Module 4

Before this module, I knew that there were many different types of feminists, who vary in their arguments as to the sources of sexism and oppression and how they should be addressed, but I had not really thought about organizing them into separate categories, nor did I realize that they could vary so widely in scope. But this is an important issue for feminism, because of the popular conceptions people have of what is 'feminist' and how those conceptions might affect their decisions and attitudes regarding feminism. Also, if people - in particular those who identify as feminists themselves - cannot agree on what constitutes feminism, it might have poor implications for the movement as a whole. But inability to come to a consensus on specifics is not necessarily a bad thing, because after all, isn't feminism supposed to be a valuation and celebration of diversity?

Moreover, although the individual goals of each brand of feminism do vary, most of the differences stem from their assessment of what is causing sexism and oppression in society, and how to remedy the situation. I feel fairly confident in saying that a Marxist feminist would probably be happier in a 'Radical Feminist' world than in one run by capitalism and/or patriarchy. In other words, these schools of thought likely have more basic goals in common than they have differences, and might agree on more than one would assume.

That being said, each variety of feminism seems to have its own strengths and weaknesses. Liberal feminism seems to be the most reasonable or acceptable brand of feminism, as it does not call for drastic revolution, instead advocating change within the existing system. This is a good approach to begin with, but IMHO society needs to make more deep-seated changes in its basic attitudes, as well as in the construction and organization of institutions. In this way, I suppose I would be more of a 'Socialist' feminist.

I found it very intriguing that Radical Feminism advocates maintaining the gender binary system rather than adopting Fausto-Sterling's argument for a five-or-more-sex system. I understand how this position fits with their assertion that the differences between the two sexes are used to maintain existing power structures, but it would seem to me that the two points of view are entirely reconcilable - if, as they assert, the biological differences between men and women are used to oppress women, the acknowledgment of additional sex categories would entail a restructuring of these systems of power, ideally resulting in a more egalitarian social organization (which is what radical feminists call for - a "radical alteration of existing systems," or a "whole new pie!").