Not All Feminist Ideas Are Equal: Anti-Capitalist Feminism and Female Complicity

Journal of International Women's Studies Volume 16 Issue 1 The 10th Anniversary of the FWSA Essay Competition: New Directions in Feminist Studies Emotions, Activisms, Intersectionality Article 6 Nov-2014 Not All Feminist Ideas Are Equal: Anti-Capitalist Feminism and Female Complicity Giuliana Monteverde Follow this and additional works at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws Part of the Women's Studies Commons Recommended Citation Monteverde, Giuliana (2014). Not All Feminist Ideas Are Equal: Anti-Capitalist Feminism and Female Complicity. Journal of International Women's Studies, 16(1), 62-75. Available at: http://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol16/iss1/6 This item is available as part of Virtual Commons, the open-access institutional repository of Bridgewater State University, Bridgewater, Massachusetts. This journal and its contents may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. ©2014 Journal of International Women’s Studies. Not All Feminist Ideas Are Equal: Anti-Capitalist Feminism and Female Complicity By Giuliana Monteverde1 Abstract This paper advocates a more explicit feminist discussion of female complicity by demonstrating that existing discourses on women’s participation in patriarchal practices are inadequate. By looking at two contemporary anti-capitalist feminist texts—One Dimensional Woman by Nina Power and Meat Market: Female Flesh under Capitalism by Laurie Penny—I show that these feminists acknowledge the disrupted sex binary, but have not produced texts that reflect this understanding. Whilst these authors admirably concern themselves with structural reasons for inequality—rather than blaming individual women—their treatment of complicit women is wavering. They are scornful of powerful American Republican women and of ‘fun’ feminists, but sympathetic or unconcerned with women engaged in performed hegemonic sexuality. I argue that a consideration of female complicity is linked to the reimagining of categories for future feminisms. Key Words: Complicity, Anti-Capitalist Feminism, Postfeminism Introduction This essay seeks to show that a study of female complicity is a worthwhile new direction in feminist studies and a useful paradigm from which to analyse various strains of contemporary feminist discourse. By outlining what I mean by female complicity, I hope to show that feminism should move from a submerged approach to a more explicit discussion of the ways in which women participate in the construction of sexism and the upholding of a patriarchal, or kyriarchal, society. I will look at two recent anti-capitalist feminist texts—One Dimensional Woman, by Nina Power, and Meat Market: Female Flesh under Capitalism, by Laurie Penny—in order to examine their approaches to the notion of female complicity. I conclude that this perspective, with its focus on political action and systemic explanations for inequality, does not concern itself enough with the actions of individuals (which is opposite to the approach of liberal mainstream feminists, who focus too much on the actions of individuals). The authors are open to the idea of female complicity, highlighting that women are not inherently better than men, and that they do objectify one another, but do not offer any conclusive statements on how to deal with this theoretically. These feminists do acknowledge the disrupted sex binary by criticising ‘token’ or ‘decoy’ women, but do not extend this to articulate how this affects the traditional categories of feminism. I argue that focusing mainly on the paradigm of work and women’s relationship to it (both inside and outside the home) leads to an incomplete stance on female complicity. Whilst a sustained political critique and awareness of intersectionality is a positive aspect of this type of 1 Giuliana Monteverde is a second year PhD candidate in the school of English and History at the University of Ulster, Coleraine. Her doctoral research is on representations of complicity in contemporary feminist discourse. 62 Journal of International Women’s Studies Vol. 16, No. 1 November 2014 feminism, these authors do not fully explain the issue of complicit women or treat them in a consistent manner. Whilst a structural analysis of power does implicitly suggest that individual action is less important than collective effort, an exclusion of individual female voice means that various categories of women (powerful, sexualised, domestic) appear ambiguously in these texts, undermining the false binary of men versus women, but not offering an alternative model. Of course, the books discussed here have their own goals, and therefore it is understandable that the authors’ approaches to complicity are somewhat problematic given that they are addressing issues of their own. Regardless, it is necessary to critique this particular aspect of their work, with the intention of setting the groundwork for further research and discussions on this issue. The focal point of both Power and Penny’s work is the strong link between feminism, the situation of women, and capitalism—including the feminization of labour, prostitution as sex work, commodified femininity, and unpaid domestic work. Their work contains a sustained and scathing critique of late consumerist capitalism and the hierarchical class system (including sex, race and sexual orientation) stemming from the power inequalities inherent in it. These two texts serve my purposes of looking at the representation of women perceived to be complicit and the treatment of the notion of complicity. Where some authors represent women perceived to be complicit in a problematic way, (e.g. Ariel Levy and Natasha Walter), Power and Penny do so in a less problematic and more varied way. Power and Penny directly address the idea that women aren’t inherently pro-woman in a political and academic manner rather than a sensationalist one; the content of these books is therefore interesting for work concerned with ideas of complicity. Furthermore, Power and Penny’s work can be conceived of as politicised popular feminism, which is a fairly uncommon genre, and therefore worthy of attention. I begin by outlining my understanding and application of complicity. I then give a brief overview of contemporary feminism to show why it is necessary to adjust current feminist approaches in line with broad changes in feminist thought. I contextualise the political milieu that Power and Penny are writing in and responding to, and then look at various examples of complicit women in the texts, showing that the differing approaches used by the authors reveal an uneven picture of female complicity. Complicity The definition of complicity advanced here refers to the broad notion of participation in a practice, belief, behaviour, or understanding that can lead to oppression, discrim (...truncated)