Feminism

Feminism in Politics: Definition, Development and Types!

Definition of Feminism:

There are number of definitions of feminism and a very lucid one has been offered by the author of the article published in Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics.

“Feminism is a way of looking at the world which women occupy from the perspective of women. It has at its central focus the concept of patriarchy which can be described as a system of male authority which oppresses women through its social, political and economic institutions. Feminism is, therefore, a critique of patriarchy on the one hand and an ideology committed to women’s emancipation on the other”.

Feminism is, therefore, a doctrine which is concerned with emancipation of women. But broadly speaking the concept embraces other areas of women’s life such as their development, role in political, social, cultural and economic affairs. It also talks about women’s rights and freedom.

The social and political structure have been built up in such a manner that women are not always at par with men in various affairs of society and this has practically given birth to a male-dominated society. Feminism, therefore, wants to highlight the idea that, since women form one-half of the population, social progress (interpreted in all senses) can never be a reality without the complete and spontaneous participation of women.

Feminism vs Feminist Approach to Politics:

Readers here are confronted with two terms—feminism and feminist approach to politics. To remove this confusion the two terms need to be clarified. We have already noted that feminism is a movement whose aim is to accelerate the social role of women because without this role and its advancement all-round progress is practically an impossibility. Hence feminism is an ideology.

But this concept cannot throw sufficient light on feminist approach to politics—when it was strongly felt that without women’s whole-hearted participation in all sorts of social functions neither social development nor their emancipation are possible. Naturally gender equality has become an issue of great importance. In order to ensure women’s participation and realisation of their rights a change in the entire structure of society must be made effective and this can be done only through political machinery—state and its agencies.

A long-drawn movement—both academic and non-academic—can turn this concept into a reality. It is necessary to note here that in real sense feminism and feminist approach to politics are not different ideas or concepts; both are interlinked. Women are to be treated in equal terms with men—this is the basic concept. This is a demand and this has led to a movement. Both academic and non-academic ideas are associated with these two.

Rise and Development of the Concept:

Early History:

Though feminism or feminist approach to politics is chiefly a product of the second half of the twentieth century its origin can be traced as far back as the ancient civilizations of China, Greece and India. In all these countries, from the history we come to know, women had special position and honour and they were found to participate in various affairs of the society.

In Brihadaranyaka Upanishad there are several conversations between Maitreyee and her husband Yajnavalkya which denote that women had freedom and opportunity to actively participate in religious, social, cultural and ethical issues and they could record their valued opinion on these matters. Both in ancient India and China women were respected, Christine de Pisan’s Book of the City of Ladies was published in 1405 and this book foreshadowed many of the ideas of modern feminism.

At the fag end of the eighteenth century several people voiced this resentment against the inappropriate and unequal treatment meted out to women. It was declared that since women form one-half of population and they are moral, intelligent and rational beings they must have equal rights with men.

This concept was vigorously advocated by Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797). She published A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792. Wollstonecraft wrote the book in the backdrop of the French Revolution (1789). Subsequently the movement earned greater momentum.

Wollstonecraft and Feminism:

We award special treatment to Wollstonecraft’s contribution to the cause of feminism. At the end of the eighteenth century it was really a courageous effort to fight for the cause of women. In the above-noted book she said, “If the abstract rights of man will bear discussion and explanations, those of women, by a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same test.”

She also observed that if men are allowed to enjoy freedom and happiness is it not unjust and inconsistent to deprive women of the same? She charged the society with the argument that it is deliberately depriving the women of various rights and freedom and this is done in a calculated way. She asked who made man the exclusive judge. Both men and women have the gift of reason.

But the structure of society makes a discrimination. Wollstonecraft made the following suggestion: Women ought to have representatives, instead of being arbitrarily governed without having any direct share. Here we have given special importance to Wollstonecraft’s view because of the fact that what she said in 1792 is still important and, at the same time, thought-provoking today. The central idea of feminism or feminist approach to politics was forcefully advocated by her. She is regarded as pioneer in this field.

In the 19th and 20th Centuries:

Feminism assumed the character of a movement in the thirties and forties of the nineteenth century. In many parts of USA women gathered at the street corner meetings and demanded equal rights and privileges with men and in the sixties this movement gathered momentum when the demand for the abolition of slavery tormented the entire political scene of USA. Conventions were held at different places of USA and in those conventions women demanded that they would be given equal rights with men.

The women’s movement was particularly strong in the industrially advanced and democratic countries of the West. J. S. Mill (1806-1873) vehemently opposed the tactics to oppress the women’s movement and he strongly advocated political and other rights for women. He criticised the steps taken by the House of Commons for defeating the proposal for women suffrage.

At the beginning of the twentieth century women formed associations and accelerated their movement for the realisation of their demand for suffrage. The movement first started in Britain and France and spread subsequently in other parts of Western Europe.

In some cases the movement was quite militant in nature because the sponsors and supporters of the movement not only campaigned for their cause but also resorted to attacks upon property. This particularly happened in Paris and other areas.

Recent Picture:

Though feminism was a late eighteenth century product its actual development took place in the second half of twentieth century. Particularly after the 1960 the feminist movement began to draw the attention of many serious people of both sides of Atlantic.

The American feminist and political activist Betty Friedan published. The Feminine Mystique in 1963 and immediately after the publication the book created ripples in the academic and political circles. What she emphasise was that the advanced democratic countries of the world were granting several political and other rights to women and in spite of this the central question of women was far away from any solution.

The main question was the complete emancipation of women from male domination. This question would be solved if women were granted equal rights with men; they were allowed to participate in all affairs of state and society. The arguments of Frieden were accepted by other feminist leaders.

In the seventies and eighties several other books were published in support of the movement and because of this feminism were termed as a wave. Two books were published in 1970. One was Kate Millett’s Sexual Politics (1970) and Germaine Greer’s The Female Eunuch. The publication of these books encouraged the women community to strengthen the movement and men began to take active interest in women’s movement.

Feminist Scholarship Neglected:

A large number of books and pamphlets were published during the last three decades of the twentieth century and all these have more or less agreed that so far as intelligence and scholarship are concerned women are not inferior to men and in spite of this their scholarship fails to receive proper recognition from different quarters.

One critic makes the following observation, “Historically, political science has not been receptive to feminist concerns or for that matter, to women in general. Women either are invisible as political actors or they are seen to be political actors of a peculiar—often deviant—sort”.

In recent years several studies have been conducted by American and British political scientists to investigate the role of women in political science and on the basis of investigation they have arrived at the above conclusion. It has been found that generally men are actors of various political activities and research and academic works are mainly controlled by them.

This type of male domination in the academic world of political science is- not due to the absence of scholarship of women. Rather, their scholarship has been neglected. Some critics have even said that political science is defined as masculine activity. Those characteristics and activities which guide men are called political. On the other hand the activities which are generally performed by women are not categorised as political.

War, election, political manipulation management of political affairs are all subjects of men’s activities. It is not generally assumed that women could successfully participate in all these affairs.

In ancient times political and diplomatic functions were under the full control of men. In fact, women were not permitted to enter into all these domains. It was believed that women are quite eligible for domestic and family matters only. Both the importance and role of women were undervalued and neglected.

This created a lot of resentment in the minds of women and mainly because of that a movement was launched in several parts of the world. If we look at the numerous works and journals on political science we shall find that women are generally neglected. For example, American Political Science Review is a front-ranking journal on political science. A study reveals that between 1949 and 1969 there were articles of 1,000 men along with the articles of only 15 women.

However, some people are of opinion that this neglect is not deliberate. Women are not fit for political activities, they take very little interest in political affairs, they are reluctant to participate in election and political affairs, they lack political knowledge, they do not take interest in forming independent opinion etc.

Liberal Feminism:

Meaning and Exponents:

Feminism or feminist approach to politics has been viewed from different ideological background which has necessitated its classification into liberal, socialist and radical feminism. We shall first focus our attention on liberal feminism.

Liberal feminism means both men and women are entitled to same or equal rights, freedoms and privileges and there is no place of any artificial distinction so far as rights are concerned between men and women. Hence the first point of emphasis of liberal feminism is women like men are human beings and therefore can claim equal rights with them.

The arguments of liberal feminists stand on the basic tenets of political liberalism. Distribution of rights must not be related with distinction of sex or gender. The latter is an absolutely natural phenomenon and it has nothing to do with the distribution of rights or awarding of privileges.

The pioneer of liberal feminism is no doubt Mary Wolstonecraft. After the publication of her famous work A Vindication of the Rights of Women (1792) people’s attention to women’s rights was attracted and many people began to think about it seriously. J. S. Mill is another important personality of women’s cause and movement. The Subjection of Women was published in 1869. In the second half of the twentieth century large number of women took the cudgel of women’s cause and Betty Friedan is one of them.

Central Idea of Liberal Feminism:

Central idea of liberal feminism is basically based on individualism. Every person has the right to develop his/her personality and inherent qualities and it is the primary responsibility of the authority to make way for the realisation of this. If rights are essential for men why are the same not essential for women? Naturally women can legitimately claim equal rights with men.

To deprive women of rights in an arbitrary- manner is absolutely unjustified and this cannot be allowed to continue. Any idea of democracy is incomplete if women are not allowed to participate in all the affairs of state. Hence the real meaning of democracy indicates that both men and women must have legitimate share in any are participation. Some feminist activists have endeavoured to associate feminism or equal rights for women concept with happiness.

It is observed that without the possession of equal rights by women there cannot be any happiness and comprehensive development of the inherent qualities that women possess. Guarantee of political rights is the only provider of security and through it women can have access to happiness.

Education is included into rights and the liberal feminists argue that it cannot be the exclusive province of men. Both men and women have the right to the facilities of education. Education enlightens mind and broadens the outlook. When that situation arrives the possession of rights by women will undoubtedly erode the male domination and expand the freedom of women.

Features of Liberal Feminism:

The core idea of liberal feminism is reformism. It does not deal with the thorough change of society through radical revolution. In numerous ways it has expressed its dissatisfaction against the prevailing system of distribution of rights and privileges.

It believes that if the present system of male domination distribution of right etc is reformed in favour of women then the latter will get full opportunity to develop their personality. Liberal feminism does not deny the natural distinction between men and women and it also admits that all sorts of activities cannot be properly performed by women.

This natural distinction must always be kept in mind. What it wants to assert is that the door to all sorts of rights and privileges shall be opened to all and it is the ability and proclivity of mind that will guide the persons.

The state authority shall not be the source of any artificial distinction. Liberal feminism also says that inclination of mind, outlook, preference etc. of men and women are different and this difference must be adhered to at any cost.

For example—women have special fascination for family affairs and this must not be disturbed. It believes that only through appeal, movement, persuasion and other peaceful ways the system of the society can be favourably changed. Militant ways are not necessary. The reformist attitude of liberal feminism is prominent in all respects. From this analysis it is obvious to us that liberal feminism is not willing radical change of the structure of society. Keeping the structure of society intact it wants improvement of women.

Socialist Feminism:

Meaning and Source:

Socialist feminism is quite different from liberal feminism in the sense that while the latter states that the differences between women and men mainly relate to the male domination in all spheres of society and distribution of rights and privileges in favour of men the former is of opinion that relation between women and men is rooted in the social, cultural and economic structure of society. Socialist feminism has no faith in reformism.

A radical social revolution can remedy this deep-rooted evil which is planning the society. Hence we see that the concern of women has been viewed by two groups or schools in a completely different way. ‘If the economic structure of society is not overhauled radically change in the material condition of women will remain a far cry.

At the beginning of the eighties of last century a United Nation report on the condition of women made the following observation. “While women represent 50 percent of the world population, they perform nearly two-thirds of all working hours-, receive one-tenth of world income and own less than 1 percent of world property”. This glaring and disturbing difference between men and women is a clear indicator of how women are neglected and exploited in all countries of the world.

Socialist feminism wants to eliminate permanently the difference and in order to do that the entire economic as well as political structures are to be changed.

Central idea of Socialist Feminism:

Socialist thinkers, particularly Marx and Engels, have exposed the real character of exploitation of women in any capitalist society. Engels has stated several forms of exploitation. A capitalist society is based on private property and the system of private property is always patriarchal. Son is the owner of parents’ property and daughter is thrown out of parental property system.

This is absolutely unjustified and unjust. Daughter’s right and mother’s place—both are overthrown. In this way the exploitation of women becomes the characteristic feature of any capitalistic society. There is a second form of exploitation of women in capitalism and it is the family system. Father is the head of the family and his direction is binding on all. There is no place of mother’s voice or even if she gets any opportunity to raise her voice that is feeble.

In the third place, the chief function of women in family of a bourgeois society is to bear children and manage domestic affairs. Her main function is to do hard work for the satisfaction of men members of the family. Fourthly, women’s cause and interests are neglected and a feeling of sacrifice and to serve others is always inculcated.

Finally, men have the right to satisfy their sexual appetite from extramarital sources which is denied to women. In fact, in a capitalist society, women are second class citizens and they have no place in the policy-making affairs. They cannot freely participate in the domain of politics. To sum up, in a capitalist society there is no proper recognition of women’s merit and intelligence. Though it is exaggerated, there is some truth.

Suggestions of Socialist Feminists:

The picture of women’s status in a capitalist society as depicted above is an ignoble one and it is admitted on all hands that ways to its annihilation must be found out.

(1) The entire capitalist society is based on hypocrisy and through continuous efforts that can be remedied. For this purpose women’s education is essential.

(2) System of private property is to be abolished and if it is not possible the right of daughter to parents’ property must be made a law.

(3) A new system is to be introduced in which the women must have an assertive voice and role and no decision shall be taken without their consent.

(4) The present traditional and patriarchal family system shall be replaced by communal living and family system which was suggested by Plato (427- 347 BC).

(5) Social, economic and political structure of the society should be so restructured as to enable the women to participate in all affairs of the state.

(6) Finally, the radical change in the society is to be effected through a revolution.

Such a revolution will destroy the economic and political system of society and in that place there will come a new society auguring a new life free from all sorts of exploitation. The role of the women will not be restricted to the performer of domestic works and motherhood. So we find that the socialist feminists have viewed the emancipation of women as the central place of feminism.

Exact Position of Marx and Engels:

A recent study has exhibited that though some general views can be formulated about the stand taken by Marx and Engels in regard to feminism both of them did not take special interest in it. “Considerable tension has existed between Marxist approach to feminism and political practice and Marx himself offers in his own writings little encouragement of feminism. Engels, on the other hand, adopted throughout his life a more auspicious attitude to feminism. Although Marxists have often regarded feminism as one of a number of “bourgeois deviations” from the revolutionary path, while feminists have often regarded Marxism as unwilling to give priority to gender equality”.

It is a fact that Marx and Engels did not take special interest about feminism and it is perhaps due to the belief that they were primarily concerned with the general welfare of all sections of people. Hence women in particular did not draw their attention specifically.

It was their conviction that the abolition of capitalist form of society through a protracted class struggle would ultimately bring about a general emancipation, including women. From the study of history they came to learn that slavery of women was due to capitalist system and if this is abolished no special movement would be required to establish the rights of women.

Radical Feminism:

Meaning and Definition:

The very term radical feminism implies that it is different from liberal and socialist feminism. Radical feminism focuses its attention on the fact that half the population comprises women and the patriarchal structure is that this half is controlled and guided by the other half consisting of men and until and unless this patriarchal structure is abolished there is not the remotest possibility of emancipation of women. “Radical feminists, therefore, proclaim the need for a sexual revolution, a revolution that will, in particular, restructure personal, domestic and family life.”

The well known and characteristic slogan of radical feminism is thus the “personal is the political”. What radical feminism asserts is that it is the oppression of women which is the sole cause of their all-round backwardness and without the abolition of this oppression development or favourable change of women’s physical and psychological condition will remain a distant possibility.

Again, without revolution this change cannot be achieved. Any sporadic efforts and lackadaisical attitude are absolutely insufficient in bringing about general emancipation of women from the well-guarded clutches of patriarchal society. Piecemeal efforts are absolutely insufficient for the attainment of coveted goals—an emancipation of women. The entire society is to be restructured.

Central idea of Radical Feminism:

The basic difference between the liberal and socialist feminism lies in the fact that it has built up a systematic theory about women’s progress and in doing this it has highlighted the oppression, cause of oppression, the methods to combat it, and all sorts of related issues and matters. In all societies both developed and underdeveloped women in numerous ways are oppressed. Men play the pioneering role in oppressing the women.

Men have forced the women to believe that academically and intellectually women are inferior to men and for that reason they are not considered quite fit for providing adequate leadership in society. This mentality has taken its deep roots in society and any attempt on the part of women to develop themselves is discouraged.

In this way the injustice and suppression have become the characteristic feature of society. The term injustice is a broad term and it has several meanings such as sexual exploitation, racial discrimination, class oppression. In India, women are not always the victims of class exploitation but also of caste exploitation. Women belonging to so-called lower caste are denied of certain legal rights. In many Western countries women are not at par with men in respect of political and economic rights.

The ways of exploiting women are well-calculated and sometimes these are supported by authority. Legal, political and economic structure of our society is so framed that it is very difficult for women to get justice. It is said that they are legally dispossessed. Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay says so in Legally Dispossessed.

Some Exponents:

There are a large number of exponents who have analysed the radical nature of feminism from their own angles. But on several points or junctions they meet together. One of the earliest radical feminists is Simone de Beauvoir (1906-1986). Beauvoir was a French novelist. Beauvoir’s The Second Sex was published in 1949 and this book created tremendous impact upon the public mind.

According to Beauvoir the status and physical condition of women are determined not by natural differences between women and men but by the social and material conditions and forces and they are created by men and forcibly imposed upon women to satisfy the demands of patriarchy. Protracted efforts and radical revolution are the only ways to free women.

Kate Millett is an American author whose Sexual Politics was published in 1970. In this book she argued that in societies there are several forces and institutions which were created generations ago and have maintained their activity.

From the very childhood both boys and girls are in various ways indoctrinated in the line that girls are inferior to boys and this difference is due to physical differences bestowed upon them by nature. Both men and women, because of these natural differences, are not fit for all sorts of work. Millet believes that the chief source of women’s oppression is patriarchy and this can be removed by annihilating patriarchy, But this task is quite an uphill one and a multipronged attack is necessary to emancipate women.

One such way is consciousness of women shall be raised so that they can fight against all types of oppression and exploitation. She also says that political authority is to be restructured so that it can fight against oppression. She observes that prevailing social, political and economic structure is not suitable for fight. Women’s liberation thus requires a revolutionary change.

Firestone in her The Dialectic of Sex has issued feminism and the emancipation of women from different angle. She says that the biological differences between men and women cannot be obliterated all of a sudden. However, for the emancipation women, men are to come forward and this they can do by implementing the most modern and sophisticated techniques.

They can easily free them from child bearing and child-rearing. The use of contraceptives can stop pregnancy. Non-governmental organisations are to be formed which may take the charge of children. Both men and women can easily share the domestic affairs. Above all, modernisation and development are the most effective means of emancipation and without a radical social, economic and political change these can never be achieved. A revolution is thus the best way.

Women and Political Science:

“Women are Systematically Ignored”:

On a different perspective it has been pointed out that the intellect and wisdom of women have not been duly recognised in political science. In recent years, women scholars began to study the different branches of political science and they were surprised to find that in this subject there are many paradigms and these do not make any due recognition of the importance of women and, as a result of it, in the entire system of analysis there are many gaps and distortions.

This created a lot of resentment in the minds of women scholars of the discipline. The male scholars of political science and its various branches have built up theoretical and conceptual frameworks without mentioning the contribution of women. The tangible consequence is all the paradigms and conceptual frameworks have remained incomplete. Sometimes these have deliberately distorted the importance of women’s scholarship.

The women scholars, have questioned the veracity of various paradigms and conceptual frameworks. This approach of women scholars is quite natural because no discipline can claim its development complete without proper recognition of women scholars. Even if any discipline suffers from scarcity of women scholars attempts shall be made to arouse the interests of women.

Politics is a Masculine Product:

Only one aspect of male-dominated politics, that is theoretical, is highlighted. But there is a vast field of political science, which is a practical one. In ail industrialised developed countries of the world there are well-organised institutions and well-built administrative structure. In democracies all these do function well to satisfy the requirements of the authority and they do not leave any stone unturned to cater the interests of elite groups and ruling class.

But there is a dark corner behind this so- called well-illuminated and highly publicised picture. Let us see how a critic puts the matter “Historically, the actions of governments have been the actions of men, their politics—both foreign and domestic, have been made by men”.

All aspects of domestic and foreign affairs are more or less dominated by men. Even policies are determined by men. Women’s function and responsibility practically terminate at the point of exercising right to vote. This function we may call peripheral.

Because women are not fully and deeply involved in these functions such as policy-making and policy- implementation. The majority policy-makers of all the developed countries of the world are men. “Concepts such as justice, equality, citizen participation, democracy, political obligation, social contract theory were developed by men”.

Gender-Bias in Early Politics:

In order to have a clear idea about the importance or role of women in politics/political science it is necessary that attention should be focused on ancient literature of politics. Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics have not paid due consideration to the contribution of women to the academic analysis of political science and other subjects.

In the constitution, management and administration of ideal state women’s role is almost absent. The guardian class devotes the time and energy to the cause of ideal state and it is capable of doing this because this class is completely relieved of the day-to-day drudgery of earning livelihood and this is performed by slaves, women and workers.

Thus we see that the ideal state is built upon the wisdom of guardian class consisting of men only. But the common sense knowledge teaches us that the wealth, intellect and prosperity of the ideal state could not be built sans the hard labour of women. Aristotle made a compromise between private life and public life by subordinating the former to the latter.

Men will enjoy freedom and leisure so that they can pursue political and intellectual activities and women are the providers of leisure and freedom. Middle Ages could not produce any remarkable political scientist.

But, however, all sorts of political activities were dominated by men. In Middle Ages politics was controlled by religion and religion was controlled by men. In Machiavelli’s The Prince we find the same thing. Women were subordinated to men. Rousseau and other thinkers did not make any concession for women.

A Change in Attitude is Necessary:

If we look at the history of Western political thought we shall come across two clear opposite trends. Firstly, political theory is by and large dominated by the thoughts and ideas expanded by male political scientists which may lead one to think that women have no contribution. The other trend is that there have been challenges to this notion. Political theory and political affairs cannot be the exclusive domains of male thinkers.

There are a very good number of political scientists of the women category. But the tragedy is that their contribution has failed to draw attention and proper recognition. Women are quite capable of thinking political theory in a befitting manner and they can also participate in political affairs.

For the proper recognition of women’s contribution it is essential that males must change their attitude. Everywhere the common term “individual” is used. But individual includes both men and women and to reach this goal men must change their attitude. In today’s democracy the unitary concept prevails. But a real democracy is of a federal character.

It is managed and flourished by both men and women. In a real democracy there is no place of sexual difference. The patriarchal character of modern society deliberately ignores the importance of women. This outlook must change out and out. There are physiological differences between man and woman which have nothing to do with the political theory.

Recent Trends:

There have been occurred some encouraging trends in recent years. They have taken place in large scale in industrialised societies of West and in a smaller scale in the developing societies of the Third World. One trend is qualified and able women are participating in administration which was previously a male domain.

It has been found that women have all ‘the good qualities required for running and managing administration. Another trend is in almost all the spheres of public life women have entered into the keen competition with men. These two spectacular trends have enormously strengthened the position of women in the academic sphere. Even many male academicians have persuasively argued that women are at par with men in so far as their intellect is concerned.

All combinedly have encouraged women to come forward with their intellects and ideas and they have considerably enriched political thought. Women’s participation in political affairs, in compared with earlier ages, has also increased.

This makes democracy participatory in its true sense. Many states of both West and East are making concessions to women so that they can compete with men in all spheres. In spite of all these the cause of the women is still a neglected domain and women are variously battered by the patriarchal structure of society.

Conclusion:

In almost all the states of the Third World women are deprived of basic rights and privileges. Their role in policy-making and management is far below the expectation. Only a very few women win elections and happen to be law-makers. In academic fields the number of women is rising but here again the number is not up to the desirable limit.

In family and social affairs they are not at par with men. The rate of the progress of women in the developing nations is so slow that it can reasonably be called a frustration. Because of this, it is alleged, women’s cause, ideas ad intellect are not duly reflected in the policies and decisions.

Even the academic outputs in different disciplines are not satisfactory at all. In family, in society, in politics and in the affairs of the state women are subject to exploitation. There must be an end to all kinds of exploitation.