Personal relationships, sexuality and power

Feminists were politicizing gender relations as power relations. This meant challenging their supposed naturalness (Pateman, 1989: 131; Mouffe, 1992:372).Although this approach was intended to be an analy­sis of broad patterns of power which tended to favour men as a group over women as a group, feminists were often interpreted as critical of men as individuals. In other words they were accused of being man — haters (see, for example, Spender, 1985: 1—6).There were feminists who did believe individual men had responsibility for sexism, while others

thought it more important to focus on patriarchy as a system in order to get away from the idea that women’s liberation could be achieved if only individual men would change. While some feminist groups had included men in their early days, women had found that men tended to interrupt women and dominate the groups. Therefore most feminists argued that it was important for women to work together without men in order to develop their confidence and to ensure that women’s needs were met. Men supportive of feminism were encouraged by some feminists to form their own groups to explore their complicity with patriarchal power and to consider how they might contribute to a more equal society (Holmes, 2000a). I return to masculinity politics later in the chapter, but it was an offshoot of feminism and there are other aspects of feminist politics which need to be covered first. These relate to other ways in which ‘the personal’ was politicized.

The politicization of sex, sexuality and sexual relationships included feminist debates about heterosexism. Heterosexism was a concept developed by lesbian feminists to describe the ways in which heterosexuality was taken to be ‘natural’, while homosexuals were the target of discrimination and, in some nations, of criminal punishment. Some lesbians were, it seemed, arguing that their sexuality was a fundamental part of who they were, not just a preference for a certain kind of sexual partner. This idea was present within consciousness raising and articulated within literature of the time (Klaich, 1974). Also lesbian experiences within a straight-dominated feminist movement played a part in making them aware of heterosexism. Heterosexual feminists seldom, if ever, saw their sexual orientation as a crucial part of their identity (see Kitzinger and Wilkinson, 1993). There was also much controversy around the position of some lesbian feminists who insisted that being a lesbian was a political statement. Many other feminists interpreted this as implying that only lesbians were ‘proper’ feminists. The notion of separatism was much misunderstood, often wrongly being equated with radicalism (Beasley, 1999: 53—8). Some lesbian feminists did argue that women should focus their sexual attention on women, and live their lives as separately from men as possible. This argument developed out of key feminist ideas about patriarchy as relying on demeaning sexualizations of women (see for example, Firestone, 1972; Greer, 1970). Most lesbians saw sexuality as far more complex than the sexual act, involving psychological, emotional and political factors as well as physical. For many this meant that separatism was not a viable political strategy, as they could not escape all these issues by avoiding men. However, there tended to be agreement among lesbian feminists, and many heterosexual ones, that the majority of a woman’s energy should be channelled towards other women.

Seeing sexuality as a political choice marked an interesting shift towards seeing sexuality as socially constructed. This challenged common-sense ideas that sexuality was a natural attribute that could not be changed by

will (see, for example, Jackson and Scott, 1996: 6—12, 17—20). However, there was also sometimes an assumption that women’s true sexuality was repressed by patriarchy and lesbianism was that truth. The implication was that women could liberate themselves by ‘choosing’ to ‘return’ to this ‘true’ sexuality. Such an implication underestimated the complex opera­tion of power in shaping bodies and sexuality. Although it was very important to politicize heterosexual relationships by revealing how power relations operated within them, there were problems with insist­ing that sexuality was fundamental to women’s ‘real’ identity. Foucault has pointed out the problems of discourses which insist that the truth about ourselves lies in our sexuality. Western science has promoted such discourses since the nineteenth century and they have been used to control people who do not fit within scientifically sanctioned definitions of sexual normality, especially homosexual men and women (1990/ 1976: 69—70). However, it is important to note that not all lesbians were separatists (or even feminists) and that in some respects the insistence that sexuality was a political choice did suggest that it was not fixed by ‘nature’.Also, lesbian feminists were not alone in encountering problems around issues of identity.

Updated: 07.11.2015 — 14:42