM give support to sisters whose marriage falls apart as a result of their involvement with feminism? It is a basic contradiction of the WLM that it challenges existing personal relationships but can offer little in their place. In its ideology and demands it offers unrealiseable possibilities to women – unrealisable because our oppression is structured in the economy.

This is a contradiction which is not contained within the socialist movement. Socialists have always opposed ‘lifestyle’ politics and ‘utopia building’ to the struggle to overthrow capitalism. For us, there can be no such opposition. Our very survival, personal and political, depends upon building a movement offering new relationships and possibilities to women and children (no, not separatism!) – but how do we go about this? Our experience with childcare points up the difficulties.

5. Bearing in mind points 3 and 4 can the WLM develop into a mass movement? Does it have to? How do we involve working class and married women? – if we don’t there is a danger that the WLM will become a movement of ‘liberated women’, offering a threat to the mass of women rather than a source of support. Is the WLM a movement or vanguard? Probably somewhere in between in that the impact of its ideas has been greater than the actual numbers of women involved.

Should the role of the WLM be as a catalyst sparking off campaigns and activities involving men and women who do not see themselves as feminists?

 

Newcastle

How do we integrate socialist and feminist politics?

A day meeting held at the socialist centre, Newcastle, on September 4th on the wearing two hats problem.

This was the first regional meeting we in the North have held as a result of the workshop at the National Conference and it was attended by 17 women from Middlesborough, Newcastle, Sunderland and Coast Group. Most of us there, as well as being involved in women’s groups and campaigns are active in trade unions, the Labour Party and Left Groups (I.S and I.M.G.). The meeting was organised around three topics:

1 Wearing different hats: “I often wonder which hat to wear at meetings; whether I should leave my ‘feminist’ hat at home when I’m being a ‘trade Unionist’”, to be a discussion on our experiences of picking up on ‘feminist’ issues at ‘socialist’ meetings.

2 Are feminist politics secondary to socialist politics? Are we reluctant to raise women’s issues because we do not feel that they are as important as socialist politics? Do we lack conviction – or self confidence. Is it lack of theory or because of the attitudes of the left towards feminism.

3 The way forward. Where do we start in tackling the problem – our consciousness, our theory, our organisation and structures, or where.

Three working papers were submitted and we drew up a list of specific instances where we had conspicuously failed to raise ‘women’s issues’ at socialist meetings.

 

Trades Council Fight the Cuts meeting (1)

The discussion at the workshop on cuts in social services and education expenditure centred around the problem of redundancy amount Health Service and Education workers, ignoring the effect on the users of these service, most especially housewives. “A” felt she ought to raise this issue but didn’t dare in case she didn’t get the support of the other women in the workshop, she was frightened of appearing obsessive and irrelevant.

Unemployment Meeting (2)

In a statement about the Scottish teachers strike, the speaker unfortunately said that women teachers in the north of Scotland regards their m=work as a hobby. “B” felt very nervous about pointing out the sexist nature of that remark, both because the speaker has been extremely good, and it seemed rather niggardly to pick it up on that one point and because the meeting was about unemployment and not sexism.

Anti-racist Meeting (3)

A comrade said that by playing on the sexist attitudes of the men involved he had diffused a potentially racist situation. He argued that it was perfectly legitimate to use sexism to combat the greater evil of racism. No woman felt strong enough to challenge his remark and in the end it was left to a man to explain that fascism breeds equally on sexism and racism.

Anti-fascist Meeting (4)

The discussion turned to writing a leaflet for the Asian community, the chairman said that it could be written in English because all immigrants understand it now, “C” pointed out with some trepidation that Asian women could not speak English because the are confined to their homes. It had not occurred to the men present that some immigrants are female.

 

FEMALE OPPRESSION IS INTRINSIC TO CLASS SOCIETY. Class society was founded on our oppression. All institutions and movements are permeated by sexist ideology – even that movement dedicated to overthrow of class society itself.

Given that we really believe in our slogan

There can be no revolution without women’s liberation;

There can be no women’s liberation without revolution.

 

How is it that we have to spend an afternoon discussing the ‘wearing two hats’ problem in any way? How come that we feel so torn between our feminist perspective and our involvement in the socialist movement?

Why are we forced to deal with the problem of integrating our feminist and socialist politics? Surely the struggle against women’s oppression ought to be an integral part of the struggle for socialism.

The fact that we feel such a conflict of loyalties and the fact that we find this conflict so anxiety provoking reflects nothing if not the depth of our oppression as a sex.

 

1. Our oppression goes so deep that the socialist movement, supposedly out to challenge capitalism root and branch, until recently accepted sexist ideology unquestioningly. Women were not seen as specially oppressed and for the purposes of organising at least, could be ignored – not quite ignored, for though we may not have had specific problems, we were certainly problematic for the left. We stood in the way of revolutionary process. We were backward and we distracted the worker from his proper pursuit of class struggle in two ways
   1. As part and parcel of comfortable family life we sapped his will to strike, dimmed his revolutionary ardour
   2. As Eve figures, we diverted that ardour in unfortunate directions

Socialist women struggling for a feminist perspective were made to feel that y raisin women’s issues they were creating an indelicate diversion. The inadequacies of that analysis led to a fase polarity being set up between the class/socialist issue and the women’s/feminist issue. Although the left acknowledges the fact of women’s oppression on one level, this polarity still exists with the class issue taking precedence within it.

2. Our oppression goes so deep that it affects every aspect of our lives including our relationships in the socialist movement. Even though we are committed feminists we cannot altogether free ourselves from the psychological effects of that oppression. Consequently it is not easy to keep having to challenge that polarity.
   1. As women we are accustomed to putting the requirements of others before our own interests. This makes it especially hard at meetings to interrupt the even tenor of agreement about what the subject under discussion actually is (the Cuts, unemployment, racism) to ask the ‘irrelevant’ questions – what about the women? It goes against the grain – maybe the ‘socialist issue’ should take priority – maybe I should keep quiet.
   2. We are also used to being belittled and patronised; aware of the possibility that we could well be ignored when we voice an opinion. Our self-confidence is systematically undermined by sexist society. If we try to speak at meetings we do so with diffidence, feeling silly in case we’re boring, side-tracking the issue or being trivial even when we are talking about the subject in hand. If we go further and insist on our rights to put our interests before those of the general struggle, if we ask that questions ‘what about the women’ we are likely to feel very guilty, sounds unnecessarily defensive/aggressive.
3. Our oppression goes so deep that even though we have been battling away in the socialist movement for years now, chauvinism is still rife in the left and Trade Union circles.

Maybe there is formal acknowledgement of the fact that women are oppressed, but the significance and extent of that oppression has to be defined and limited for us to by chauvinist attitudes.

1. It is seen as just one issue among many to raise the occasional struggle around.
2. It is certainly not to be given as much weight as class issues
3. Nor is it considered as significant as black oppression in the scheme of things

If a black person is attacked, that is racism.

If a woman is raped, that’s life.

Our hurts are more trivial than those of black people, and even feminists sometimes find it hard to persuade themselves that sexism is as evil as racism. Which is why we let the ‘comrades’ remarks go unchallenged at the anti-racism meeting.

“Maybe he’s right, maybe I’m carrying things too far by feeling angry. No, he’s wrong –  but how to say it casually, without introducing rancour into the meeting. If I put it theoretically, I can present it objectively without yelling. All oppression hurts. How dare you, a comrade, not take that pain seriously.”

When he was answered by a man, we were left to think

“Why didn’t I say that, why did I leave it to a man”

And anyway, why shouldn’t we yell out occasionally that oppression hurts.

For our oppression isn’t seen as something that really hurts us. Men can forget the woman questions when we are discussing Ireland or Chile. We can’t! We can never forget that we are oppressed i is there in our every relationship. For us it is a part of living, not a separate issue. We can neither forget the women when we discuss Ireland, nor can we forget that we are women, whatever we are discussing. In fact we can never take off our feminist hats to suit the convenience of the agenda. Male comrades may think and even say to us in so many words,

“ O.K. you are oppressed, but don’t go on about it, don’t drag it into everything, where is your sense of humour, you are in danger of becoming a bore.”

In conclusion, then, we are faced with a number of conflicts, stemming directly from the fact of our oppression.

We are constantly having to force awareness of ourselves as a special category at meetings when we raise the women’s issue. Constantly having awareness of ourselves forced on us by the sexist attitudes of our comrades.

Definition of socialism still effectively excludes the feminist perspective. We are put in the position of having to force the left to recognise the validity of women’s issues in the general struggle for socialism.

Even those sisters that accept that the class issue should have priority are brought up against the fact of their own oppression at meetings. They are faced with the dilemma, shall I challenge that sexist remark, shall I ask what about the women, or shall I let it pass?

Because we are oppressed, it is often difficult to speak at meetings anyway, and it especially goes against the grain continually to raise the women’s ussie – when we bring ourselves to do it, we know that we could be annoying or irritating our male comrades by disrupting the tidy progress of the meeting. The fact is that we cannot relax at meetings, can’t allow ourselves the luxury of concentrating on the subject in hand in the full knowledge that the struggle of women against their own oppression is seen to be integral to general struggle for socialism. Integral in the sense that:

1. Both men and women comrades see the implication for women in any campaign being fought.
2. Methods of organising women are considered as seriously as methods of organising men (i.e. women immigrants, housewives, etc.)
3. The socialist movement is free of sexist ideology and assumption – or at least that men as well as women are ever vigilant to challenge such ideology
4. In this way we will be free to participate without undue self-consciousness of ourselves as women; free to consider the subject matter of the meeting and free to raise issues other than ‘feminist’ ones.

Ann Torode. Coast Women’s Group.

 

MOST OF THOSE (at least those over 25) in the Women’s Movement who would describe themselves as Socialist Feminist arrived at this perspective from being active members of left groups, perhaps at college, and ye at the same time feeling dissatisfied with the analyses of socialist change provided by those groups, or to be more specific, the men in those groups. Through being told repeatedly that the struggle was ‘at the point of production’ and not at the kitchen sink, or even at the typewriter keyboard or hospital laundry, if that was where you happened to be, and also that women were reactionary, a counter-revolutionary force, women on the left had to either work out their own salvation or be completely co-opted by the male picture of themselves as the handmaid of the left, there on sufference only.

Fortunately, the former was what happened and women on the left developed what seemed at the time to be a completely new perspective on the nature of revolutionary change. We have spent the last four or five years developing this perspective, relating it to ‘mainstream’ left thought and indeed discovering in the writings of Marc, Engels et al., some strains of ideology if the time and the economic climate had been right. Instead, they have lain dormant, ignored and even denied for the first fifty years of this century, and have now been developed (e.g. the relationship of housework to surplus value) in as valid a way as other Marxist themes have been developed by 20th century male socialists.

We have now reached the stage of being able to examine the many political changes of the ‘Third World’ in particular and in the rest of the world, from a socialist feminist viewpoint. This provides the main explanation for the affinity many of us feel for the Chinese revolution, which for all its shortcomings, set out with the intention of tackling all social forms from the smallest unit upwards – the priority given in early days to rehabilitating prostitutes by creating a climate of opinion in which their exploitation was understood and personal stigma removed is one example – another might well be the development of a non-elitist medical system that caters for the real needs of the whole individual rather than the Russian system which for all its ‘polyclinics’ still relied heavily on a technological reputation.

In other words, what we have developed in the socialist feminist approach is one which could be described as ‘holistic.’ It is not simply that we look at issues as they affect women (e.g. the ‘cuts’ and so-called ‘community care’ by that our approach to the revolution is one that looks for the effect of social change on people as friends, parents, siblings, lovers, students, etc., as well as in their restricted roles of workers (for money), producers and consumers. We are redefining people’s place in society with reference to all of the roles and relationships in which they are involved whereas conventional socialism sees people’s relationship to the power base as being a direct results of their place in production. We do accept that people’s relations to production has an effect on their political and social power, but maintain that if the revolution did not encompass the most searching examination and change of all sorts of social relationship, father-son, teacher-student, etc., it would not be a revolution y our definition. We start at men-women relationships because they underpin the most basic inequalities in our society – but we do not stop there.

All these things agreed, and subsumed under the slogan ‘No revolution without women’s liberation, no women’s liberation without revolution’, we have reached an impasse which is caused by the dual factors of grouping together as women o examine women’s issues, and the eagerness of men on the left (most of them) to let us get on with ‘women’s issues’ while they work on the ‘important’ things like racialism and the right to work. I feel that what we have to do is to explain the relevance of socialist feminism to all social issues with which the left is concerned – whenever we come across an example of political analysis or action which lacks our feminist and ‘holistic’ approach we should point it out, and seek to teach this new approach not as something diversionary but as a valid approach for the whole of the left. The fact that we as women may be involved for a number of years in trying to get this message across should not deter us or make us feel embarrassed, in spite of the opposition we may encounter. We have worked hard working our ideology out – we now have to spread it. A few examples would serve:

1.Many women in the campaigns for easier access to better birth control have to reject the ‘population control’ element of some male socialist economists, pointing out that they could just as easily advocate pro-natalist policies if they thought that the socialist economy could be better served that way (it has happened before and is now happening in some parts of Eastern Europe).

2. A long as detailed article in the Guardian by John Harris, a most astute and intelligent commentator on African affairs made only passing reference to the situation of women and we were left at the end not knowing if Julius Nyrere’s regime had any effect on the birth control available to Tanzanian women, whether childcare and domestic tasks were still the main responsibility of women, either alone or with their mothers and sisters, whether women were actually getting to the local call meetings and affecting local politics. Of course it may be that all this has come to pass – but if it had it would be a miracle and we should still be told by male socialist writers. We have to train them to adopt this analysis in their work (rather like getting them to notice the floor need vacuuming (Cannot read bottom of page 11) at home!) and we shouldn’t have to send a sister to Tanzania to report specially on changes in family structure.

3. Two articles in New Society this week (Sept.2nd) by John Rex and Lawrence Scheimmer, analyse what is happening in Southern Africa, conclude that a Russian socialist model is quite likely to follow a violent revolution, and the latter only refers to the position of women in the current struggles to adopt a tone of surprise that ‘280 pre-teenage girls went on the rampage’ in the SA violence. Nowhere does John Rex comment on the appalling effect on family life of the apartheid and migrant labour system, and on the analysis, or lack of analysis, of changes that could be hoped for in this direction by the freedom movements (I don’t means teaching the girls to handle weapons). Two things must sicken you about African freedom movement leaders – they are almost all male, or related to males in references to them – Winnie Mandela is always ‘wife of jailed leader Nelson, etc.’. Where are the women?

4. I was always sickened, attending black power rallies in Leeds, to find the black men on the platform and the black sisters in the kitchen, making the curry – or at Bradford, to see a busload of Asian men at an anti-NF demo, knowing their wives were at home suffering the most awful isolation and repression.

To conclude, we have to start shouting, in the press, at meetings – everywhere – we have a valid approach to the whole of socialist thought and action – and without the feminist, whole-of-life approach – THERE IS NO REVOLUTION!

Anna Briggs. Coast Women’s Group.

OBVIOUSLY NO PAPER OR CONFERENCE CAN COVER ALL ASPECTS OF THE relation between women’s liberation and socialism. In this paper I want to look at two issues. (1) the question of defining what people mean when they talk about socialism, (2) how to take up the issue of women’s liberation in aspects of the class struggle on Tyneside, particularly with reference to public expenditure cuts, unemployment and the anti-fascist/anti-racist campaign. While the paper treats these questions separately it is important to insists on their connection, the way we campaigns now should influences by the type of socialism we want to create.

 

WHAT TYPE OF SOCIALISM DO WE WANT?

1. Definitions of Socialism.

 

If we look at the discussions about women’s liberation and socialism, we can see obviously the debate between radical feminism and socialism. This essentially is over whether capitalism or men constitute the cause of women’s oppression and what revolutionary strategy flows from this. What I want to discuss, however, is the debate between socialism and economism. If this distinction between socialism and economism is not clearly made, then I would contend it is not possible to establish the relevance of socialism to women’s liberation.

There have been many political debates in the socialist movement. The debate against economism is an old one. The essential argument of economism (and related theories such as workerism) is that the working class organised at the point of production is the only class with a role to play in the revolution and that its experiences in the factory are all that is necessary for the generation of revolutionary consciousness. In this sort of model of revolution the role of housewives, as well as intellectuals, artists and peasants, etc., is minimal. This type of theory leads to a political practice which focuses on the industrial struggle on the shopfloor, often to the exclusion of all else. Similar in this respect to economism is syndicalism, which sees the road to revolution as via the mass general style and so focuses exclusively on trade union struggles. For women, many of whom are outside the trade unions, syndicalist theories lead to an exclusion from the class struggle.

For revolutionary Marxists the struggle for socialism is the struggle for the liberation of all humanity; the ending of the economic exploitation of the proletariat and of all other types of oppression. This has consequences for fundamental aspects of revolutionary strategy.

1. b) Revolutionary Consciousness

 

What is revolutionary consciousness? Does it mean understanding one’s own oppression and understanding about all types of oppression and exploitation and seeing the need for an integrated fight against them? Lenin in “What is to be done” argued that political class consciousness (i.e. a fully developed revolutionary consciousness) required understanding of and opposition to all types of exploitation and oppression. To overthrow capitalism and replace it with socialism it is not enough to revolt against one’s own oppression, but to oppose the system as a whole.

In this framework the role of the revolutionary party is to provide the conscious factor in history which seeks to unify all struggles and to develop them in anti-capitalist directions. If revolutionary consciousness if not automatic or spontaneous, then it is necessary for some organisation to take revolutionary consciousness into the working class. The consciousness that workers spontaneously achieve is economist and often social-democratic. For the working class to become the ruling class in society it has to win the leadership of all oppressed layers and intermediate strata.

1. c) Workers’ Councils (Soviets)

 

Many sectors of the struggling masses, e.g. peasants, women, black people etc. are not organised in trade unions. Trade unions, therefore, reflect the sectoral struggles of groups of workers; they do not unify the whole class or the masses. This is the task of workers’ councils or soviets. Soviets are the universal form of the dictatorship of the proletariat. They are composed of all layers in struggle against capitalism, can achieve the overthrow of the system and provide the participatory direct forms of democracy which can build socialism. Soviets would include representatives of housewives committees, women’s groups, tenant organisations, nursery action groups etc., as well as representatives of workplaces, unemployed workers etc. In the tasks of the period of dual power (i.e. the situation in which two forms of state, bourgeois and proletarian come to decisive conflict) (Cannot read bottom of page 13) the task of soviets should not be only to organise military affairs, distribution of food, transport etc., but also to tackle immediately the problem of childcare (and in many instances contraception and abortion) to free women to participate in the struggle and raise their own demands.

 

PRESENT CAMPAIGNS ON TYNESIDE

a) Cuts in Public Expenditure.

The cuts affect women both as employees and consumers. What we have to do, however, is not simply to demonstrate that cuts hit women hardest, but to take up their role in reinforcing the family and show how women can struggle against the cuts. Many militants will take up the struggles against the cuts without any understanding of the question of family, but taking up the fight against the cuts (particularly social services and nurseries) does lead to some discussion of the family. To fight cuts effectively one has to reject the view that is it the women’s responsibility to provide community care for the sick, old, mentally ill etc. Work around the cuts thus provides us with an opportunity to educate wide layers of the vanguard on the question of the family. For women to participate in fights against the cuts requires organisation at the level of the workplace and community. It is not enough, however, for women to take part, they must also lead these struggles. For instance, at the North Tyneside Council Meeting, where the Housing Campaign was thrown out of the Council Chamber, most of the tenants were women. They were very militant, but the men did all the public speaking. Positive discrimination in favour of women, encouragement to speak help with preparation etc. is needed to overcome this sort of problem.

1. b) Unemployment

Here we have to campaign for the Right to Work for Women both at a programmatic level and in terms of practical implications for campaigns against unemployment. For instance campaigns against unemployment should take up cases where women’s jobs are threatened, e.g. civil service, teaching, nursing, textiles, service industries. When campaigning for training, apprenticeships, more jobs, etc., we should demand 50% of them be allocated to women. Documentation is needed on the number of women unemployed, inequality in benefits, rate at which women become unemployed etc. Campaigns also need to stress the need for abortion, contraception and childcare facilities as essential for a Woman’s Right to Work. We also need to respond to proposals to “solve” the problems of youth unemployment by sacking all married women.

1. c) Anti-fascist/Anti-racist Campaign

While it is obvious to many that fascist movements are racist, it is often less obvious that they are sexist. For fascists women’s chief (often only) role is as breeders of the master race. Therefore fascists oppose abortion, sexual freedom, women working outside the home, etc. and seek to reinforce the family and repressive sexual morality. This means that, as with racism, they take up themes which have a deep resonance in a working class imbued with imperialist and sexist ideology. Workers do not support fascists just because they are unemployed and live in slums. These are significant material factors, but the appeal of fascists also depends upon deeply ingrained reactionary ideas. There is nothing incompatible with being a revolutionary socialist and saying that the mass of the working class is deeply (though not irremediably) racists and sexist. Response to racism comes from a long imperialist cultural heritage. Response to sexism comes from the way working class existence is structured by the family. A man goes to work to support his family; he looks to family life for comfort and relaxation; family maintains personal identity. Thus the slogan of the defense of the family rallies many men and also many women, for whom the family is perceived as an escape from low-paid boring work. The anti-fascist vanguard has to discuss and come to terms with the question of the family to combat fascism successfully.

On the questions of anti-fascist/anti-racist struggles we have to fight to win the campaign to take an orientation to black women, particularly Asian women, who, because of their oppressed position in the family, may be ignored in such struggles. For instance it is not the case that only black youths have been subject to racist attacks. Attacks have also been made on black women, but as these have included sexual attacks, the women have not reported them. It is therefore difficult to assess the extent of attacks on black women. It is not the case that the extremely strong family structure of the Asian community is an impassable barrier to Asian Women taking part in struggles. At the Imperial Typewriters Strike, Asian women played a leading role. This example has to be discussed and analysed by the anti-fascist vanguard.

Liz Lawrence

(Newcastle International Marxist Group)

 

 

SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION

1. Wearing different hats

Although we often feel torn about raising ‘women’s issues’, most sisters felt that their confidence had grown with the growth of the Women’s Movement. We were at least able to identify sexist remarks at meetings even if we did not always feel that we could challenge them.

Several other instances of sexism at socialist/trade union meetings were cited – male comrades not taking creche arrangements seriously – like union branches adjourning to men only bars, thereby effectively excluding women from the camaraderie and informal decision making of the trade union movement. A particularly striking example of sexism was mentioned by two Newcastle women.

After picketing, a crowd of men and two women went into a bar, the barman served the men but refused to serve the women – the majority of the men left with the women but half a dozen reused to leave the bar, they didn’t see the reason why they should.

We discussed the incident at the anti-racist meeting. One sister said that though she had disagreed with the ‘comrades’ remarks she decided not to challenge them because she felt that the discussion ought to concentrate on the anti-racist campaign that they were there to organise. She said that if we took issue with every sexist remark, we could get side-tracked. Other sisters wondered if she was implying that women’s issues were secondary in taking this attitude. She replied that she felt that we had to weigh up the situation at the time. She pointed out that there were other people in the meeting to take up his sexism.

1. b) Are feminist politics secondary to socialist politics

 

Why are we reluctant to raise women’s issues?

1. We are usually in a minority at meetings – maybe the only women there
2. We feel that we would not get support from other sisters at the meeting
3. Recognised ‘socialist’ politics are felt by the majority at the meeting to take precedence over ‘feminist’ politics – so we are very conscious of being labelled as ‘the one who always brings up the women’s issue.’ In many cases these are regarded as either trivial or irrelevent so we are frightened of appearing idiotic.

Attitudes of the left

 

Though most left groups and the labour party recognise that there are women’s issues, they often feel that mere recognition is enough. It is left up to the women to get on and organise around the,. Women’s issues are not seen as integral to the struggle for socialism; as integral to the current campaigns against the cuts, unemployment and racism.

Non-sexist attitudes and behaviour has not yet become a way of life for the male left. Socialist men may only remember to be non-sexist when they know that there are feminists present who will challenge their sexism.

One sister said that a left group might latch on to a particular issue because it has become fashionable – a kind of bandwagon effect – like the abortion campaign. But when the abortion campaign was taken up it was reduced to a workerist outlook, the group concerned did not enrich its socialism with a feminist perspective – rather abortion became a class issue rather than a ‘women’s issue’.

Is this because we haven’t yet presented any underlying socialist feminist theory that the left can take up women’s issues in this way? Or is it due to the male bias of the left groups themselves?

The real question is what do we all mean by socialism – do we mean ‘workerism’ or do we envisage a total struggle around all aspects of our lives. We had a long discussion about Workplace ‘versus’ community politics and organisation.

Some sisters argued that socialists had to organise at the workplace because that was where the mass base was – it was pragmatically easier than trying to mobilise women tied to their kitchen sinks. Also the organised working class would form the spearhead of the coming revolutionary struggle and we ought to concentrate our resources there. This did not mean that we should restrict our activities to questions of pay and conditions but rather that we should raise consciousness amongst the working class and its organisations on other issues like racism, sexism and struggles taking place in the community.

Against this, other women felt that whilst the organised working class with certainly play the leading role in the revolution, the ‘community’ type issues and the struggles around them would constitute a growing challenge to the State itself and that it was these issues that most concerned women. Thus the crucial importance of women and women’s issues to the growth and development of the revolutionary movement. A campaign against education cuts, say, was a campaign directly against the State.

We need a coherent theory of the family and its role in capitalist society and an analysis of the importance of ‘community’ politics in its relation both to the Women’s Movement and to shop floor struggles,

 

1. Where do we go from here

Women should give each other more support at meetings, perhaps we could caucus before any particular activity to discuss our intervention to ensure that various workshops are covered, that amendments are submitted, that sisters are supported by each other when raising women’s issues.

We must try to build up our numbers in political groups and trade unions so that we are not the lone womens issue speaker at every meeting. Locally, we must encourage men to participate in the women’s liberation and socialism course so that they behind to see the importance of women’s issues to the general struggle.

We decided to organise a regional conference to discuss more fully the role of women in the family and the community. We would link this theory to specific local campaigns and we would invite men and women involved in those campaigns to participate.

This afternoon’s discussion was so productive that we decided to continue the regional meetings of the socialist current, the next meeting to be on October 23rd in Sunderland. The Sunderland sisters to decide subject and venue.

 

We have heard from the Manchester and District Women & Socialist Group who have been meeting since August. So far they have had three meetings with an attendance of about thirty.

The group has decided to look at specific topics like Health, Education, Sexuality, Economics, etc., and try to work out a socialist feminist perspective for them.

Firstly, they looked at health, dealing with the NHS – the cuts, women working in the NHS, the relationship between worker in, and consumer of the health services, self-help groups, and the state-financed Community Health Centres.

The discussion tended to polarise into those who felt it was necessary to develop a strategy for fighting the cuts and defending the existing health services, and those who first priority was fighting for an improved health service, who were dissatisfied with the flaws in the services provided.

By the end of the meetings everyone felt that it was worth struggling to synthesise these views through the Women and Socialism Group. An effort was made to combine both approaches and by the end of the meeting, although there were the differences, everyone felt that it was worth struggling to reach such a synthesis; that there was an urgent need to develop a socialist feminist perspective through meetings of the Women and Socialism Group.

Yorkshire Women & Socialism   (extract from WIRES No.15)

Having been selected (arbitrarily!) as Yorks co-ordinator… I can see no sign of any functioning women and socialism groups, although there were plenty of Yorks women at the National Conference Workshops. Hence something of a vacuum! Many socialist women here in Sheffield seem to be up to their eyes in campaign work; we could probably use some general discussion, but would sisters choose to commit time to this….? (I’m investigating the idea via local newsletter, talking to people etc.) What about York, Leeds, Hull, Pontefract etc..?

Is organising regional and local discussions in the WLM itself more important than doing this just within the socialist current? What do sisters think about doing both/either – how do the two relate to each other?

What local W. & S. groups do exist in the region?

Is discussion via the W. & S. newsletter and Wires as much as we want just now?… or could we use e.g. one of the suggestions made at Newcastle – a regional meeting on a specific topic like abortion?

….Feedback please. In Sisterhood, Jenny Owen.

 

***

 

EUROPEAN FEMINIST SOCIALIST CONFERENCE – is still in PARIS, bit the date has now changed … 1977

The 3 broad themes of the Paris conference will be

Women and work

Women and the class struggle

International solidarity

And we in England are making representations to the Planning group to have workshops at the conference relating to the following topics:-

National abortion campaign

Working women’s charter

Gay politics and the lesbian left

Alternative childcare

Women’s Aid

Chilean Women’s solidarity group

Spain and Women against fascism

Women in left groups

Immigrant Women

Women in minority nations (Wales, Basque, Brittany etc)

Women in Ireland

Women’s periodicals

Equal Pay, Unemployment

Women’s Health

Women in rural areas

These are only some of the possible topics that we in Britain could contribute to, and hopefully short papers (about 1 page each) are being prepared for each. These will be circulated for comment, amendment etc. to anyone who wants them.

 

At the moment there are meetings at the London Workshop for anyone who is interested in helping with preparation or who just wants to know about the conference. To women outside London, we are very sorry that the meetings have to be in London on a weekday at the moment (because of booked Saturdays mainly), but PLEASE, if you want to help, or perhaps write something for the conference or whatever, write to the address and we will keep in touch!

Particularly, if anyone has ideas about what a socialist feminist is, or should be, write down and send them to us!

Finally, a plea for financial help! At the moment, money for postage is coming out of my own pocket and there are more than 60 women on the mailing list and we don’t know who of those is still interested in the conference. If you are interested therefore and want to receive papers and further details, please send a supply of stamped addressed envelopes or a small donation. From now on we will have to stop sending out info so indiscriminately, although we will of course continue to put things in the workshop newsletter and Wires.

In sisterhood,

Barbara Yates

 

(Note: Any communication to SCARLET WOMEN should be accompanied by a SAE as we have no funds for postage at the moment.)