Social conservatism speaks to problems and fears created by the enormous social upheaval in the United States (Klatch, 2019), which witnessed changes in blacks' relations to whites, women's relations to men, and children's relations to parents. The pro-family movement expresses fears resulting from teenagers' cultural independence from parents; it expresses parents' concerns about their children's getting pregnant, having abortions, abusing drugs, or being sexual without a context of responsibility. Social conservatives believe that feminism also denigrates the very status of the homemaker. Paradoxically the very success of the feminist movement's increase in female participation in politics has also meant the increased involvement by women opposed to the goals and values at the core of feminism. The fundamental division between right-wing women that emerged from these sources can be presented as two distinct ideologies or ideal types: the social conservative and laissez-faire conservative worldviews. Like social conservatives, laissez-faire conservatives deplore the current direction and spirit of America.
Feminism as an organised force dates from abolitionism prior to the Civil War when (McElroy, 1991), fighting to free the slaves, women became conscious of their own legal disabilities. From these anti-statist roots, the women's movement eventually divided over such issues as sex, the family, and support for World War I. This blog traces individualist feminism from these origins up to the present day. It demonstrates that on issues from sex and birth control to business and science, government has been the real obstacle preventing women from achieving freedom and equal rights.
Knowing Women explores some of the most exciting and new developments in feminist theory (Crowley, 1992), engaging the reader as an active participant in critical debates concerning the status of women as both objects and subjects of knowledge. We introduces and reappraises key feminist questions concerning sex and gender, biology and the body, sexuality and motherhood. Various psychoanalytic perspectives are critically examined for the light they throw on the social and symbolic constructions of femininity. We also have to explore theories of the subject and subjectivity, the place of language in the construction of social identities and the relation between discourse, power and knowledge.
There are many, feminist and non-feminist alike (Delmar, 2018), for whom the question 'what is feminism?' has little meaning. The content of terms like 'feminism' and 'feminist' seems self-evident, something that can be taken for granted. It has become an obstacle to understanding feminism, in its diversity and in its differences, and in its specificity as well. Histories of feminism which treat feminism as social movement tend to concentrate on chronicling the vicissitudes of that movement and subordinate any exploration of the intellectual content of feminism to that main purpose. The exploration of feminist history is severely limited if the appearance of the social movement is assumed to be feminism's apotheosis and privileged form. Feminism's fascination with women is also the condition of the easy slippage from 'feminist' to 'woman' and back: the feminist becomes the representative of 'woman', just as 'feminist history' becomes the same as 'women's history' and so on.
Where has British feminism gone (Walter, 1998)? Has it retreated into the academy, did it burn out at Greenham Common, has it emigrated to the United States? Natasha Walter discovers that there is a new feminism right here and now in Britain. It is alive and kicking and speaking in the voices of young British women. In defining this new feminism, Natasha Walter celebrates women's growing power, casts aside the dogma of previous generations, and argues that the old adage 'The Personal is Political' does more harm than good. Because above all, this new feminism is frankly materialist. Who cares about how women dress, how they talk, how they make love? First, feminism must deliver political power and economic equality. With tremendous wit, verve and intelligence, THE NEW FEMINISM marks out fresh ground in feminist debate.
With Sigmund Freud notoriously flummoxed about what women want (Buhle, 2022), any encounter between psychoanalysis and feminism would seem to promise a standoff. But in this lively, often surprising history, Mari Jo Buhle reveals that the twentieth century's two great theories of liberation actually had a great deal to tell each other.
Feminism is a mass movement commenced by women of all groups to eradicate all forms of feminist oppressions by men that are prevailing in a patriarchal society (Mohajan, 2022). It always fights against all types of oppressions on women. It is a procedure that attempts to understand and conceptualize gender roles and advocates for the annexation of women's interests in social organization. It tries to explain the phenomenon of gender inequality. It is considered as a policy to achieve gender equality in all spheres of the society. Feminists support of ensuring equal individual rights and liberties for women and men.
Over recent years (Jackson, 2018), young feminist activism has assumed prominence in mainstream media where news headlines herald the efforts of schoolgirls in fighting sexism, sexual violence and inequity. Less visible in the public eye, girls’ activism plays out in social media where they can speak out about gender-based injustices experienced and witnessed. Yet we know relatively little about this significant social moment wherein an increasing visibility of young feminism cohabits a stubbornly persistent postfeminist culture.
Generation Xers were more generally politically active than Baby Boomers when activism was corrected for age (Duncan, 2010). There were many differences by feminist self-labeling. Weak feminists somewhat identified with the feminist label, endorsing some of the attitudes and outlooks of strong feminists but less of their commitment. Feminist self-labeling was more important in explaining women's relationship to feminism than was generation, implying that exposure to a shared ideology can unite members of a group across generations. Weak feminists may represent a promising group of potential recruits for women's right activist groups. They possess many of the same attitudes as strong feminists and have some sense of the critical analysis necessary to take on the feminist label; however, they may not be quite as far along in their feminist identity development as strong feminists. Education about feminism and provision of a feminist lens might strengthen the commitment of some of these weak feminists.
References
Delmar, Rosalind. "What is feminism?." In Theorizing feminism, pp. 5-28. Routledge, 2018.
Walter, Natasha. "The new feminism." (1998).
Buhle, Mari Jo. "Feminism and its discontents." In Feminism and Its Discontents. Harvard University Press, 2022.
Mohajan, Haradhan. "An Overview on the Feminism and Its Categories." (2022): 11-26.
McElroy, Wendy. "Freedom, Feminism, and the State an Overview of Individualist Feminism." (1991).
Crowley, Helen, and Susan Himmelweit. "Knowing women: feminism and knowledge." (1992).
Jackson, Sue. "Young feminists, feminism and digital media." Feminism & Psychology 28, no. 1 (2018): 32-49.
Duncan, Lauren E. "Women's relationship to feminism: Effects of generation and feminist self-labeling." Psychology of Women Quarterly 34, no. 4 (2010): 498-507.
Klatch, Rebecca E. "Women of the New Right in the United States: Family, Feminism, and Politics." In Identity Politics and Women, pp. 367-388. Routledge, 2019.