There is no debating that feminism was necessary back then. Socially and legally women were at a severe disadvantage and something had to be done. Of course it’s a never-ending process as injustice will exist as long as humans exist, but the levels are very different nowadays in western countries compared to developing and exploited countries (no they aren’t “developing” they are being held back, but that’s a different topic).
At the same time, there was a lot of movement for social awareness and things like free love, queer acceptance, bodily autonomy, anti-racism movements, and a lot more were happening world-wide. France had massive left-wing protests and so did Germany. Many know of the movements in the US Black Panthers, MLK, Woodstock, Free Love, Flower Power, and turmoil that took place after Kennedy was shot in 1963. In Congo Patrice Lumumba was assassinated for his role in the independence of the country (leading to the Congo Crisis), Nigeria had its very own Nnamdi Azikiwe promoting an African Union (which came to be for a short while), and a lot more was happening.
One would have thought the world was going to radically change forever in the 60s, but then, very quickly, the biggest topic became feminism. It was on TVs, talkshows, streets, and much more. While other civil rights movements were being brutally stamped out, somehow feminism got bigger and had major support in the US by the Johnson administration (after Kennedy was shot) and (suprisingly) even the following president: Nixon (although he was still a fucking sleeze).
And thought by the 70s the social movements in the US were declining and still strong in Europe, feminism gained force.
Things have now changed significantly as feminism is now “evil” to right-wingers and religious types (with a return to rhetoric from their antagonists in the 60s) and still serves as a major distraction, but mostly because it is seen as a danger to the elite themselves. For a while, it served its purpose of distracting and also bringing more people into the workforce while successfully forcing the pay of single bread-winner to be insufficient and requiring two. The economical output doubled while remuneration halved (with inflation considered).
The bigger distraction now is “immigration”. The elite and uberrich have now successfully shifted the focus away from themselves. Again.
That’s one of those new social engineering tricks they came up with. Co-opt all the subcultures and subvert them into obedient puppets and you won’t have to fight them later.
I guess the peace movements and protests made the aristocrats feel insecure.
And now the height of rebellion is purple hair and transgenderism.
Hey, one of the more nuanced posts here with links and something I can relate to! 🫠
I’m fairly sure there is this cultural difference here. I believe we still have some of those old-school movements here in Europe. Feminism, fight for environmental issues and the planet, anti-war people… I think it also fundamentally changed how they raised the next generation(s). To this date people (on average) don’t beat their kids anymore and they mostly try to provide them with lots of opportunities. We, as people, were fairly emancipated for a while. And there is a broad bandwith of stuff that came from the protests of 1968. It’s been a long time, though. Things went through different phases or waves… I don’t think there was that much of a clash between generations since. And maybe that changed things.
As far as I’m aware, the protests of 68 and the following movements were bottom-up. By the people. But we had a lot of neoliberalism after that, starting with Reagan, Thatcher… And the world changed yet again. Pretty substantially and it had its toll on society and economy.
And seems to me we’re deep in neoliberalism these days. Especially the USA. (But most western countries are headed the same direction.) And with that it’s top-down. People with money guide the country, and society… Rip off the people… And all the identity politics and distraction tactics work really well on the internet. People are confined in filter bubbles and radicalize. They’re confused about their identity and there isn’t even “truth” out there because that got displaced by an abundance of misinformation. They get some fabricated outcry of the day, every day. And that provides them with some distraction. Something to get agitated about and feel hate towards someone or something. And that’s good enough. Also fits the social media dynamics very well, and unfortunately that’s where we all get our truth from, these days. A substancial amount of people doesn’t even care anymore about what’s happening beyond their front door. They just make up stuff on the internet. And they pick fascism as their identity.
I don’t think this is connected to feminism. It’s a great showcase of the Strauss–Howe generational theory and how bad social media and the corporate run internet is. Hating on women or blaming feminism is just one aspect of something else in my opinion.
No, first wave feminism was originally for the women who were wealthy and powerful.
People really underestimate how racist everyone used to be. The suffragettes were all for equal rights for all, but seethed when black men got voting rights before them, due to the implication that while middle class women were lesser than black people, who were viewed as subhuman.
Rebecca Felton was an major figure in the American suffragette movement, and was a proud slave owner that advocated for lynching instrumental in the establishing the Jim Crow South.
Hence the need for the subsequent waves of feminism.
Rebecca Latimer Felton - Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Latimer_Felton
The Suffragettes Were Not Allies to Black Women, They Were Racist - https://www.edpost.com/stories/the-suffragettes-were-not-allies-to-black-women-they-were-racist
I’m not sure why you’re saying “no”. It doesn’t seem like you’re contradicting at all. The 60s were second wave feminism.
Eh, perhaps semantics due to not enough context in the original post. “Co-opted” suggests that the original goals of feminism were changed to favour those in power, when in reality it was more of an “always has been” situation.
I see what you mean after looking up co-opted. I was looking for a term that indicates joined by to influence and amplify for your own goals. Yes, feminism has brought about good and real tangible change, but it was also used as a major distraction (my original claim).
As you said, the first wave was indeed racist and many parts of feminism are still targeted at the white, middle class woman. The outrage for the sexual assault on a white woman is magnitudes larger than that of a colored woman. Colored women are also taken less seriously by medical professionals as well as the judiciary. There was a documentary in Germany about how non-white women are treated by doctors and it was disgusting to see how they were brushed off as “it’s in their culture to exaggerate”. The same happens in France to Muslim women.
Identity politics is a diversion for class politics. Can’t have class solidarity if your political position is a specialized configuration of all your various identity characteristics.
Amen. Couldn’t have put it better.
You can care about more than one thing at a time.
Of course, but the point is how much energy is put into what. We should be putting most of our energy into resolving the wealth gap, but instead we’re deeply divided and easily get distracted. Celebrities, feminism, blm, “immigrants”, movies, TV series, games, … . In doses they are fine, but the minority cares about solving wealth distribution and don’t vote on solutions.
Sounds like you don’t think you can care about more than one thing at a time.
More like your reading comprehension is 0.
A different opinion doesn’t mean there is a misunderstanding
it all changed when reagen had his southern strategy, culture/religion based on mysgoyny.
