Current Issue/Words/Difference as Change

Nolan Bouchillon - "Difference as Change"

            Within every social or political movement, internal and external challenges exist; the feminist movement is constantly evolving, redefining, and reinventing its sociopolitical, economic, gender, and sexual perspectives which ultimately destroyed the once pervasive mainstream, homogeneous feminist ideology of the 1960s. In an attempt to incorporate the thousands of women who failed to meet this exclusive white, heterosexist, middle-class feminist identity, women of color, lesbian women, and lower class women created alternative feminist agendas that addressed their multidimensional identities, perspectives, and diverse goals for liberation. Although divisions still exist among and within women throughout this interdisciplinary movement, it is vital to recognize how influential the feminist movement’s progressiveness and expansion, from once exclusive to now inclusive identity politics, has been on organizations such as the CU Women’s Resource Center (WRC). The Women’s Resource Center’s theme “Defining My Womanhood, Embracing Our Liberation” emphasizes the importance of self-naming, self-definition and respect for diverse women in order to effect collaborative sociopolitical change. The essays “Essentialism vs. Constructionism” by Diana Fuss, “Feminism and Its Differences” by Teresa de Lauretis, “Hidden in Plain View: African American Women, Radical Feminism, and the Origins of Women’s Studies Programs, 1967-1974” by V.P. Franklin, “Gay and Liberation” by Elizabeth Wilson, and Leslie Feinberg’s semi-autobiographical novel Stone Butch Blues collectively demonstrate that differences have always existed and still exist within the entire women’s liberation movement. However, presently many women demonstrate through organizations such as the CU WRC, how vital it is to recognize, dialogue, debate, understand, and accept each other’s differences in order to progress towards successful liberation. This essay delves into certain conflicting perspectives on race, homophobia, and gender identities within the feminist movements, and the ways in which these restrictive ideologies influenced women to recognize the importance of self-naming and self-definition. It will demonstrate that these themes would fail to exist without the historical and present challenges throughout the feminist movements.

            Many women challenged the racist ideologies pervasive throughout mainstream feminist agendas in the sixties and seventies. This resulted in an influx of alternative and diverse political agendas specifically for women of color. During this time period, most women, regardless of race, agreed that sexism was the underlying and unifying factor for the feminist movement. However, in her essay, “Hidden in Plain View: African American Women, Radical Feminism, and the Origins of Women's Studies Programs, 1967-1974” V.P. Franklin quotes Margaret Simons’ belief that this mentality results in, “…a lack of sensitivity to the situations of minority women and failure to understand their reluctance to identify with a predominantly . . . white organization” (438). Many women of color agree with Simons’ argument and suggest that they were ultimately invisible throughout the beginning of the Second-wave feminist movement (Franklin 434). The prevalence of racism in the feminist movement influenced women of color to branch off from mainstream feminism and create separate political agendas that addressed the interconnected issues of racism and sexism. Black feminism and Chicana feminism are two sister movements that grew out of their discontent for the mainstream feminist movement in the 1970s. Womanism, coined by Alice Walker, also erupted to challenge mainstream feminism. Although womanism was initially centered on African American women, it emphasizes each woman’s particular cultural experience in regards to race, class, and gender. Womanists argue that invoking race is invoking gender and that strong interconnections exist between all males and white supremacy (Dr. Reiland Rabaka Lecture: 3/13/2007). Although mainstream feminism during the 1960s and 70s was fundamentally racist and insensitive to women of color, it caused a wide variety of diverse feminist and womanist agendas to emerge. Women of color expanded the women’s liberation movement and successfully created a self-defining space for women of color. Furthermore, these historical events illustrate that women can unite against patriarchy on the consensus of sexism; however, women’s multiple identities must first be addressed to and accepted from all women in order to ultimately create a successful movement.

            It is vital to recognize that racism was not the only schism that existed between women at the eruption of Second-wave feminism; homosexual women were also alienated from mainstream feminists, and they initially reacted by constructing a sister branch of feminism called lesbian feminism. However, lesbian feminists also excluded individuals within the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, and Transgender (LGBT) community. Women with particular sexual and gender identities that challenged lesbian feminism were excluded from the movement (Feinberg 135). For example, throughout the late sixties and early seventies lesbian feminists detached themselves from butch-femme lesbians because they believed their relationships perpetuated patriarchy (glbtq.com; lesbian feminism). Leslie Feinberg illustrates this example in her book Stone Butch Blues. Theresa, a vital character throughout the book, identifies as a political feminist femme. The newfound lesbian feminists that she tries to join patronize her relationship with Jess, who identifies as a butch woman. Theresa expresses to Jess that the lesbian feminists told her, “…that butches were male chauvinist pigs” (Feinberg 135). Theresa and Jess grapple with the restrictive and oppressive gender expectations of lesbian feminists. Jess consistently expresses her indifference for the movement and Theresa responds with, “I need the movement, Jess. And so do you” (Feinberg 135). This portrays just one example of women who were alienated by the feminist and lesbian feminist movements. The Women’s Resource Center’s theme “Defining My Womanhood, Embracing Our Liberation” recognizes how problematic restrictive identity politics are and how important self-definition is in a movement that consists of multidimensional identities.

            The example described in Leslie Feinberg’s novel Stone Butch Blues reinforces the past and present challenges in feminism and lesbian feminist identity, gender, and sex politics. Throughout Second-wave feminism, feminists often criticized role- playing in the overall lesbian community and contested that these women were taking on false identities which betrayed their essential female gender identities based on their sex (glbtq.com; lesbian feminism). Although mainstream feminism has been accused of homophobia, lesbian feminism adopted many ideals and values from mainstream feminism. As exemplified in Stone Butch Blues, lesbian feminists mirrored mainstream feminist’s exclusive gender and sex politics by excluding and openly criticizing butch-femme relationships. In her article“Gay and Liberation,” Elizabeth Wilson suggests that butch-femme role-playing relationships are based off of dominant male and female roles which tend to reinforce the unequal power dynamics suggested in heterosexist relationships (7). Wilson argues that butch-femme roles are socially constructed from the male and female gender identities in a heterosexual society (7-9). Wilson indirectly suggests that gender is essential. In her article “Essentialism vs. Constructionism,” Diana Fuss recognizes that essentialists see male and female categories as natural, unchanging, ontological objects that serve as the starting point for the laws of the social (3). To Wilson, role-playing exists because of gender. However, Judith Butler argues in her article “Imitation and Gender Subordination” that restrictive male and female identity categories are social constructs based on the individual sex that attempt to reinforce heterosexual and male oppression (7-8). Butler argues that gender is an unoriginal construct, or simply just an imitation, an, “imitation of an imitation or a copy of a copy” (8). Butler claims that essential gender roles are non-existent and that no single, original identity exists for a woman or a man. Furthermore, Butler believes that role-playing in butch-femme relationships simply mirrors the role-playing that exists in every day heterosexual relationships in society (8-9). The debates on gender essentialism and constructionism within the feminist and lesbian feminist movements demonstrate how problematic and restricting socially constructed identities and labels are for women simply striving for liberation. Restrictive categories and the debates surrounding them most likely influenced present themes on the importance of self-definition for women.

            Like most social movements, the feminist movement was not born with a book of directions. Feminists were forced to face their differences. But their differences are responsible for expanding the feminist liberation movements and themes into what they are today. Teresa de Lauretis recognizes in her article“Feminism and Its Differences” that differences exist between women and within each individual woman. She argues that the internal divisions in the feminist movement helped to challenge not only other women, but also society’s gender, political, and sexual discourse (Lauretis 25). Without the overt racism and homophobia apparent throughout Second-wave feminism, women might still define themselves in one homogeneous group. However, each individual woman has an individual identity and would only be doing a disservice to herself and others by overlooking important meaningful differences such as her race or sexuality that contribute to her identity. Women can build a movement together to fight sexism, however it is vital for women to define themselves and their identities on their own terms. Lauretis concludes her article with Audrey Lorde’s quote describing women’s “house of difference” (30). Lorde preaches:

            Being women together was not enough. We were different. Being Black together was notenough. We were different. Being Black women together was not enough. We were different. Being Black dykes together was not enough. We were different. Each of us had our own needs and pursuits, and many different alliances. Self-preservation warned some of us that we could not afford to settle for one easy definition, one narrow individuation             of self…It was a while before I came to realize that our place was the very house of difference rather [than] the security of any one particular difference. (226)

The CU Women’s Resource Center’s theme “Defining My Womanhood, Embracing Our Liberation” reflects Lorde’s emphasis on coming to terms with each other’s differences and the ability to accept each other on an individual basis versus as a sub-category or label. The struggle of difference will always pervade reality. However, the power of difference has proven itself worthy through its actions in the feminist movement.

 

           

           

Works Cited

Butler, Judith. “Imitation and Gender Insubordination.” The Critical Tradition: Classical Texts and Contemporary Trends. Ed. David H. Richter Bedford. St. Maxtins: Boston, 2007.

Feinberg, Leslie. Stone Butch Blues. 1993. Afterword Leslie Feinberg. New York: Alyson Books, 2003.

Franklin, V.P. “Hidden in Plain View: African American Women, Radical Feminism, and the Origins of Women’s Studies Programs, 1967-1974.” The Journal of African American History. 87.2 (2002): JSTOR.U of Colorado, Boulder. 26 April 2007 <www.jstor.org>.

Fuss, Diana. “Essentialism vs. Constructionism.”

Lauretis, Teresa de.“Feminism and Its Differences.” Pacific Coast Philology. 25.1/2. (1990): J-STOR. U of Colorado, Boulder. 26 April 2007 <www.jstor.org>.

“ Lesbian Feminism.” GLBTQ Encyclopedia. 2004. 26 April 2007 <www.glbtq.com>

Rabaka. Reiland. Introduction to Hip Hop Studies. University of Colorado, Boulder. 13 March 2007.

Wilson, Elizabeth. "Gayness and Liberalism."  Hidden Agendas: Theory, Politics, and Experience in the Women's Movement. (1986): J-STOR. U of Colorado, Boulder. 25 April 2007 <jstor.org>.