Transcribe
Translate
Ain't I A Woman? newspapers, June 1970-July 1971
1970-10-30 "Ain't I a Woman?" Page 12
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
A Sister Questions Separatism I can understand two reasons for WLF being a separatist organization. The first is that only women understand and feel our own oppression. It is therefore necessary for women to get together with one another to share common experiences and realize that what we've felt were "personal problems" are in fact a common oppression by this society. It is also up to us to arrive at just what this society must do or provide to end our oppression. The second reason is that all men oppress women, making political action with them intolerable. This usually means that because of their socialization all men act in such a way as to oppress women, and that they can not deal with their male chauvinism enough to make our working with them useful or tolerable. Another view would be that although individual men can deal with their male chauvinism, males can never give up superior position in this society. No matter how "right on" a male may be in his head, he will still have caste priveleges he has no control over. A "right on" male oppresses the women he works with just because he is a male in this society. For my year in WLF I have accepted WL being separatist: it was emotionally very nice to have a year in which I felt no obligation to deal with men at all and could hate them as a caste. But with our child care centers we decided we wanted men to take responsibility for childcare now - not after the revolution, but now or else women with children would never have the time or freedom to be revolutionaries (a privileged position in this society.) So we were in the position of working with men- in our case politically aware men. At this point it became very difficult to see men as the enemy- to draw a line and say they weren't worth the effort to deal with. So I began to question separatism: I still agree with the first reason for separatism- members of an oppressed group must identify with one another, understand their common oppression and make demands on society. But the number of oppressions in our society are incredible: women-men, black-white, old-young, gay-straight, upperclass-lowerclass to name the ones we are most aware of. But us it really necessary for all female, black 60 year old, gay lower class people to get themselves together and separate themselves politically except for alliances with all other people? Maybe a group like that is necessary for a while, but certainly there is a time when the divisions are no longer useful and that the people must begin to deal with their oppressors- by constant education, confrontation, and explanation of just what behavior oppresses them. The point it, separatism for analysis is essential, but after that analysis is made the divisions can lose their usefulness. This implies stages- stages that will be different for each person in each situation and stages that will have to be repeated as new things come up. I think we must learn to recognize the point at which enough analysis has been done to begin working on changing society in the most effective way. Perhaps our child care cell is not ready for a new stage yet, but how will we know unless we try when we feel we want to? I have become very disillusioned with the second reason for separatism. First, I believe that there are men who are legitimately working on their male chauvinism and that it is possible for them to deal with it although it is a constant struggle. Second, I have realized that I am probably more intimidated by the more politically aware and confident women in WL than I am by the men I am now dealing with in child care. This probably comes form a greater respect for the women than the men. But the fact remains that political intimidation by men relative to women is no longer a reality for me. Thirdly, recent speaking situations have lead me to dread dragon ladies (the priveleged few who "liberate themselves" and dump on all other women) as much as male chauvinists. I would like to choose the people I work with politically by their actions and not their sex. In the context of the child care centers in Iowa City: I feel a demand of 24 hr. a day free community controlled day care staffed half by women and half by men is a sufficient analysis of the child care problem for the time being at least. If I and other women feel we can handle working with men on this issue and can derive some benefits from it - Why continued on page 13 [line of figures] The politics of Women's Liberation is that our collective strength will free us by giving us an analysis of the position we hold in this society and the necessary action needed to destroy the power of those people and institutions that oppress us. Oour analysis will show us how and what we must do to end the oppression women suffer as a class of people. We have barely begun to make a feminist analysis, an analysis about the condition of women and how to materially change that condition. But that analysis can only be gained from other women, because they are the only people who have experienced the condition of being female in a patriarchal world. Making that analysis is painful, and it is necessarily collective because we are a whole class of people who are oppressed and a whole class of people who must define what freedom can mean to us. The reality of race, and economic class differences within the female class rules out any individual analysis. Only together as women, transcending class and race barriers, can we arrive at goals and tactics that will benefit all women. Realizing the isolation and separation of women from other women has not removed that reality or what it has meant to us. We have never been able to define our needs or fight for them because we have been kept apart. Getting together as women we see as a crucial tactic of our revolution. It follows that neither our analysis nor our battle can be different for each person nor can it be a series of stages that we individually go through. Many women who have had little "political" experience (new left or other) have a very clear definition of their oppression and we must seek them out just as we must reach out to women who have been or are active politically to identify with us as women and struggle with us to end the oppression of all of us. Day care, publishing, medical care -- these have been some of our equipment to help us gain strength working together, to help our analysis of the needs our revolution will have to meet. We must be able to collectively analyze our actions on these projects as to their effects on women and as to how these projects have brought us closer to waging a revolutionary struggle (theory correcting practice, practice correcting theory). We must be able to change our direction on any issue or project if they become an end in themselves and not a means to liberate all women. To want to choose the people you work with politically by their actions and not their sex sounds pretty good -- until you realize the you are choosing to relegate Women's Liberation to secondary status within some greater movement. When women are free, we will have that choice. None of us chose to be revolutionaries -- objective conditions caused that. None of us chose to be women -- because we are, objective conditions affect us differently from men. Men can choose to give up the privileges of an oppressor class, women don't have that choice. But so long as men tell women to work for some kind of people's socialism, so long as men assume as their right the right to define women's needs (because women are, after all, people too), those men are the enemy. To be politically aware, men will have to give up all the privileges of an oppressor class and define their own needs. Only a strong women's movement will keep us from being one of those objects they need -- like the free grass, free food and free women in the promised land of People's Park. To be a revolutionary woman is to recognize a fundamental oppression -- that of being female in a patriarchal society. This is the primary contradiction we live with. It is not the only contradiction we live with. It is not the only contradiction. Women are affected by economic class and race and are determined to end that oppression, but it is the primary contradiction of being female in a male world that forces us to identify with and work with each other to accomplish its destruction. Recognizing our own oppression is painful and figuring our what to do about it is hard. Women's Liberation doesn't have a recipe for making that contradiction more tolerable. Sometimes we delude ourselves when we say women get together to discover their problems aren't "personal problems". It goes much further than that. That sort of analysis leads to the derogatory notion of all-women groups as therapy sessions and reduces "consciousness raising" to therapy. "Consciousness raising" grows out of all our actions. It means recognizing what little power women have simply because they are women, whether in demands on the state or on the husband. Sometimes we fall back into thinking of politics as something unrelated to sex, we separate ourselves from other women by blaming them for not having the correct ideology, thinking that other women intimidate us as much as do men. But the intimidation we feel from men comes from the recognition of the material power they wield. We cannot feel intimidated by women wielding power that they have never had. Power is a material condition in the male world, it does not materially exist in the female class. We also can fall back to preferring to think of ourselves as "people", forgetting that person and woman in a patriarchal society are a contradiction in terms. It should be irrelevant to us that any man could be considered more or less "politically aware" while any woman is still in the position to be oppressed. Only our collec- 12 Vol. 1 No. 8 Ain't I
Saving...
prev
next
A Sister Questions Separatism I can understand two reasons for WLF being a separatist organization. The first is that only women understand and feel our own oppression. It is therefore necessary for women to get together with one another to share common experiences and realize that what we've felt were "personal problems" are in fact a common oppression by this society. It is also up to us to arrive at just what this society must do or provide to end our oppression. The second reason is that all men oppress women, making political action with them intolerable. This usually means that because of their socialization all men act in such a way as to oppress women, and that they can not deal with their male chauvinism enough to make our working with them useful or tolerable. Another view would be that although individual men can deal with their male chauvinism, males can never give up superior position in this society. No matter how "right on" a male may be in his head, he will still have caste priveleges he has no control over. A "right on" male oppresses the women he works with just because he is a male in this society. For my year in WLF I have accepted WL being separatist: it was emotionally very nice to have a year in which I felt no obligation to deal with men at all and could hate them as a caste. But with our child care centers we decided we wanted men to take responsibility for childcare now - not after the revolution, but now or else women with children would never have the time or freedom to be revolutionaries (a privileged position in this society.) So we were in the position of working with men- in our case politically aware men. At this point it became very difficult to see men as the enemy- to draw a line and say they weren't worth the effort to deal with. So I began to question separatism: I still agree with the first reason for separatism- members of an oppressed group must identify with one another, understand their common oppression and make demands on society. But the number of oppressions in our society are incredible: women-men, black-white, old-young, gay-straight, upperclass-lowerclass to name the ones we are most aware of. But us it really necessary for all female, black 60 year old, gay lower class people to get themselves together and separate themselves politically except for alliances with all other people? Maybe a group like that is necessary for a while, but certainly there is a time when the divisions are no longer useful and that the people must begin to deal with their oppressors- by constant education, confrontation, and explanation of just what behavior oppresses them. The point it, separatism for analysis is essential, but after that analysis is made the divisions can lose their usefulness. This implies stages- stages that will be different for each person in each situation and stages that will have to be repeated as new things come up. I think we must learn to recognize the point at which enough analysis has been done to begin working on changing society in the most effective way. Perhaps our child care cell is not ready for a new stage yet, but how will we know unless we try when we feel we want to? I have become very disillusioned with the second reason for separatism. First, I believe that there are men who are legitimately working on their male chauvinism and that it is possible for them to deal with it although it is a constant struggle. Second, I have realized that I am probably more intimidated by the more politically aware and confident women in WL than I am by the men I am now dealing with in child care. This probably comes form a greater respect for the women than the men. But the fact remains that political intimidation by men relative to women is no longer a reality for me. Thirdly, recent speaking situations have lead me to dread dragon ladies (the priveleged few who "liberate themselves" and dump on all other women) as much as male chauvinists. I would like to choose the people I work with politically by their actions and not their sex. In the context of the child care centers in Iowa City: I feel a demand of 24 hr. a day free community controlled day care staffed half by women and half by men is a sufficient analysis of the child care problem for the time being at least. If I and other women feel we can handle working with men on this issue and can derive some benefits from it - Why continued on page 13 [line of figures] The politics of Women's Liberation is that our collective strength will free us by giving us an analysis of the position we hold in this society and the necessary action needed to destroy the power of those people and institutions that oppress us. Oour analysis will show us how and what we must do to end the oppression women suffer as a class of people. We have barely begun to make a feminist analysis, an analysis about the condition of women and how to materially change that condition. But that analysis can only be gained from other women, because they are the only people who have experienced the condition of being female in a patriarchal world. Making that analysis is painful, and it is necessarily collective because we are a whole class of people who are oppressed and a whole class of people who must define what freedom can mean to us. The reality of race, and economic class differences within the female class rules out any individual analysis. Only together as women, transcending class and race barriers, can we arrive at goals and tactics that will benefit all women. Realizing the isolation and separation of women from other women has not removed that reality or what it has meant to us. We have never been able to define our needs or fight for them because we have been kept apart. Getting together as women we see as a crucial tactic of our revolution. It follows that neither our analysis nor our battle can be different for each person nor can it be a series of stages that we individually go through. Many women who have had little "political" experience (new left or other) have a very clear definition of their oppression and we must seek them out just as we must reach out to women who have been or are active politically to identify with us as women and struggle with us to end the oppression of all of us. Day care, publishing, medical care -- these have been some of our equipment to help us gain strength working together, to help our analysis of the needs our revolution will have to meet. We must be able to collectively analyze our actions on these projects as to their effects on women and as to how these projects have brought us closer to waging a revolutionary struggle (theory correcting practice, practice correcting theory). We must be able to change our direction on any issue or project if they become an end in themselves and not a means to liberate all women. To want to choose the people you work with politically by their actions and not their sex sounds pretty good -- until you realize the you are choosing to relegate Women's Liberation to secondary status within some greater movement. When women are free, we will have that choice. None of us chose to be revolutionaries -- objective conditions caused that. None of us chose to be women -- because we are, objective conditions affect us differently from men. Men can choose to give up the privileges of an oppressor class, women don't have that choice. But so long as men tell women to work for some kind of people's socialism, so long as men assume as their right the right to define women's needs (because women are, after all, people too), those men are the enemy. To be politically aware, men will have to give up all the privileges of an oppressor class and define their own needs. Only a strong women's movement will keep us from being one of those objects they need -- like the free grass, free food and free women in the promised land of People's Park. To be a revolutionary woman is to recognize a fundamental oppression -- that of being female in a patriarchal society. This is the primary contradiction we live with. It is not the only contradiction we live with. It is not the only contradiction. Women are affected by economic class and race and are determined to end that oppression, but it is the primary contradiction of being female in a male world that forces us to identify with and work with each other to accomplish its destruction. Recognizing our own oppression is painful and figuring our what to do about it is hard. Women's Liberation doesn't have a recipe for making that contradiction more tolerable. Sometimes we delude ourselves when we say women get together to discover their problems aren't "personal problems". It goes much further than that. That sort of analysis leads to the derogatory notion of all-women groups as therapy sessions and reduces "consciousness raising" to therapy. "Consciousness raising" grows out of all our actions. It means recognizing what little power women have simply because they are women, whether in demands on the state or on the husband. Sometimes we fall back into thinking of politics as something unrelated to sex, we separate ourselves from other women by blaming them for not having the correct ideology, thinking that other women intimidate us as much as do men. But the intimidation we feel from men comes from the recognition of the material power they wield. We cannot feel intimidated by women wielding power that they have never had. Power is a material condition in the male world, it does not materially exist in the female class. We also can fall back to preferring to think of ourselves as "people", forgetting that person and woman in a patriarchal society are a contradiction in terms. It should be irrelevant to us that any man could be considered more or less "politically aware" while any woman is still in the position to be oppressed. Only our collec- 12 Vol. 1 No. 8 Ain't I
Campus Culture
sidebar
