main Feminist Movement page
REVOLUTION IS HAPPENING IN OUR MINDS
article was written in the fall of 1969 for College and University
Business and published in a special issue on REVOLUTION
II: Thinking Female,
Vol. 48, No. 2, February 1970, p. 63. It was reprinted in The New
Feminism in Twentieth Century America ed. by June Sochen, Lexington,
Mass: D.C. Heath & Co., 1971, pp. 149-160.
solemnly, the Witches filed around the Federal Building, faces dead
white, staring straight ahead, flowing black capes swirling around
them. "Our sister justice lies chained and tied," they chanted.
"We curse the ground on which she died."
was Halloween, the annual religious festival of the druidic witches,
and a Chicago "Coven" of WITCH (Women's International Terrorist
Conspiracy from Hell) had chosen the day to announce the beginning
of a new, militant phase of the Chicago women's liberation movement.
is just one branch of the new women's movement that has been building
up over the last few years. The guerrilla theater and action group
made its initial appearance on Halloween in 1968 when a New York coven
(thirteen) whisked down Wall Street to hex the financiers. The Dow
Jones industrial average dropped five points the next day, and WITCH
has been, expanding its activities ever since. On Halloween 1969,
the target was not big money but big government as represented by
the conspiracy trial going on in the Federal Building in Chicago.
During, the same year, other women around the country were doing more
than just casting hexes:
In New York, 400 women filed suit charging that the state abortion
laws unconstitutionally deprived women of the right to control their
Students at Grinnell College in conservative Iowa held a "nude-in
when a Playboy representative came to speak on his magazine's "philosophy"
to protest use of women's bodies as a commodity.
Berkeley women held hostage an editor of a new underground newspaper,
Dock of the Bay, until he agreed to stop publication of a special
"Sextra" issue planned to raise money for the new paper.
Women from several cities descended on Washington, D.C., in January
1969 to disrupt an inaugural tea given by Mrs. Richard Nixon and
again in November to picket HEW.
The second annual protest of the Miss America contest was held in
Atlantic City. The 1969 protest against the use of women as sex
objects was milder, with no undergarments thrown into a "Freedom
Trash Can" or live sheep crowned "Miss America" as
had been done the year before. Participants in the protest were
cooled by the police, who segregated them on a small corner of the
boardwalk, and by premature discovery of a women's liberation "plant"
among the contestants in the beauty pageant.
A feminist repertory theater was started in New York, and a private,
tax-exempt Human Rights for Women foundation was founded in Washington,
D.C., to help fund feminist projects.
In these and other cities, women were organizing karate classes,
agitating for day-care facilities, counseling women on where and
how to get abortions, holding numerous women's classes with and
without credit, on and off campus, attending more than two dozen
regional conferences on women's liberation, with from 60 to 600
participants, and publishing four journals and numerous newsletters.
fevered activity is only the outward and not always the most significant
sign of a new consciousness among women about their "minority"
position in society. Only a few years ago most people ridiculed the
idea that women had a long way to go. Now women are beginning to recognize
and articulate what a West Coast (male) psychologist called the "great
reservoir of rage in women -- just under the surface." They are
beginning to organize themselves into what is called the "women's
movement actually has two origins, and in many ways there have also
been two separate movements that are only now beginning to merge. One,
composed primarily of young, white, middle-class, college-educated women,
started as a spin-off of the youth and student movements that have been
burgeoning over the last 10 years. The other movement has its roots
deep within the Establishment and among some of its established critics.
Its participants tend to be older, less political, and much more established
in career or home. They too are predominantly white, middle-class, and
college- educated but less consistently than the other movement's.
of the founders of the latter movement come from the network of people
built up by the President's Commission on the Status of Women created
by President Kennedy in 1961 and the subsequent 50 state commissions.
Dissatisfied with the lack of progress being made on the recommendations
to come out of these commissions, they met with Betty Friedan, author
of "The Feminine Mystique," and others to form the National
Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966.
the slogan "Full Equality for Women in Truly Equal Partnership
with Men," NOW has a topdown structure and an office in New York.
It has grown to some 3,000 members, 10 per cent of whom are men, and
tends to concentrate on eliminating employment discrimination and laws
affecting women's rights.
its formation, Now has been joined by such other specifically women's
rights organizations as WEAL (Women's Equity Action League), FEW (Federally
Employed Women) and several small groups. All these organizations are
beginning to join hands with the much older National Woman's Party (NWP)
to work on the Equal Rights Amendment. The NWP came into existence right
after the 19th Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1920. It was
the daughter of the radical Congressional Union for Women's Suffrage,
which under the leadership of Alice Paul had carried on most of the
serious agitation (marching, picketing, fasting) that preceded passage
of the amendment. Unlike its more moderate sister, the National American
Woman's Suffrage Association, which later dissolved into the League
for Women Voters, the radicals decided that the battle was not yet won.
Ever since 1923, Alice Paul and the NWP have been lobbying for another
amendment providing that "equality of rights under law shall not
be abridged or denied by reason of sex," and they have twice had
it out of committee onto the floor of the U. S. Senate.
1967 and 1968, unaware of and unknown to NOW or the state commissions,
younger women began forming their own movement. Here too, the groundwork
had been laid some years before. The different social action projects
of recent years had attracted many women, who were quickly shunted into
traditional roles and faced with the self-evident contradiction of working
in a "freedom movement but not being very free. Nor did their male
colleagues brook any dissent: They followed the example of Stokeley
Carmichael, who cut off all discussion of the issue at a 1964 SNCC conference
by saying, "The only position for women in SNCC is prone."
In 1967 women in five different cities (Toronto, Detroit, Chicago, Seattle
and Gainesville, Fla.) spontaneously, independently, began to meet together.
Some came from the New Left groups, some from the southern civil rights
movement, and some from the free universities. Unknown even to each
other, they began groping for an understanding of why politically aware,
affluent, well educated, white women should feel so downtrodden.
months they met quietly to analyze their perpetual secondary roles in
the radical movement, assimilate lessons learned in study groups, or
reflect on their treatment in the civil rights movement. They were constantly
ridiculed by the men they worked with and continually told that what
they were doing was "counter-revolutionary" because it would
further splinter an already badly fragmented movement. In many ways
this very ridicule served to feed their growing rage. One immediate
result was that all the groups, independently banned men from their
meetings. In part they borrowed this idea from the then rapidly expanding
Black Power movement, which taught the women the importance of running
their own show. But their many concurrent bitter experiences also made
the ban on men a tactical move, as they learned that female discussions
were much more open and honest when there were no men around.
resistance from the men, the women eventually used the infrastructure
built up by the civil rights and student movements, the underground
press, and the free universities to disseminate women's liberation ideas.
In 1968 the groups discovered each other, and at Thanksgiving that year
the first, and so far, only, national women's liberation convention
attracted over 200 women from around the country and Canada on less
than a months notice. Many of them had not been involved in the New
Left or other radical activities and were perplexed by the overblown
rhetoric used by their more political sisters in the heated debate over
whether the women's movement should be a separate one or kept within
the radical movement. Nevertheless, they returned to their cities turned
on by the idea of women's liberation and since then the movement has
expanded at an exponential pace.
younger women's movement tends to operate as a loose confederation of
sister chapters with at best informal ties. However many cities are
now setting up centers to coordinate activities and reach the larger
public. As there are no national structures and no membership lists,
no one really knows how many women are involved. The best guesses are
around 10,000. The number of chapters is also indeterminable. The basic
organizational form of the movement, these small groups of 10 to 30
women meet regularly to talk, write or plan actions. They are generally
formed on the basis of locality, occupation, marital status, or politics,
and some of the more permanent ones have colorful names which add considerably
to the political alphabet soup.
are: WRAP, Women's Radical Action Project, Chicago; WITCH, everywhere;
Redstockings, New York; UWIL, Union for Women's International Liberation,
Los Angeles; Women's Majority Union, Seattle, and Cell 16, Boston. Many
groups just call themselves Female Liberation, Women's Liberation Front,
or Radical Women. It is by these latter terms that the movement as a
whole will be referred. The phrase "women's liberation movement"
is used for the total new surge of feminism, however, and should not
be used to identify just the younger branch which often uses that term
to refer to itself.
the WLF spans a spectrum from an extreme radical feminism that recognizes
no other social problems than those of women (these women are often
called man-haters, and a few don't object to the term) to women radicals
who disdain the word feminism and feel that women's issues should be
subsumed under other political concerns. Some areas have become particularly
identified with one side or another. Thus, Washington, D.C. and Chicago
are highly political, while New York and many of the southern groups
are strongly feminist.
in the all-embracing concept of "liberation" is a positive
program which gives the WLF an entirely different tone from other student
groups. It also makes the radical women seem a good deal quieter than
other radicals, because most of their current energy is concentrated
asked what kinds of activities WLF engages in, one West Coast organizer
bluntly stated, "We talk to each other about ourselves. That doesn't
sound like much, but it turns out to be dynamite. As we exchange experiences,
we begin to realize that all these discontents we thought were individual,
personal problems have common, social causes. Women have been kept isolated
from each other in their individual homes. We've been taught to see
each other as enemies, as competitors. Now we're changing that. We're
changing our attitude about ourselves, about other women, about society.
The revolution is what is happening in every woman's mind." The
intense, often personal discussions which form the core of current WLF
activity have not resulted in any detailed programmatic outline. But
one thing that has been decided is that sex roles have to go.
date, all societies have divided labor on the basis of sex, as well
as other factors. The sex roles differ with the cultures, but all cultures
carefully shape children from birth to fit accepted concepts of masculine
and feminine behavior and to believe that these concepts have some eternal
validity. In our society, these roles are reflected in our movies, our
fiction, our advertising and our opinions; they stereotype women, and
men, as rigidly as any ethnic minority.
new feminists feel that these roles are degrading, confining and anachronistic.
While they might have been necessary in the primitive society in which
they were developed, they have no place in the complex technology of
the 20th Century. Now it is individual ability that is important in
performing most socioeconomic functions, not muscular strength nor the
possession of a uterus. For the first time in human history, we have,
the potential to liberate all people to be creative self-fulfilling
women's liberation, movement feels that one of the greatest barriers
to this potential for liberation is the way our society automatically
assumes that all people have, or ought to have, particular abilities
or interests determined by their sex and treats them accordingly. While
men are also adversely affected by this stereotyping (and therefore
men cannot be liberated until women are), it is particularly bad for
women because the basic values are male, and the basic structures are
set up to benefit men. One example often given is the fact that if a
man is drafted, his job must be held for him by law, and his scholarship
or place in school usually is. When he returns he is given the honors
of a veteran and other more tangible benefits such as those available
under the G.I. Bill. But if a woman gets pregnant, she is likely to
lose her job or be forced to drop out of school, and often she cannot
return for several years because the major responsibility of caring
for the child is hers. This is the only industrialized nation in the
world that does not provide state child care facilities, and those women
who seek other means of caring for their young children are made to
feel guilty because they are "neglecting" them. These discrepancies
in the treatment of men and women have rarely been pointed out until
the last few years.
of the primary goals of the movement is to break down discriminatory
structures and sexual stereotypes. The new feminists feel that men and
women should share the privileges and responsibilities of work, home
and children. Each person should be free to choose the extent of his
or her participation in both domestic and economic spheres. To do this
requires changes in the social structure and changes in people's ideas
about what women can and should do.
their discussion groups, women are learning a whole new concept of themselves
and how to stand up and fight for what they want. Their purpose is to
change people's heads, and enough heads have been changed so that the
ideas of women's liberation are taken much more seriously by many more
people than they were when the groups were first formed two and a half
years ago. "Even those who felt themselves the most enlightened
laughed at us at first," declared Joreen, a founder of the first
group and one of those who prefers not to use a last name because it
is inherited from her father. "But they aren't laughing any more.
Most people don't understand women's liberation, so they try to ignore
it. But they can't. Its silent, subtle and subversive. It is spreading
everywhere, because it is an idea whose time has come. Discussions may
be the main thing now, but this verbalization of the rage within women
is only the first step. Eventually it will erupt into action and no
one will know quite how it happened."
far, the most frequent eruptions have been the sporadic WITCH actions.
The intent of this WLF offshoot is to use theatrical means to "blow
people's minds." Apart from the hexes, most public actions by the
radical women tend to be symbolic, like the Miss America protests. Because
so much of women's "oppression" involves individual attitudes,
there is a good deal of individual confrontations.
women's liberation is not primarily a student phenomenon, perhaps the
most disruptive action to date has taken place on 'a campus. When the
University of Chicago erupted in January 1969 with massive protests
and a two week sit-in over the firing of radical feminist professor
Marlene Dixon, women's issues were not lost in the shuffle. It was largely
due to the efforts of Mrs. Dixon, now teaching at McGill University,
and the primarily undergraduate WRAP, that women's liberation issues
were publicly aired in Chicago for the first time. Protesting the general
attitude of the university toward women, WRAP demanded more women faculty
and more courses on women, objected to advisers who recommend marriage
instead of a continued academic career and teachers who disparage women
as a group in class or who see them primarily as sex objects.
in the professional schools began to form caucuses in their departments
to analyze their problems as professionals. Women in one caucus even
formed their own separate organization -- the Association of Women Psychologists.
The need for this is perhaps indicated by the closed mind response of
a council member of the American Psychological Association to a request
that accreditation be withheld from the department that cannot show
nondiscrimination. With a shocked expression on his face he declared:
"You can't make that demand. We haven't even conceded that to the
blacks yet." This statement at last September's Washington conference
prompted one surprised woman to comment: "This just shows that
women are even a second class minority group. We can only ask for what
blacks have already got."
of women professionals and graduate students has just begun, and indications
are that it will be one of the most potent forces to hit the academic
world since SDS. Concerted efforts are being made to organize women
horizontally through their professional organizations, and vertically
on their campuses by departments into what has the potential for becoming
a tightly-knit national structure. Although it is not yet clear what
specific institutional changes the caucuses will demand of higher education
-- beyond those already expressed at the ASA, APA and APSA conventions,
their mere existence serves to strengthen the position of women in the
to Sociologist Alice Rossi, long-time radical feminist, "The caucuses
make it easier for women to do things for themselves -- they don't have
to wait until the institutions deign to do something. just organizing
provides a support group which helps women get through graduate school,
confront the usual put-downs by male professors and colleagues, understand
that many of the problems they face are structural, not personal, and
open up new fields of inquiry by pointing out the flaws in sex role
conceptions. The solidarity function of the caucuses is as important
as the institutional changes demanded."
caucuses are interested not only in the condition of women in the university,
but also in what the university teaches about women. Their conclusion
is that it teaches them nothing good. "There is an anti-woman bias
inherent in the social sciences we are being taught," declared
a graduate student in sociology. "Women are rarely studied by the
predominantly male social scientists, and when they are the data are
always interpreted to justify their inferior position." She went
on to point out that new studies are just being done "which show
that women are taught the same kind of self-hate and group-hate that
blacks and other minority groups have suffered from. Children respond
to the expectations others have about them, particularly parents and
teachers, and girls learn early that they are not supposed to amount
to much of anything. We live in a society which rewards high achievement
-- outside the home -- yet a recent University of Michigan study shows
that even college women have learned to fear success as something which
is 'unfeminine.' As students we can't even look to our professors for
examples of how to act as women professionals because all but a handful
of them are male."
conclusions are resulting in a concerted effort to include more courses
on women and more material on women in regular courses. This demand
has often mystified most professors because they don't see anything
particularly lacking or wrong with what is already being taught. Some
of this confusion is cleared up by social psychologist Judith Long Laws,
one of the few researchers on women respected by the new feminists:
"Most of the work on women in the social sciences is derived from
three myths," she said. "They are (1) anatomy is destiny,
in the tradition of Freud; (2) women aren't serious about work, therefore
working women shouldn't be taken seriously, and (3) the individualistic
fallacy, which says 'excellence will out' despite prejudice, and then
points to the lack of great achievements by women."
Laws went on to say that the field of "women studies" is just
beginning to open up as these assumptions are being questioned and that
this development is being accelerated by the growing women's liberation
movement. She predicted that within a few years forward-looking universities
will be hunting for people to make their reputations in this field.
But "in the short run, they will have to hire women to research
and define these problems, because it will take men a long time to get
the sensitizations necessary to do so, and the women aren't going to
wait." Several foundations have already indicated their interest
in financing relevant studies, so "women studies" may soon
rival "black studies" as the newest interdisciplinary area.
graduate students and faculty are becoming concerned with their situation
as professionals without necessarily feeling they are part of the women's
liberation movement, the movement has been spreading to the undergraduates
from off campus. For a long time it was of no interest to undergraduate
women, who, living in the most egalitarian situation they will ever
know, were simply not familiar with the problems. However, now that
women's liberation has become "in" many are discovering that
it does in fact have much to say to them.
Iowa woman student said, "How many times have we been told 'You'd
better get a teaching certificate, just in case' rather than encouraged
to go on to, say, science." At Cornell College, the women complain
they are tired of the "shame of graduating without a 'Mrs.,' or
"the feeling you're going to die if you don't get a date on Saturday
night." A recent Florida graduate talked of "the split personality
you develop. You have to be competent in school and then act like a
helpless little girl on dates to keep the male ego bolstered."
the women's movement did not start on the college campus, higher education
has a good deal to do with its cause. The number of women, and men,
going to college has risen steadily until today, more than half of all
college age youth are in college. There is always a direct correlation
between revolt and education. In the case of women, it is proving impossible
to "keep them barefoot and pregnant" when they have B.As and
Ph.Ds. Like their male counterparts women want to use what they have
learned, and very little of their higher education has anything to do
with housekeeping and childcare. It is no more surprising that college-educated
women are in the forefront of the women's liberation movement than it
is that a higher percentage of women with degrees work full time than
do those of lesser education.
campus is also providing a testing area for new interpersonal relationships
which are having a strong effect on the traditional family structure.
Women no longer go from the house of their father to that of their husband.
They go to college first. There the experience of college roommates
provides a model of living with someone else in an egalitarian relationship
which is transferred by both men and women into marriage. The developing
practice of living with someone of the opposite sex as a test of compatibility
before marriage is still another transitional stage. This new "gradualism"
of family formation, which incorporates at least some egalitarian experiences,
is providing the time necessary to work out new living arrangements
which was not possible under the rigid, traditional system.
campus is not a major source of women's discontent, but it may turn
out to be a major focal point of their anger. It manages at one and
the same time to incorporate an egalitarian philosophy with an authoritarian
structure. While women students are, theoretically at least, told they
are the intellectual equals of men, they have only to look around them
to see the lack of women among their teachers and their disproportionate
the young female activists of today, the university is a ready made
example of hypocrisy they find so deplorable. If higher education doesn't
listen to some of its own advice and change some of its own policies
to further equalize the position of women in its own departments, it
may find that it has educated its women students to make the changes