Feminism is not a party political issue

A couple of years ago, Conservative Home Secretary and Minister for Women and Equalities, Theresa May and Diane Abbott, Labour MP and Shadow Minister for Public Health were both proudly photographed in t-shirts emblazoned with the slogan ‘This is What A Feminist Looks Like’ in a cross party display of support for the Fawcett Society’s 2006/07 ‘Feminist Challenge’.

The goal was to reclaim the ‘f-word’ and have the wide ranging bunch of famous faces from politicians like May and Abbott to female barristers like Cherie Blair QC and male comedians like Bill Bailey, promoting the idea that feminists were normal human beings and not the hairy, axe grinding harridans of legend.

However, the question of what it is to be a feminist was been hijacked by both sides of the Labour/Conservative debate last week as a way to demonstrate their respective parties’ credentials to their female voters. It started with former Women and Equality Minister and current Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (and incidentally currently the longest serving female MP in the House of Commons) Harriet Harman telling this month’s issue of Total Politics that ‘If you’re actually political, you can’t be a conservative and a feminist’.

This, of course, provoked a furious response on the Guardian’s Comment is Free from Tory backbenchers Amber Rudd and Andrea Leadsom detailing exactly how the socialists have historically been ‘late to the party’ on women’s rights and that it was the Conservatives that were properly empowering women which they languished on welfare and all female shortlists under Labour.

The article was part of the ongoing Tory attempt to reclaim the hearts and minds of the female voters away from their supposed ‘natural resting place’ on the Left. Amber Rudd is one of the cohort of young, female Conservative MPs elected in 2010 that David Cameron is at pains to show off as part of the Conservatives’ new touchy feely, liberal attitude to women and minorities in order to undo some of the damage caused by the cuts being perceived as comparatively hitting women harder than men.

However, all this bitching and bravado is missing the point about feminism and its role in politics today. Feminism is a political issue but it is not a party political issue. The modern movement does not care who it is that protects women from being beaten up by their husbands, or who gives them equal pay or who makes it safe for them to walk home alone at night. All they care about is that it gets done. This entire ‘Look at me! Look at me! Look at how many girls I’ve got on MY team’, is pandering and doesn’t go anyway into solving the problem. The problems facing the modern feminist movement go beyond the historical accusations that Conservatives don’t like it when women leave the house and that Labour and the Unions don’t like it when women take wages away from men; whilst it is political, it is also economic, cultural and social.

The argument going back and forth between each side at the moment is nothing more than a front for their central political agendas. Conservatives argue that they are helping women back into work; this is in a similar vein to the rest of their employment and welfare policy, similarly Labour’s stance on issues like childcare and maternity leave is in line with their more socialist ‘it takes a village’ credentials. The fact that these things affect women is incidental and unavoidable but it doesn’t make them a ‘women’s issue’.

Much like all issues that affect women are not necessarily feminist issues, not all women are feminists and of the ones that are, not all feminists make it their sole reason for getting up in the morning. To assume all women are the same, that they need to be flattered, charmed and convinced as a group that only cares about what they get for the extra X chromosome  is the same kind of naive and narrow minded thinking that the misogynists use. It assumes that all women care about things like child benefit, it assumes that all men don’t.  As a twenty one year old, unemployed graduate and childless feminist I don’t care that much about child benefit, but there are many thousands of feminists that do; our priorities are shaped by the point we are it in our lives.  Next election I’m voting for the party that will get my generation out of the dole queue, not the party that shouts the loudest about gender solidarity.

The feminist agenda is something that needs to run parallel to mainstream politics and be the priority of every major party to fix with the willingness and the help of the British people. We do not need to be pandered to, we are not all the same nor have the same concerns; we just want it done. It doesn’t matter what either party has done in the past it is what they are doing now, regardless of any political points they may win or lose, is what matters.

The Representation of the People Act or Fourth Reform Act, which won women the right to vote in 1918, was passed by a coalition government of Liberals and Conservatives; do you really think anyone is going to vote for another on that basis in 2015?

Recent Posts on Notebook

• Justin Webb on the medical advances in tackling heart disease
• The Photography Blog: 'Control Order House' by Edmund Clark - Photographing our response to terrorism
• Dementia Awareness Week: Should we keep an open mind to spiritual solutions?
• Hearing loss: An invisible impairment and a preventable disability
• Barking Blondes: When to vaccinate

• http://www.careNfashion.com/ Adil

  True! This is what Feminist looks like.

• BusyBeeBuzz

  Although I agree with Harriet Harman’s statement that ‘If you’re actually political, you can’t be a conservative and a feminist’, I would add that after labour adopted Tory monetarist policies, introduced the tripartite banking system, cosied up to Murdoch, went into an illegal war against Iraq and fiddled expenses, neither can you be a labour and a feminist. Let’s face it, feminists (and all folk in this country) have a choice between Tories, alternative Tories and the wishy, washy yellow Tories who will swing either way. I would be very interested in becoming an MP, but I cannot bring myself to join any of the existing parties. As a (mature), disabled, unemployed graduate and childless feminist I do care about child benefit. My priorities are not shaped by this moment in time (or my personal circumstances). My political priorities are the same as they were when I was 21 and they are based on human rights and everything that I believe to be good, right, true and just. Your writing is excellent and I am confident that by the next election you will have a job and won’t need to throw your vote away on any party who makes false promises about getting your generation out of the dole queue. I won’t vote for any party who wants to get rid of the Human Rights Act and Legal Aid, nor any party who wants to privatise or part privatise the NHS. All non-millionaires will have to make a stand together against party political corruption. Until all Parties clean up their ‘acts’, I feel that I have been effectively disenfranchised.

• http://www.facebook.com/katie.przybyl Katie Przybyl

  While I agree
  with most of this blog I can’t accept that our priorities are only shaped by
  the point we have reached in our lives. I’m a childless feminist, and I don’t
  see myself becoming a mother in the future. But I do care a great deal about
  child benefits. One of the main reasons for the inequality between men and
  women (the pay gap, the glass ceiling etc) is the fact that women bear
  children. Many employers are reluctant to employ women for that reason, often
  mothers simply can’t afford childcare and never return to work. Child benefits
  are an important tool in ensuring women can work once they become mothers. This
  leads to women being more independent and productive. As a feminist this is
  something I care for.

  Part of growing up is understanding that things that may not affect us directly
  are still playing part in the larger picture. If you are a feminist, you should
  very much care about child benefits.

• BusyBeeBuzz

  Representative Democracy? Women in the 2011 Local Government
  Elections in England http://www.cfwd.org.uk/uploads/pdfs/RepresentativeDemocracyFinal.pdf
  After you have read that, read about the Fawcett Society’s history then buy the above t-shirt for £17.50 (not available in pink). “The 1970s saw a new wave of feminism sweep the country. Fawcett campaigned for and celebrated the passing of the Equal Pay Act in 1970 and the Sex Discrimination Act in 1975.” http://www.fawcettsociety.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=29

• BusyBeeBuzz

  Anyone who asserts that Feminism is not a party political issue has forgotten the history of feminism. The Fawcett Society write: “The 1970s saw a new wave of feminism sweep the country. Fawcett campaigned for and celebrated the passing of the Equal Pay Act in 1970 and the Sex Discrimination Act in 1975.”

• BusyBeeBuzz

  The Guardian recently stated: “The myth persists that a woman in parliament, by virtue of her genitalia and her shoe size, is a feminist. This fantasy, which defines a woman by her gender, just as a misogynist does, should have died in the arms of Margaret Thatcher, who said, “I owe nothing to women’s lib”, and so gave nothing in return. A few years ago, Theresa May posed in a T-shirt that read, “This is what a feminist looks like”, which is admirable, except it isn’t what a feminist looks like. Confusing feminism with femininity is as daft as confusing feminism with consumption; either you are committed to equality for all women, in which case you are a feminist, or you are committed to equality for some women, in which case you are a friend, or you are committed to equality for yourself, in which case you are a probably a Conservative.”

• Guest

  Feminism is an essentially self-interested controlling paradigm. Equalism is a more appropriate paradigm. Many myths are touted by neo-con feminists that are untrue – In the UK 82% of long term unemployed are male (DWP, 2011) and 1.6 million men are unemployed as compared with 1.1 million women. Male incarceration in prison has risen from approx 40K in 1990 to 80K in 2010. 95% of street homeless are Male.

  I remember when we were assured that feminism would mean fewer wars, a more equal society and a better relationship between men and women. Instead those countries at the forefront of feminism (US and UK) have started more wars, consumed more stuff and become more unequal.

  The idea that feminism has no casualities is false – it is merely a tool for ultra-Capitalists to encourage greater consumption and inequality. Any right minded person should care about the rights of women and men without resorting to extremist ideology.