Women's Work

A Survey of Scholarship By and About Women

Ellen Cole, Esther D Rothblum, Donna M Ashcraft

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136376276
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Sciences sociales
• Subtopic: Études relatives au genre

While most women's studies texts function "topically" as "readings" for courses and general use, Women's Work: A Survey of Scholarship By and About Women takes a broad spectrum of women's disciplines--psychological, artistic, religious, and philosophical--and gives you a diverse, interdisciplinary view of this important and ever-expanding field of study in one accessible volume. You'll see that women are leading the world into the twenty-first century in such areas as education, business, health, and science. You'll also find your appreciation for the current developments in women's studies increase as you see how far-reaching and multifaceted this crucial discipline really is.Women's Work avoids the compilations of topical readings that tend to bog down typical women's studies courses and explores the different disciplines that continue to make this field central to the development of the academic world community. You'll find your perspective on women's studies expand and take on new meaning as you delve into these and other areas:

• feminist approaches to research
• the lack of women in science and feminist critiques of science
• women and health
• psychology and discussions on sex differences, sex similarities, and gender roles
• communication differences between men and women
• women in literature, art history, and metaphysics
• Judeo-Christian religions and goddess religionsThis comprehensive compendium has something for everyone interested in the massive contribution that women have made--and will continue to make--in all areas of human development. All readers, especially women's studies scholars, professors, students, and informed members of the general public looking for an excellent, up-to-date resource concerning the general direction of feminist disciplines today, will definitely want a copy of Women's Work.

Chapter 1
Introduction to Women's Studies and Feminist Theories

Donna M. Ashcraft

What is Women's Studies?

Women's studies is the field that studies women (e.g., their place in society, their behavior), that studies the accomplishments of women (e.g., the literature they have written, the art they have created), and that studies the world from a different perspective, using sometimes different methods than those typically used (e.g., see Chapter 2 on feminist research methods). The field of women's studies was initiated primarily because society noticed a lack of acknowledgment, and a devaluing, of the work (academic and otherwise) of women. Likewise, a new way of conducting work, thinking about issues, theories, research, and so on, had begun to be formed. With this different perception of women, the field of women's studies was born.

Feminism and Feminist Theory

Defining feminism is very difficult. For now, let us define it as believing that women and men are equal and that women should be awarded the same opportunities as men. However, what "equality" means and what we mean by "awarding the same opportunities to women as to men" varies from one feminist theorist to another. For example, some feminists believe that equality means that men and women are essentially the same, that is, that any sex differences that do exist are minimal and most likely caused by society rather than biological factors. Others believe that men and women are not the same. They believe that there are sex differences. However, while society in general has devalued the characteristics, abilities, and tasks of women, these feminists believe that women should be valued in and of themselves; for example, that nurturance and the raising of children is at least as important as being the strong, independent breadwinner of a family.

The issue of equality also includes different perceptions of how equality between men and women should be worked toward and this difference in opinion depends upon a person's adherence to a certain feminist theory. Thus, for some theorists, "awarding the same opportunities to women as to men" means that all women should have the same opportunities as all men; for others, it means that these opportunities should be awarded on a hierarchical level. What this latter view means is that not all women are created equal. Some are better at some things than others; for example, some are more creative or artistic than others. Therefore, not everyone should be given a particular opportunity because they may not have the capability to fulfill the obligations of, say, a particular job. More concretely, an example of this view would be believing that not everyone should be able to go to medical school because not everyone has the ability to understand the material that must be learned in medical school in order to be a competent physician. Finally, there are still others who believe that wealth and opportunities should be equally distributed to all. Thus, it should be evident that there are many feminist viewpoints.

What I mean by the term "feminist theory" then, is a mode of thinking, a set of beliefs that influence our ideas about why women are in a subordinate position to that of men and about how to resolve this inequality.

During the course of this chapter, I will briefly describe the main points of the major feminist theories. I am deeply indebted to Judith Evans (1995) for publishing her text titled Feminist Theory Today: An Introduction to Second-Wave Feminism, and for clarifying the major feminist schools of thought. I draw heavily on it. I use her division of feminist theory and so will be discussing five schools of thought: liberal feminism, radical feminism, cultural feminism, socialist feminism, and postmodernism.

Liberal Feminism

Early liberal (or moderate) feminists believed that there are very few sex differences. Those that do exist are minimal, even irrelevant, and are due to socialization rather than differences in anatomy or some other biological factor. Therefore, because women and men are so similar, women should be treated similarly to men. Because there are no sex differences, society cannot maintain discrimination against women. Striving for equality between men and women is justified because men and women are essentially the same.

The type of equality sought by liberal feminists is equality of opportunity, as opposed to what Evans calls equality of condition. This means that women should be allowed into the same schools as men. They should be allowed to try for the same jobs, promotions, pay raises, contracts, and so on, as men. Liberal feminists are not saying that all women should be awarded the same opportunities. They are not saying that all women should share equal wealth. Rather, they believe that within society there is a hierarchy and that opportunities should be given to both men and women at each of those levels of the hierarchy. Liberal feminists believe that if there is equality of opportunity, then a certain type of equality of condition will follow. For example, you are probably well aware that even today, there are still some occupations that employ primarily men and others that employ primarily women (Reskin, 1988). You are probably also aware of the concept of the glass ceiling (U.S. Department of Labor, 1991). This is the idea that women are allowed to enter certain occupations and advance through promotions to a certain status within such occupations, but very few women enter the highest level, most likely due to discrimination. As an illustration, note that while there are many women in business and even many women in middle management, very few enter the highest levels of management (e.g., U. S, Department of Labor, 1991). Likewise, although there are many women academicians, significantly fewer women than men reach the level of full professor (Keetz, 1991). Liberal feminists believe that these two phenomena will disappear once equality of opportunity is gained.

Thus, what liberal feminists believe will happen once women have gained equality of opportunity is that there will be equal numbers of men and women at each level of the hierarchy. However, a hierarchy of socioeconomic status (SES) will still exist; that is, some women will still have a higher status, income, and so on, compared to other women, and the same would be true for men. It would also follow that some men would have a higher SES compared to some women and vice versa. Note that this is different than what was true at the beginning of the women's movement At that time, most women were not employed outside the home, and those who were earned significantly less than men employed outside the home, even if they were employed within the same profession (e.g., Bernstein, 1988; Larwood, Szwajkowski, and Rose, 1988). For liberal feminists, then, equality of opportunity would certainly help many women. However, early liberal feminists were criticized for this view for two reasons:

1. This view favored middle-class white women and excluded the experiences of minority women and women of lower SES.
2. Some believed that all women should be equal and that there should be only one level of society.

Also, after women began to enter the traditionally masculine work world, some began to experience dissatisfaction. While these early liberal feminists believed that once they gained the same opportunities as men, they would be happy and equality would be achieved, in actuality this was not true. Many of the women who delayed having children to begin careers either regretted not having children or began to realize that their biological clocks were ticking and some experienced difficulty conceiving due to age-related infertility. Others who had children and who had established careers were exhausted from managing the demands of both and began to realize that they could not "have it all" and do all of it well (e.g., Friedan, 1981).

For these reasons, liberal feminism began to change. Whereas early liberal feminists believed that males and females are essentially the same (equal) because any sex differences that do exist are caused by society as opposed to nature (i.e., biology), second-stage liberal feminists began to question the assumption that males and females are essentially the same. Thinking evolved such that these later feminists began discussing the possibility that males and females really are different. If one examines the early liberal feminist position, one can see this possibility; they did suggest that some sex differences may exist. It is just that they dismissed them as irrelevant, "not real," because society produced them as opposed to hormones or reproductive structures or brain differences. Thus, if we accept that even sex differences that are produced by society are "real," then one can see this evolution in thinking.

An example of the type of difference that was discussed was the trait of nurturance. Second-stage liberal feminists began to believe that perhaps women really are more nurturant than men. Beyond this, however, second stage liberal feminists began to suggest that these differences actually make women superior to men, at least in some ways. So for centuries, women were told that their characteristics (femininity) were inferior to the characteristics of men (masculinity), but now these second-stage feminists said just the opposite. Debates ensued, revolving around the issue of whether such traits as nurturance are actually better than such traits as competitiveness.

These second-stage liberal feminists still believed that these sex differences are learned—for example, that girls are taught to be more nurturant than boys while boys are taught to be more competitive and aggressive than girls. This implies, then, that society encourages girls to aspire to be better human beings than boys. The traditional home atmosphere that has kept women in a subordinate position in society for so long may have actually encouraged their growth toward a preferable concern for humanity. By teaching our daughters to be mothers, we have taught them to be more compassionate toward society in general (e.g., Montague, 1992), to be morally superior. However, whereas the early liberal feminists argued that equality of opportunity should be granted to women because men and women were essentially the same, now second-stage liberal feminists believed that equality between men and women should be granted because women are superior to men in some ways. For example, would not the world be a safer place if women were in the positions of authority (such as the President of the United States) instead of men? Since women are more concerned about other people, wouldn't they be less likely to start a nuclear war?

Doesn't this imply that it is men, not women, who should change? This question also focuses on another difference between early and second stage liberal feminists: whereas early liberal feminists saw nothing wrong with women trying to become more like men, second-stage liberal feminists suggested that perhaps men should become more like women. Note two assumptions about this thinking:

1. This debate suggests that any differences between the sexes can be minimized or eliminated; therefore it is assumed that masculine and feminine traits are learned rather than innate.
2. There is an assumption that both males and females have the same traits but in differing amounts. These two assumptions underlie the movement toward androgyny. In the 1970s Sandra Bern (1974) suggested that masculine and feminine traits were not polar opposites after all; instead they could be thought of as complementary. She further suggested that both males and females could have both masculine and feminine traits in their personalities. When both masculine and feminine qualities were found in high amounts in one person, she or he was said to be androgynous. (For a further discussion see Chapter 5.)

Second-stage liberal feminists suggested that males could become more like females and that females could become more like males. This concept could be included in the occupational realm. For example, while early liberal feminists encouraged women to become breadwinners for families and to enter traditionally masculine occupations, second-stage liberal feminists also suggested that perhaps some males would actually prefer to stay home and raise families. However, others argued that since women were the ones who were morally superior, more nurturant, should not they be the ones to raise our children to also be more compassionate? This latter view, however, relegates women to the status quo, that is, subordination, and so some have suggested wages for childrearing and housework. This view of the superiority of women will be addressed more fully when we discuss cultural feminism.

Notice that even if men and women become more like each other, there will still be some women and some men of higher status than other women and men. Thus, second-stage liberal feminists still believed in the hierarchical structure of society. And this is the key to liberal (or moderate) feminism. Although liberal feminists may vary in their views about whether sex differences should be addressed or minimized and about whether men should become more like women or women like men, they all agree that the way to achieve equality between the sexes is to work for equality of opportunity and to work for women's advancement within the already existing institutions of society.

Radical Feminism

A second theoretical perspective is radical feminism. Radical feminists blamed a traditionally masculine society for the oppression of women. Adherents to this view believed that implications of sex and gender were responsible for the oppression of women. Whereas sex is the biological division into male and female, gender includes the cultural assumptions about a person because he or she is biologically a male or a female. Beliefs that biological females have certain types of traits or abilities and that biological males have certain types of traits or abilities simply because of their sex is the concept of gender. Radical feminists believed that the artificial assumptions society made about people because of their biological sex kept women in a subordinate position to men. For example, assumptions that women are emotionally fragile, and that men are emotionally stable would keep women in an inferior position in society. Similarly, these assumptions promoted patriarchy, or a society in which men have a higher status than women. This patriarchal society then continued, in tautological fashion, to encourage male dominance over women. Thus, radical feminists believed that patriarchy was the cause of women's oppression.

Some even went so far as to suggest that sexuality (e.g., compulsory heterosexuality) was partly responsible for the subordinate position of women in society. Compulsory heterosexuality suggests tha...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• About the Editor
• Contributors
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Chapter 1. Introduction to Women's Studies and Feminist Theories
• Chapter 2. Research for Women: Feminist Methods
• Chapter 3. Women in Science: Rediscovering the Accomplishments of Women
• Chapter 4. The Biology of Women: The Process of Becoming and Being Female
• Chapter 5. Women's Health: Identifying Women's Health Issues and Concerns
• Chapter 6. Psychology of Women: Theories of Sex Differences and Sex Role Development
• Chapter 7. Women and Sociology: How the Structure of Society Affects Women
• Chapter 8. Women and Anthropology: Including Women in the Evolution and Diversity of Human Society
• Chapter 9. The Geography of Women: The Influence of Capitalism and Gender on the Spatial Organization of Society
• Chapter 10. Women in Business: The Experiences of Women in the U.S. Workforce
• Chapter 11. Women and Education: Women as Students and Teachers, and in the Curriculum
• Chapter 12. Gender and Communication: The Influence of Gender on Language and Communication
• Chapter 13. Philosophy and Women: Thinking About Women
• Chapter 14. Women and Religion: Recapturing Women's Spirituality
• Chapter 15. Women in Literature: Women's Writing, Writing About Women
• Chapter 16. Women and Art: Uncovering the Heritage and Building New Directions
• Index