FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Why Not a Women’s Party? 

Recent news about sexual harassment and violence have lit up every bulb on the political light string.  The most discussed include mainstream Democrats, like Harvey Weinstein; aggressive conservatives, like Roger Ailes; white-nationalists, like Donald Trump; and to left-liberals, like Al Franken and John Conyers.

It seems increasingly clear that gender and sexuality are separate from the left-right spectrum we usually use to understand politics.  Equally clear is that the the two major parties do not fully represent those of us who are on the down sides of gender and sexual hierarchies.

Perhaps it’s time for something new.  Why not a Women’s Party – or, hewing more closely to contemporary usage, a Gender Equality Party?

The idea sounds radical.  But in addition to the fact that Britain has had a Women’s Equality Party since 2015, the notion also has a distinguished pedigree in the United States.

After women’s suffrage, a wing of the movement birthed a National Woman’s Party.  This imperfect organization, almost all wealthy and white, tried to create an autonomous women’s political bloc.  The Party’s defining initiative, starting in 1923, was for an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the Constitution.  Parallel to the National Woman’s Party was the League of Women Voters, which operated within the major parties but was similarly dedicated to using women’s votes to change policy.

By the 1930s, activist women had mostly been incorporated into the traditional political parties.  Thousands became Democrats, thanks in part to recruitment efforts headed by female pol Molly Dewson.  Democrats made good on part, although not all, of the organized women’s agenda.

In the 1960s and 1970s, disappointment with male-dominated politics resurfaced.  White women complained that male activists wanted them to “put out” and make coffee for the cause.  Some African American women were fully accepted by black men fighting for civil rights.  But a variety of women of color feminisms emerged from the impatience women felt with posturing male warriors for Black Power, Brown Power, and Red Power.

Feminist anger from the period still crackles: Robin Morgan insisted: “No more, brothers.  No more well-meaning ignorance, no more co-optation, no more assuming that this thing we’re all fighting for is the same.”  Michele Wallace lamented: “Now that freedom, equality, rights, wealth, power were assumed to be on their way” for black men, many believed African American women “had to understand that manhood was essential to revolution – unquestioned, unchallenged, unfettered manhood.  Could you imagine Che Guevara with breasts?  Mao with a vagina?  She was just going to have to get out of the way.”

Feminists created their own organizations.  The National Organization for Women and National Women’s Political Caucus were joined by efforts for liberation beyond law courts and ballot boxes.  These efforts were nourished by organizations of politicized LGBTQ people and non-sexist men.

There were gender-based mobilizations behind Shirley Chisolm’s campaign for President and Hillary Clinton’s near miss.  Neither was independent of the Democrats.  Now, after Clinton’s loss and the nonpartisan opening up about sexual harassment, we can appreciate anew the value of building autonomous organizations for gender subordinates and gender rebels.

A Gender Equality Party faces challenges.  Most profound are the twin questions: what is its agenda?  And who are its members or subjects?  Feminists know that women’s political needs are inseparable from their race, class, geography, (dis)abilities, and nationality – and therefore not uniform or obvious.  Feminism today adds extra complexity by embracing women born as men and people who don’t identify with any familiar gender categories.

Challenges aside – why not give it a try?  A Gender Equality Party could serve as a spur to new thinking, reminding Democrats and Republicans that feminists, LGBT people, trans people, and their allies, are part of every winning coalition.  It might stop Democrats from throwing reproductive rights, and sexual and gender expression, off the boat and into sharky waters.

Theorist Juliet Mitchell claimed five decades ago that women’s was the “longest revolution” in world history.  Judging by the news from Hollywood and Washington, the revolution is still far from won.  Perhaps a Gender Equality Party can get us a little closer to where we ultimately want to be.

* This piece will air, in abbreviated form, as a commentary on Vermont Public Radio on Tuesday, December 12, 2017.  

More articles by:

Felicia Kornbluh is an Associate Professor of History and of Gender, Sexuality, and Women’s Studies at the University of Vermont.  She served for six years as Director of the GSWS Program at UVM and has also served as a Commissioner on the Vermont Commission on Women and as President of United Academics, the UVM faculty union (AFT/AAUP).  Kornbluh holds a B.A. from Harvard-Radcliffe and a Ph.D. from Princeton University.  Her books include The Battle for Welfare Rights (2007) and, with Gwendolyn Mink, Ensuring Poverty: Welfare Reform in Feminist Perspective (forthcoming, 2018).  Her articles have appeared in a wide array of academic and non-academic journals.   

November 13, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
The Midterm Results are Challenging Racism in America in Unexpected Ways
Victor Grossman
Germany on a Political Seesaw
Cillian Doyle
Fictitious Assets, Hidden Losses and the Collapse of MDM Bank
Lauren Smith
Amnesia and Impunity Reign: Wall Street Celebrates Halliburton’s 100th Anniversary
Joe Emersberger
Moreno’s Neoliberal Restoration Proceeds in Ecuador
Carol Dansereau
Climate and the Infernal Blue Wave: Straight Talk About Saving Humanity
Dave Lindorff
Hey Right Wingers! Signatures Change over Time
Dan Corjescu
Poetry and Barbarism: Adorno’s Challenge
Patrick Bond
Mining Conflicts Multiply, as Critics of ‘Extractivism’ Gather in Johannesburg
Ed Meek
The Kavanaugh Hearings: Text and Subtext
Binoy Kampmark
Concepts of Nonsense: Australian Soft Power
November 12, 2018
Kerron Ó Luain
Poppy Fascism and the English Education System
Conn Hallinan
Nuclear Treaties: Unwrapping Armageddon
Robert Hunziker
Tropical Trump Declares War on Amazonia
John W. Whitehead
Badge of Shame: the Government’s War on Military Veterans
Will Griffin
Military “Service” Serves the Ruling Class
John Eskow
Harold Pinter’s America: Hard Truths and Easy Targets
Rob Okun
Activists Looking Beyond Midterm Elections
Binoy Kampmark
Mid-Term Divisions: The Trump Take
Dean Baker
Short-Term Health Insurance Plans Destroy Insurance Pools
George Wuerthner
Saving the Buffalohorn/Porcupine: the Lamar Valley of the Gallatin Range
Patrick Howlett-Martin
A Note on the Paris Peace Forum
Joseph G. Ramsey
Does America Have a “Gun Problem”…Or a White Supremacy Capitalist Empire Problem?
Weekend Edition
November 09, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Louis Proyect
Why Democrats Are So Okay With Losing
Andrew Levine
What Now?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Chuck and Nancy’s House of Cards
Brian Cloughley
The Malevolent Hypocrisy of Selective Sanctions
Marc Levy
Welcome, Class of ‘70
David Archuleta Jr.
Facebook Allows Governments to Decide What to Censor
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Zika Scare: a Political and Commercial Maneuver of the Chemical Poisons Industry
Nick Pemberton
When It Comes To Stone Throwing, Democrats Live In A Glass House
Ron Jacobs
Impeach!
Lawrence Davidson
A Tale of Two Massacres
José Tirado
A World Off Balance
Jonah Raskin
Something Has Gone Very Wrong: An Interview With Ecuadoran Author Gabriela Alemán
J.P. Linstroth
Myths on Race and Invasion of the ‘Caravan Horde’
Dean Baker
Good News, the Stock Market is Plunging: Thoughts on Wealth
David Rosen
It’s Time to Decriminalize Sex Work
Dan Glazebrook
US Calls for a Yemen Ceasefire is a Cynical Piece of Political Theatre
Jérôme Duval
Forced Marriage Between Argentina and the IMF Turns into a Fiasco
Jill Richardson
Getting Past Gingrich
Dave Lindorff
Not a Blue Wave, But Perhaps a Foreshock
Martha Rosenberg
Dangerous, Expensive Drugs Aggressively Pushed? You Have These Medical Conflicts of Interest to Thank
Will Solomon
Not Much of a Wave
Nicolas J S Davies
Why Yemeni War Deaths are Five Times Higher Than You’ve Been Led to Believe
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail