Due Sep 27 – Sep 29
Liberal Feminism vs. Women’s Liberation
Over this week, we’ll read from two books on the rift that developed in the 1960s between mainstream feminists and younger, more radical activists calling for women’s “liberation” from the shackles of the patriarchy. Both selections are a bit long, but they are also rich in detail, so it’s a good opportunity for you to practice your ability to skim: read the first page or so in depth, scan ahead to get a sense of the chapter structure by reading the sub-headings, then choose a few places (in one or in both authors) where you’re curious to learn more—and read those sections in depth. Aim to spend about 10 minutes skimming, and then an hour focusing.
Women’s Liberation, according to Flora Davis
⤹Click the reply button just below.
According to Flora Davis, the Women’s Liberation movement was unique from liberal feminism largely because of the women that comprised it. These women were, overall, younger and had been involved in other radical movements, like the Civil Rights movement and the Anti-war movement, prior to forming the Women’s Liberation movement. As a result, many of the goals and ideologies of the movement were influenced by the lessons of sexism learned by these young women within the other radical movements. For example, many women that began their radical activism in the Civil Rights movement (and would go on to become a part of Women’s Liberation), experienced a complex sexual double standard during the sexual revolution. Black women were berated for getting involved with white men, while “a black man and white woman seemed the ultimate expression of love” (74). It led many of the women in this cohort to resent the sexual revolution because it allowed men to freely use women. This would become evident in the ideologies of the Women’s Liberation movement. Similarly, the frustration felt by women in the SDS over their position led to discussions of the “women question” that would become a cornerstone of the Women’s Liberation movement. Involvement of women in previous radical movements provided the Women’s Liberation movement with experience in advancing a movement and experience in addressing the sexism that accompanies it.
As depicted within Flora Davis’ book Moving the Mountain, there are many factors that distinguished the Women’s Liberation movement from liberal feminism. Both groups were comprised of different people with different perspectives and goals in regard to women’s rights. Because of the generational gap between the women in the different groups, each group had their own set of experiences that shaped their respective beliefs. Although they had similar overlapping goals, the distinction between the two movements are prevalent from the rise of the Women’s Liberation movement. In every sense, the Women’s Liberation movement was more radical, from their ideologies to the way their ran their organization. This radicalism set them apart but also “generated such a powerful experience that eventually influenced liberal feminism as well” (Davis 94). The Women’s Liberation movement insisted on radicalism and although it was one of their strengths, it was also a weakness that caused many of these radical groups to fail, especially when trying to enforce a “horizontal leadership” (Davis 104). In these ways the extremities of the Women’s Liberation movement advanced the womens rights movement in a way that the more mild liberal feminism take could not.
According to Davis, the Women’s Liberation movement was much more radical than liberal feminism, and more focused on the patriarchy and personal relationships, while liberal feminism focused more on politics and the economy and fighting for women’s advancement in those areas. An example of this comes into play when she describes some of the early writings of the Female Liberation Front, and the responses from liberal feminists. On page 84, she first quotes Betsy Warrior, a member of the Women’s Liberation movement, saying that the liberal feminists “‘considered us man-haters and weirdos… I think they probably despised and feared us because we were articulating their own doubts'”, then quotes Nancy Hawley, more of a liberal feminist, saying “‘it was very personal for many people who were for the first time struggling with issues in their relationships'” (84). The contrast between these perspectives on their personal relationships and interactions with men illustrates a key difference between them, how radical they were and their main priorities and focuses in how to advance the station of women in society. The much more personal tones of the Female Liberation Front focusing on relationships with men struck a chord with the liberal feminists, who were examining those relationships in a new light for the first time privately, but publicly focusing on other things.
According to Davis, the women’s liberation movement was rooted in different political tradition from liberal feminism, and although the two eventually crossed paths, the two competed during the Civil Rights Era. The two groups came from different generations and had incompatible structure and styles; most notably, the liberal feminist groups had defined hierarchical arrangements, while the womens liberation groups operated democratically without any leaders. Because of this stark difference, as well as the general tension that constantly surrounded people of this era, it was very easy for conflict to arise between women fighting for the same cause. Davis quotes Jo Freeman saying “Trying to change an entire society is a very slow… process in which gains are incremental, rewards diffuse, and setbacks frequent.” (100), illustrating the impact of misdirected frustration and how this caused women to turn on each other. Because the groups in the women’s liberation movement prioritized a lack of formal leadership, they scrutinized the liberal feminists when they failed to meet this standard, which severely interfered with the original notion of raising consciousness and urging the progression of gender equality. The women’s liberation movement was driven by their devotion to informational awareness – especially because women began to believe ludacris notions such as their inferiority to men – and their radical approaches to eliminating false gender ideals made this movement differ from liberal feminism.
Women’s Liberation, according to Linda Gordon
⤹Click the reply button just below.
According to Linda Gordon, what defined the Women’s Liberation movement was one phase many women activists undergo: consciousness-raising. With consciousness-raising, women started to gain greater confidence in themselves. Along with this confidence, they realized they could rebel against society’s maltreatment. This realization also came from witnessing the Civil Rights movement, which inspired many of these leaders. Most importantly, as black leaders did, women activists began to question the social roles of genders in society. As Gordon quotes one consciousness-raising member, “They were claiming that they were the experts on their own lives, refusing to defer any longer to the doctors and preachers and politicians who declaimed about what was normal for women” (Gordon, 82). Although this ideology may seem extreme, it perfectly captures what the Women’s Liberation movement meant. A change occurs when one explores past what others taught them. One realizes that the world has placed excessive boundaries on what one can accomplish. In this case, women realized that they were as equally capable as men were in the work field and chose to break the stereotypes holding them back. By doing so, it was necessary to obtain such radical ideals to stand for what they believe in, no matter the consequence.
In Gordon’s section about Feminism, the Women’s Liberation Movement is defined as reconstructing each aspect of life to deconstruct stereotypes, gender roles, and expectations. For example, one aspect of life is mindset in which Gordon suggests consciousness-raising to have women ask questions and, “open up, share, analyze, and abstract,“ to better understand common issues amongst women and to redirect the problem from an individual woman issue to issues inflicted upon women by men. Another aspect of life is politics where Gordan addressing the lack of exposure women have to women’s rights movements. For example, women learned from the civil rights the concept of structural racism which then translated to structural sexism in which organizations and institutions set sexism in place. Another aspect of life is race and class in which liberal feminism was exposed for its white women’s agenda and thus led to the introduction go the third world women’s alliance. Another aspect mentioned was community in which organizations were encouraged to rally support for feminism such as the SNCC. Gordan also mentions aspects such as bodies, culture, and work which add variety in empowering the women’s rights movement.
Davis & Gordon, by contrast to Van Gosse
⤹Click the reply button just below.
In broad terms I would say that Davis and Gordon’s characterization of the Women’s Liberation movement does fit with Van Gosse’s as all three authors seem to categorize the movement as one filled with ranging radical ideals paired with a flood of young activists and organizations each with differing views on how to structure leadership. Throughout Davis’ account, the movement is said to be spearheaded by a “younger branch” of activists (Davis 69). Davis speaks to the way that the SNCC was used as a “a model for what the world could become” and would support Gosse’s various examples of the intermingling of groups that happened all throughout the New Left Movement (Davis 74). Davis, as well as Gordon referencing the “movement’s diversity”, also seems to support Gosse’s testament to the way groups struggled with leadership structures. Davis even states that “groups that functioned without a hierarchy” found “an intense feeling of community” that was beneficial within the organization, but hard to translate to the broader public. This difficulty of translating small, centralized structures from one organization to even just a broader scope within the movement is a difficulty that Gosse references time and time again throughout his characterization of the New Left. Many groups had similar general goals for where they wanted change, but had drastically different approaches they were comfortable utilizing to get there.
In Gordon’s section of Feminism Unfinished, she brings up many of the same notions of the Women’s Liberation movement as Gosse and creates similar bridges between the feminist movement and greater New Left. She begins the section by describing the 1968 Miss America protests by radical feminists and explains how events as such started to categorize the feminist movement into the older, liberal sector – greatly associated with NOW – and the new Women’s Liberation cause – associated with consciousness-raising, Cell 16, Boston’s Bread and Roses, etc. This dramatic separation between old and new feminist ideals preceding and throughout the Sixties is one of Gosse’s main arguments for the formation of the New Left that he focuses on. Also, Gordon spends a significant amount of her passage discussing how the Women’s Liberation movement was greatly influenced by previous social movements, namely civil rights – “almost all the younger participants in the women’s liberation movement had previously participated in other parts of the New Left” (Gordon 36), which alludes to the interconnectedness and intersectionality of coeval radical groups that Gosse frames Movements of the New Left around. But Gordon complicates the relationship between these groups by explaining even though the civil rights movement inspired aspects of women’s liberation and these groups both wanted progressive change, their fundamental beliefs were starkly dissimilar. The Black Panthers – probably the most famous Black Power group to come out of the Sixties – were known for being very sexist (and homophobic, which I read about in Gay is Good from Thursday’s assignment) and many feminist circles were white-focused (“It was a white women’s movement, not necessarily because it was exclusionary of women of color, but simply because the agenda was a white women’s agenda.” (Gordon 29)). Though I think Gosse recognizes the nuances between Women’s Liberation and other movements, he definitely relies on the commonalities between them for his overarching thesis, whereas Gordon is willing to reference how different radical groups shaped the structure of the radical feminist movement and then pivot to discuss issues more specific to Women’s Lib.
According to Flora Davis’s account of the Women’s Liberation movement, we do see many overarching similarities that connect this movement to other New Left groups. Davis discusses how the Women’s Liberation movement was much more radical than previous liberal movements, a phenomenon that Van Gosse points out in several other New Left movements. In both, there is a general shift away from liberal ideals of reforming unjust systems, towards a more radical fight to replace them. We can also see similar protesting strategies between groups. Primarily, Davis and Van Gosse both point to civil disobedience as a central strategy for women’s rights groups, as well as civil rights organizations and anti-war movements. Despite such similarities, Davis also points out extreme division between women’s rights protesters and other New Left Movements. For example, within the major New Left organization, SDS, Davis states that “typically, the men made the decisions while the women made coffee and did office work” (76). She also points out how Women in SDS and the SNCC began to resent how many men in the movement viewed them as sex objects and that women’s rights topics were frequently brushed aside and disregarded. Along with divisions due to sexism, there were racial divisions as well. Many Black women at the time saw the movement as “bourgeois or felt that fighting racism has to be their priority” (74) and saw the women’s rights movement as highly centered around white women. This division became exacerbated by radical feminists’ claim that the patriarchy was the root of all oppression.
Davis by contrast to Gordon
⤹Click the reply button just below.
Primary Sources for Surprising Anecdotes
⤹Click the reply button just below.
Attachment Women-With-or-Without-a-Wild-Streak.pdf
Flora Davis’ anecdotal description of the Women’s Liberation Movement and its interaction with the National Welfare Rights Organization (NWRO) in Moving the Mountain demonstrates a period where unison was more of a dream than an obtainable goal. Charlotte Bunch, a member of the D.C. Women’s Liberation Movement, fought for health care rights at the hospital in Washington D.C., but she, along with other feminists, “weren’t interested in becoming involved in other issues as well,” since during “‘the black movement, women were simply not a point where it made any sense to them to join’” (Davis 80). In further analysis of this interesting recollection from Davis, I was curious to learn more about the Women’s Liberation Movement group and their impact during the Civil Rights movement. Consequently, I discovered an article from The Washington Post, headlining Women With or Without a Streak. This primary source predominantly complicates Davis’ account, since the article addresses that the movement “will increasingly organize, both in local and national groups” (The Washington Post). Notably, the differentiating factor is Bunch’s perspective of the situation by conceding and acknowledging that the women “often didn’t like the way they were treated by the black men, but they didn’t feel alienated from their own movement the way some of [the women] did from the white antiwar movement” (80). Inversely, the news article expounds on the courage of a woman to not hold back but rather “be of worth to society and herself whether she goes through life with or without a bra.” Ultimately, These two accounts of retaining women’s rights during the 1960s resided on opposite sides of the spectrum, but each had its own purpose in propelling the Women’s Liberation Movement.
It Ain’t Me Babe
⤹Click the reply button just below.
The story Breaking Out draws on famous female comic characters and features them all as experiencing a sort of awakening, where they become more aware of the negative circumstances that a patriarchal society has put them in. The familiarity of these characters makes this story more relatable to everyday women that have followed them and allows these awakenings to further resonate with them. Most notably, the second panel of this story features Juliet Jones from the comic “The Heart of Juliet Jones” resisting the words that are coming out of her own mouth. This is especially powerful, as the comic acknowledges a woman’s capability to contribute to the problems that Women’s Liberation aims to solve and essentially calls on women to resist the behavior they had taken part in their whole lives. Contrastingly, the fourth panel of the story features a more traditional aspect of the sexism, where Superman assigns Supergirl the “easy” job and steals all the glory away from her. This was a common experience, especially among women who worked in the New Left groups (for example, the women in the SDS that “got coffee and did office work”), and therefore widely appeals to women as a shared experience. Again, this calls on women to break out of what has come to be expected of them. Towards the end of this story, the women gather and their experiences are shared, similar to a consciousness-raising gathering. These women now realize that they are no longer isolated by their experiences and the women translate this sense of community into creating change. Overall, this story appeals to the average woman. It allows her to see herself within these characters and prompts her to take part in the movement.
In the story, A Flower Fable, utilizes a motif to establish a satire regarding the Women’s Liberation Movement. This comic begins with, “an old poor lady that has a tiny meager garden and an old rich lady with a beautiful oceanside garden.” The old poor lady symbolizes women in a patriarchy in which her garden is made of rocks and cement to symbolize that despite a garden usually being enriched with soil and live organisms, the life of the woman is instead lifeless and stripped of color and nutrition. It also mentions that it needs a lot of care and attention which is parallel to how a woman is required to put so much effort into the upkeep of a life that is not even as lush as she would prefer. However, after a revolution, this poor women was able to have anything that she wants. She, almost, comedically chooses to take the oceanside garden without hesitation. This displays this choice as the stupidly obvious choice and therefore making fun of people for expecting women to settle for the lesser and unwanted life when they can have the enriched, lush life. The comic ends with a moral that, “Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but gardeners have pretty sharp eyes.” This highlights that the patriarchy is awful with anyone with eyes and that by claiming that the average life of women is ideal and beautiful to all is not realistic and is considered a joke to women.
The story, Tirade Funnies, showcases the sexual comments and harassment that women faced while walking around and going about their day. This short starts off with a woman calling out to the reader, asking them to think about their own experiences walking around alone. It then goes on to show examples of the harassment that many women of the time could relate to. Men are shown shouting profanities at the women walking by, saying things such as “hey baby, I got something for you” and “what’s the matter, you don’t like sex?” (25). The story shows the central focus of the Women’s Liberation Movement–having women look firsthand at how the patriarchy manifests itself within their own lives. To achieve this, consciousness-raising groups were held to help women see and understand their own experiences with sexism. This excerpt functions in a similar way, because it allows women to see examples of such overt sexual harassment and relate it to situations they may have experienced. With ironic lines such as “we must dig all that attention, or why would we be out on the streets in the first place?” (25), readers can see how inappropriate these comments are and are more likely to take action in their own lives. The short also reminded me of the Flora Davis reading, where she explained how many men took advantage of the Sexual Liberation Movement for their own gain. She explained how, even within other radical movements, women were seen as sex objects and not taken seriously.
The Monday story examines women’s fantasies in their oppressed corporate world, undervalued and designated to menial tasks. The women imagine they are a jungle woman who spends her day fighting oppression and sexism, the “Queen of the jungle”- a powerful force in her own right. Instead of spending their days being forced to do jobs that were intellectually beneath them (notably within other leftist movements), they are imagining a life of taking action and control of their lives. They imagine an empowered life, in which they fight against their oppressors (the slave holders the jungle queen defeats), with violent statements like “maim” and “stab”. The queen of the jungle frees other women from the shackles of the patriarchy (perhaps emulating the consciousness raising sessions popular at the time). An exchange between two of the women she reads says “Now what?” “I dunno”. After being freed from the sexist and patriarchal mindset and having their eyes opened to it, the women were left not knowing where to go. After she frees the women, she returns home to nonchalantly fight a pouncing tiger, and then mentions a coffee break, transitioning the reader into an abrupt return to reality, as the corporate American women return to their current place and time. The last panel shows them all with disinterested and unhappy looks on their faces, with the word “trudge” repeated over and over again. The women were unhappy with their situation, as the last panel depicted, and longed for the fantasy world in which they were in control of their lives.
Avengers 83
⤹Click the reply button just below.
In the comic Avengers 83, Marvel pays homage to the Women’s Liberation Movement by focusing the story on its beloved heroines. These include Black Widow, Scarlett Witch, the Wasp, Medusa, and Valkyrie. In the climax, readers find out the Enchantress has kidnapped many of the male heroes to torture them. The reason for such treachery? Well, that’s because she was left alone in banishment from Asgard by the Executioner, her male accomplice. Due to such betrayal, she grows hostile toward all men and vows for them to feel her anger. However, the heroines find a way to save the day and stop the Enchantress. But what caught my interest was when Goliath came up to the heroines and said: “You birds finally learned your lesson about that Women’s lib bull” (Marvel). I found this interesting because I believe that the consensus of men’s views on the Women’s Liberation Movement was pretty much a hunk of junk. As women were becoming more open and aware of their rights, men probably felt as though women were losing a step in the head. They did not take it seriously, for society has institutionalized gender roles for a long time. So it was interesting for Marvel to capture men’s views of the Women’s Lib movement during its upcoming.
The Avengers #83 comic was significant to me after reading the contrasting reviews on the issue. I think that this theme of “superhero” is a perfect way to compare how some at the time believed only men were capable of making great change with extreme strength. I took note of panel 4 on page 23 with Widow telling the Panther he’d have to “learn” how to fight women. The Panther on this page is seen yelling at Widow about how he doesn’t “fight women – even super-powered ones.” Many of these fights showcase men undermining the female superheroes and I think it speaks to the attempts that many women during the liberation movement made to be seen as equals. I think utilizing superhero powers highlights the sense of radicalism that was surrounding the Women’s Liberation movement. Many of the fights on this page showcase male superheroes hesitating in their fights with the heroines and, because of this hesitation, losing the battles. I would say that even this hesitation could be seen as an analogy to the movement as many men hesitated when it came to putting the idea of equality with women into practice.
Within Avengers #83, the comic depicts a posse of female superheroes as they stand up against the sexism within the avengers. Much of what is depicted parallels the women rights movement. Specifically, Valkyrie embodies the Women’s Liberation movement. Right from the beginning, the group defines themselves as the liberators, directly alluding to the Women’s liberation movement. On page 4, as Valkyrie’s hero origin story is revealed, she announces her mission to end male supremacy. Valkyrie seems to have the same radical ideals that made up the majority of the Women’s Liberation movement. This is expressed through her description of the male influence as “the invisible shackles” that men place on women. She then goes on to explain how she was underestimated by men and how that is what lead to her gaining her superhero abilities and giving her the power that she needed to overthrow the patriarchal society that she hates so much.
The origin story of the Liberators initiates on Page 4 of Avengers #83 where Jan, Natasha, and Valkyrie are depicted, and Valkyrie resumes her profound story shared between the women. Essentially, the discovery of entering the Avengers’ mansion initially confused Wasp, as she was late to the “first session.” Moreover, Valkyrie discusses the reason she “dedicates [her] life to the downfall of male supremacy,” given the experiences she had working in the lab. The page flashes back to Valkyrie working with a doctor and feeling suppressed by his dismissive behavior, ultimately pushing forward her yearning to become better and stronger. However, her relentlessness caused her to succumb to the fumes of a vial.
While the following pages reveal her success following this accident, it is worth noting the parallels that Avengers #83 draws towards feminism in the 1960s. In relation to my research on the Women’s Liberation Movement, I learned that contrasting viewpoints during the period were omnipresent, as some believed there was a worthy cause to fight for while others collapsed from the negative, persuasive oppression. This synthesizes well with Valkyrie’s upbringing, as she felt empowered from an experience of weakness being a woman, and this sensation enabled her to become the successful superhero – one dedicated to associating as a Liberator – she is known today.
Avengers #83 is a vivid snapshot into the Women’s Liberation Movement in 1970, shifting the typically male-driven superhero stories to focus instead on the empowerment of the overlooked female characters of the franchise. The comic is unique in it’s strange layers of irony, as the piece was written and illustrated by men, so they are poking fun at the Women’s Lib movement in a mildly chauvinistic and stereotypical manner. While this initiative is still majorly progressive, there is an air of ridiculing the movement that makes the content leave a slightly sour taste in the mouth. The comic includes panels (pages 7 & 8 of the PDF) in which the narrating female characters describe crucial moments in their lives when they were put aside for the success of their male counterparts. Valkyrie recounts her sexist experience as a scientist who was not taken seriously by her male bosses, while Wanda reminisces to a newspaper headline that called out her brother by name and obscured her name into anonymity. These examples are very relatable and topical for the climate of the Women’s Liberation Movement in 1970 as well as today, which is what drives the comic. However, the female reader cannot help but feel slightly mocked when reading the diction, making this piece stand as a perfect example of what it feels like for a woman to stand up for herself in the male-dominated world.
Page 7 of Avengers #83 particularly struck me in its many references and commentaries on the women’s liberation movement. In this section, the comic sets the scene as Jan, the Wasp, walks in on many of the female figures in the Avengers franchise, namely Black Widow, Valkyrie, Scarlet Witch, and Medusa, as they are having their “first session” discussing how they feel discriminated against as women superheroes. This sort of “session” calls directly on the consciousness-raising practices that the Women’s Liberation movement heavily relied on to find comparisons between the sexist behaviors inflicted on these women. When the Wasp walks in on this meeting, she instantly responds with disdain: “Looks like I flew all the way from Alaska to visit an ailing aunt and wound up barging in on a powderpuff protest meeting!” This instant disapproval from Wasp is interesting – what were the creators of Avengers #83 trying to convey with this comment? The instant disapproval of Women’s Liberation by society? The instant disapproval of Women’s Liberation by other women who were conditioned that joining the women’s rights cause was wrong? Nevertheless, after hearing the origin story of Valkyrie and how the other female superheroes were downtrodden by men, Wasp’s perspective against women’s rights eventually begins to unravel. When asked if she’s with the rest of the female “Liberators,” Wasp replies “I know – I shouldn’t be! And yet – Yes! I’m in!” (9) The parallel between Wasp’s realizations about the female Avenger’s liberation movement through hearing their stories and women who joined the Women’s Liberation movement during the Sixties after sitting in on consciousness-raising sessions is clear. Even though this comic was made by men and for a less radical audience, discussing feminist issues in the mainstream media was very vital for the Women’s Liberation movement, working to prove women had just as much capability as men and should be treated by society in that way.