Women's Oppression Today

Women's Oppression Today: Problems in Marxist Feminist Analysis is a non-fiction book by Michèle Barrett (New Left Books, 1980).

Author

A socialist feminist, Barrett is best known for her books The Anti-Social Family (1982), which was written with Mary McIntosh;[1] and Women's Oppression Today (1980), which attempted to reconcile feminist and Marxist analyses.[2]

Reviews

Reviewing the book shortly after publication, Miriam M. Johnson described how Barrett could not totally combine Marxism and feminism, and reached "a more sociological perspective, in which both economic and ideological factors are given independent weight".[3]

Barrett also questioned the close link between feminism and literary criticism, saying "I can find no sustained argument as to why feminists should be so interested in literature or what theoretical or political ends such a study should serve".[4] Barrett argued that the invention of the housewife and the male breadwinner suited the bourgeoisie and capitalist production,[5] but also relied on the pre-existing gender ideology of male supremacy. Her focus on ideology to explain modern family structure was critiqued, including by Colin Creighton as "imprecise and undeveloped".[6]

Laura Rice-Sayre, praising the work as "thorough and perceptive", commented on Barrett's point that Marxist analysis is "sex blind" and that women's oppression under capitalism rests on divisions that pre-date capitalism.[7]

Johanna Brenner and Maria Ramas' 1984 piece, "Rethinking Women's Oppression", critiqued the book for not focussing sufficiently on material conditions rather than ideology.[8][9]

Joan Landes said the book was "a useful introduction to the British feminist left", and commented on a lack of questioning of Marxist theory and an incorrect focus on "right thinking" instead of power structures: "She never entertains the possibility that a feminist approach to reproduction, ideology, or gender, for example, may require a reinterpretation of Marx's account ... She disregards the observation that women are advantaged or disadvantaged by forms of organizational structure, that socialism is not just a set of principles to be implemented in the future, but the living practices of an historical movement."[10]

June Howard focussed on Barrett's place among Marxist theory: "I would characterize the tendency within Marxist thought which informs Barrett's work as an anti-economistic Marxism which has been strongly influenced by Althusser, Gramsci and the consequences other theorists have derived from their works, although Barrett strongly asserts her differences with the extreme positions in this 'post-Althusserian' dialogue".[11] Her use of Louis Althusser's theories helped popularise his work.[12]

Charlene Gannage said that "Barrett makes a strong argument for stressing the inter-relationship of theory and history" but that she fails "to pose a theoretical framework for understanding women’s collective resistance to their oppression".[13]

Stevi Jackson and Sue Scott said the book was influential in turning feminists away from interactionism as an explanation for sexuality, which they regretted three decades later.[14]

Editions

The 1988 edition had a new subtitle, "The Marxist/Feminist Encounter", Barrett by then being uncomfortable with the idea of Marxist feminism.[15] In it, Barrett coined the term "New Australian Feminism" for the work of Moira Gatens and Elizabeth Grosz, which had a mixed reception in the country.[16] Influenced by African-American writers, the second edition also revised the focus on family as the cause of women's oppression to include the role of the state.[17]

Reviewing the 2014 Verso Books edition, Rita Mookerjee discussed how the book is "of its time" in the way it focuses on "Anglo-Western women" and how it "places an emphasis on biological determinants that, in the following decade, are proven by Judith Butler to be flimsy", and yet "aptly historicizes economics and feminism in a way that allows readers to locate ideological shifts and trends".[18] Judith Stacey recounted how Barrett's shift to post-structuralism in the 1990s made her quip that the only word in the book's title she was still comfortable with was "today".[19]

References

  1. ↑ Taylor, Laurie (11 November 2013). "Richard Hoggart; The Anti-Social Family". Thinking Allowed. BBC Radio 4.
  2. ↑ Mambrol, Nasrullah (21 December 2016). "Michele Barrett and Marxist Feminism". Literariness. ISSN 3108-172X.
  3. ↑ Johnson, Miriam M. (1981). "Reviewed Work: Women's Oppression Today: Problems in Marxist Feminist Analysis. Michele Barrett". Humboldt Journal of Social Relations. 9 (1). Cal Poly Humboldt: 210–212.
  4. ↑ Olaussen, Maria (1993). "Feminist criticism as ethical criticism". Critical Survey. 5 (1): 83–91.
  5. ↑ Janssens, Angélique (1997). "The Rise and Decline of the Male Breadwinner Family? An Overview of the Debate". International Review of Social History. 42 (Supplement 5: The Rise and Decline of the male Breadwinner Family?). Cambridge University Press: 1–23.
  6. ↑ Creighton, Colin (April 1996). "The Rise of the Male Breadwinner Family: A Reappraisal". Comparative Studies in Society and History. 38 (2). Cambridge University Press: 310–337.
  7. ↑ Rice-Sayre, Laura (1982). "Women's Oppression Today: Problems in Marxist Feminist Analysis (review)". Minnesota Review (18). Duke University Press: 147-15.
  8. ↑ Kemp, Alice Abel (May 2002). "Women and the Politics of Class". Contemporary Sociology; Washington. 31 (3): 362. doi:10.2307/3089725.
  9. ↑ Brenner, Johanna; Ramas, Maria (1984). "Rethinking Women's Oppression" (PDF). New Left Review (144).
  10. ↑ Landes, Joan B. (1983). "Reviewed Work: Women's Oppression Today: Problems in Marxist Feminist Analaysis by Michèle Barrett". Science & Society. l47 (4): 495–498.
  11. ↑ Howard, June (1983). "Toward A "Marxist-Feminist Cultural Analysis"". Minnesota Review. 20: 77–92.
  12. ↑ Rooney, Ellen (2016). Seductive Reasoning: Pluralism as the Problematic of Contemporary Literary Theory. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. p. 43. doi:10.1353/book.47558.
  13. ↑ Gannage, Charlene (January 1985). "Book Review: Is Marxism Sex Blind?: Women and Revolution, edited by Lydia Sargent. Boston : South End Press, 1981. Women's Oppression Today, by Michele Barrett. London: New Left Books, 1980". Critical Sociology. 12 (4). doi:10.1177/08969205850120040.
  14. ↑ Jackson, Stevi; Scott, Sue (October 2010). "Rehabilitating Interactionism for a Feminist Sociology of Sexuality". Sociology. 44 (5): 811–826.
  15. ↑ Haines, Brigid (July 1997). "Beyond Patriarchy: Marxism, Feminism, and Elfriede Jelinek's "Die Liebhaberinnen"". The Modern Language Review. 92 (3). Modern Humanities Research Association: 643–655. doi:10.2307/3733391.
  16. ↑ Barlow, Damien (1999). "Reviewed Works: Transitions: New Australian Feminisms by Barbara Caine, Rosemary Pringle; Along the Faultlines: Sex, Race, and Nation in Australian Women's Writing, 1880s-1930s by Susan Sheridan". Signs. 24 (3). The University of Chicago Press: 802–805.
  17. ↑ Tinsman, Heidi (1992). "The Indispensible Services of Sisters: Considering Domestic Service in United States and Latin American Studies". Journal of Women's History. 4 (1). Johns Hopkins University Press: 37–59. doi:10.1353/jowh.2010.0068.
  18. ↑ Mookerjee, Rita (2018). "Women's Oppression Today: The Marxist/Feminist Encounter by Michèle Barrett (review)". symploke. 26 (1–2). University of Nebraska Press: 541–543.
  19. ↑ Stacey, Judith (November 2006). "Feminism and Sociology in 2005: What Are We Missing?". Social Problems. 53 (4): 479–482. doi:10.1525/sp.2006.53.4.479.
This page is issued from Wikipedia. The text is available under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 unless otherwise noted. Additional terms may apply for the media files.