[page 20]
A review of The Rights and Wrongs of edited and introduced by Juliet Mitchell and Ann Oakley, published by Penguin Books, 1976.
Five years ago there were less than a handful of bookshops in London which could boast a section labelled "Feminism". I remember making the pilgrimage to Compedium Books to purchase one of the new bibles; standing at the bus stop afterwards fumbling through the pages with gloved hands, rejoicing at the boldness and vibrancy of the red-on-white cover which bore the legend: Sisterhood is Powerful. This was the literature of a young movement, still able to encapsulate its diverse political and social messages between two covers.
Today, the editors of a feminist anthology have to take into account not only the diversity of the Women's Movement, but also the direction in which it is going and the distinctions which have arisen in the course of its development. The strength of Sisterhood Is Powerful lay in its attempts to identify the many facets of our oppression; it was essentially a document of the here-and-now. Literature, psychology, sociology, politics and especially history were the repositories of accumulated crimes against women.
Only the personalised narrative, the living experience of individual women, seemed free from the taint of male-dominated ideology. With the growth of women's studies in higher education, a different tradition began to emerge. Using the tools of accepted disciplines, feminists -mainly academically trained - began to explore the place of women in Juliet Mitchell and Ann Oakley situate literature, history and other fields.
their new anthology firmly within this tradition. The twelve essays they have selected vary greatly in subject and scope; but as the editors point out, the volume is unified by the contributors' common. conception of women as a distinct and oppressed social group.
Most of the essays are written from a historical standpoint which reflects the need to understand how the structures which perpetuate women's oppression originated and developed. Each condiscovery and interpretation, though some are marred by styles reminiscent of the academic dissertation. They remind us too, that most of the pioneering work in feminist theory is being done in the universities.
Yet for all the excellence of the The Rights and Wrongs of Women is a slightly disappointing book. Considered in terms of its parts, it is clearly a valuable addition to the women's studies literature. But considered as a whole, the impression it gives is one of distance from the movement which inspired it. Looking first at the range of subjects indication of several major topics of debate within the present-day women's problems which have interested most movement. 1 am thinking of the women's conferences and many study groups over the past two years, such as the nature and function of domestic labour under capitalism, the impact of the welfare state on the family, the effect of equal rights legislation and so on. This is not just an arbitrary list of what feminists are discussing at the moment. All these subjects are linked, and the need to understand them has sprung from the need to develop a strategy for fighting sexism and winning our liberation. In a sense, they are the theoretical questions which have emerged from our attempts at feminist practice. It is always easy to criticise ommissions from an anthology, and it might be argued that Mitchell and Oakley chose deliberately to exclude essays on feminist strategy. They themselves say in the introduction that "none of the pieces speak directly to or from the practice of the women's movement", and that the essays "illustrate different strands of thought within feminism, but they do not offer a unified political perspective". Since the Movement itself has no unified perspective, it is not surprising that they are reluctant to impose one on their anthology. All the same, there is no reason to leave the question of feminist strategy out altogether.
In fact, it is clear that the editors do collection is rather conventional, they explain that far from forging *a new concept of the feminist editor" they have edited in a conventional way; this was a result of their doubts about certain trends within the movement, connected with the concept of Sisterhood'. They are right to question the concept, particularly as it has led to illusions about the basis for feminist unity and the possibility for change in social relationships under capitalism. At one time, it seemed that women spreading wider and wider until all could form horizontal alliances, women had joined the movement, of at least supported its aims. Sisterhood was the concept behind this unity, and sisterhood was powerful, precisely because it can achieve this.
There are some important positive aspects to the idea of sisterhood. It implies a conscious recognition of shared oppression by women; it is a way of welcoming women to the movement. If the concept is in crisis, this must Movement itself and the world around be a reflection of the it. In practice, the Movement has been questioning the idea by seeking other bases for unity, notably campaigns.
These have generated their own specific problems and arguments. While Mitchell and Oakley criticise some women for interpreting 'sisterhood' as separatism, others are asking under what conditions we should involve men and over what issues we should fight alongside them. It is a pity that the issues the editors raise in their introduction are not fully followed through in the essays they have selected. The collection also raises questions about feminist theory which are very difficult to answer. Mitchell and Oakley write: "... we believe that part of the success of feminism will consist in the rewriting of history, sociology, psychology, economics and so forth from a standpoint which is sensitive to the situation of women as a distinct social group." This implies a re-evaluation of all academic disciplines. What tools must feminist theory develop?
Will it be structured into sociolgy/anthropology/history/psychology and so on as the social sciences taught in universities are? How will it be related to other intellectual traditions = notably Marxism? Some of these questions - and attempts at answers are present in The Rights and Wrongs of Women: but they are mostly implicit and should be expanded. Otherwise, it is difficult to see
[page 21]