On bell hooks
" We resist the hegemonic dominance of feminist thought by insisting that it is a theory in the making, that we must necessarily criticize, question, re-examine, and explore new possibilities." — bell hooks
Second wave feminist discourse — dominated by white feminist discourse — drew criticism from non-white feminists, such as Audre Lorde, as well as by social activist Gloria Jean Watkins — better known by her pen name, bell hooks, and Chicana feminists (of Mexican descent) in United States, Gloria Anzadúa.
Apart from having the same first name, bell hooks and Anzaldúa's thoughts both criticize the second wave of feminism which is considered to ignore issues of race, class and sexism. But Anzaldúa added aspects of colonialism to her thinking.
If Anzaldúa expresses her thoughts in the form of literary writing and speaks about the experiences of women of color in the United States - especially Chicana and Latina (of Latin American descent), Hooks expresses her thoughts directly, in detail and systematically about black women in the United States.
She highlighted the importance of voicing black women who she said experienced three aspects of oppression (triple oppression), namely racism, sexism and social class structure.
hooks included class struggle in her thinking and criticism of the feminist movement, which keeps her relevant to this day, almost 40 years after her book we are discussing today, Feminist Theory from Margins to Center, was published.
In the book, published in 1984, Bell Hooks emphasized the importance of rejecting the hegemonic dominance of feminist thought by insisting that feminist thought is a theory in progress, which must be criticized, questioned, re-examined and explored for new possibilities by women.
One of hooks' criticisms of hegemony in feminist discourse is related to the definition of women's liberation , which dominates feminist discourse, even today.
Women's liberation is interpreted as equalizing women with men. However, the class structure of social life in the US which is dominated by white supremacy makes hooks question "which men want to be equal to women?" and “do every woman share the same vision of equality?”
Just like Audre Lorde, bell hooks' thinking manifested itself in what we now know as intersectionality — the study of the relationships between all systems or forms of oppression, domination or discrimination — and they did so long before intersectionality became a hallmark of contemporary feminism.
Criticism of second wave feminism
The book Feminist Theory from Margins to Center is bell hooks' critisism against the feminist movement in the United States in the 1960s, one of which was pioneered by white feminist Betty Friedan, through her book, The Feminine Mystique.
The phrase "nameless problem" that Friedan expressed in her manifesto, only refers to the suffering of a group of highly educated, upper middle class women and white housewives who are bored with free time, with the house, with children, with buying things, which wanting something more from life — a career.
What Friedan missed, he did not discuss who would be asked to take care of the household and their children, if they were given equal access to men in a professional context. She ignored the existence of non-white women and poor white women in his manifesto.
Friedan likened the suffering experienced by white women to that experienced by American women in general. In doing so, she diverted attention from her class, racist and sexist attitudes towards the average American woman.
The spirit of hooks' thinking is that the discourse about the feminist movement, which should be inclusive of many aspects of oppression, becomes selective. For example, when the bourgeois feminist movement only highlighted sexism, it did not open up a discourse about sexism in terms of race and class.
The neglect of second wave feminists to discuss (and criticize) the relationship between race and class was due to white supremacy in shaping racial politics in the US at that time. Therefore, class struggle, for Hooks, is closely tied to the struggle to end racism.
Critique of Knowledge Production in Feminism
Unfortunately, white women—who do most of the creating and articulating of feminist theory—have little or no understanding of white supremacy as racial politics. They also lack an understanding of the psychological impact of social class structures and of their political status in a racist, sexist and capitalist country.
They want social equality with men in their class, they want the same wages as men for the same work, they want an alternative lifestyle. But according to hooks, many of these visions were easily co-opted by the ruling capitalist patriarchy.
It is no coincidence that feminist struggles were so easily co-opted to serve the interests of conservative and liberal feminists, because feminism in the United States at that time had become a bourgeois ideology.
Meanwhile, the experiences of lower middle class women of color will only be heard/considered valid when they are decided by bourgeois feminists.
The hijacking of feminism by bourgeois women to advance their class interests, hooks argues, has been, to a very severe extent, justified by feminist theory as understood thus far (e.g., the ideology of “common oppression”).
Therefore, every struggle to reject the co-optation of capitalist patriarchy must begin by introducing a different feminist perspective - new theories that are not based on the ideology of liberal individualism.
The exclusivism of women that dominates feminist discourse, according to hooks, prevents the birth of new, different theories. Instead, feminists with different foundations of thought and strategies are excluded, if not silenced.
“If we dare to criticize the movement or take initiatives to reshape feminist ideas and introduce new ideas, our voices are suppressed, ignored, silenced. We are only heard when our statements echo the sentiments of the dominant discourse.”
However, there are quite a few non-white women who feel supported in the structure of the current feminist movement, instead of encouraging diversity of voices, critical dialogue and controversy, they, like some white women, seek to stifle dissent.
As activists and writers whose work is widely known, they act as if they are the ones best able to judge whether other women's voices should be heard.
Three Aspects of Oppression: Race, Class and Sexism
hooks highlights that black women bear the brunt of oppression in three aspects: sexist, racist and class. On the other hand, in contrast to white women and black men, the role of black women is not — or has not yet been — associated as “exploiters or oppressors”, those who do not have what is called an institutionalized other that can be exploited or exploited. oppressed.
White women and black men can be in two positions at once: they can be both the oppressor and the oppressed.
For example, black men may be victims of racism, but sexism can enable them to act as exploiters and oppressors of women.
While white women can be victims of sexism, racism allows them to act as oppressors of black people.
Meanwhile, black women, without institutionalized others — who can be discriminated against, exploited or oppressed — often have life experiences that directly challenge prevailing classist, sexist, racist social structures and their accompanying ideologies.
These life experiences shaped black women's consciousness in such a way that their views differed from those with a degree of privilege — bourgeois feminists.
Criticism of Women's Liberation
The main problem of feminist discourse in the second wave of feminism and its aftermath is the inability of feminists to agree on what feminism is. Each of them, defines feminism through their own point of view.
For Hooks, this implies the political naivety of women in a male-dominated culture, and actually eliminates solidarity between women.
The definition of feminism that dominates feminist discourse is women's lib — an abbreviation for women 's liberation — which aims to make women equal to men. But according to Hooks, the definition of feminism is not just that.
The class structure in US social life, which is dominated by white supremacy, makes Hooks question: “Which men want to be equal to women? Does every woman have the same vision of what equality means?”
According to hooks, women's liberation ignored race and class which determined the extent to which individuals were discriminated against, exploited or oppressed.
Meanwhile lower class women — especially those who are not white — will not be able to define women's liberation as equality with men, because they are constantly reminded that all women do not have the same social status.
At the same time, they realized that men in their social group were just like them — exploited and oppressed — lacking social, political and economic power.
Therefore, these women realize that equality with men is not liberation. Meanwhile, the uncertain definition of feminism makes some women hesitant to advocate for feminism.
For example, women from exploited and oppressed ethnicities reject this term because they do not want to be seen as supporting racist movements, because feminism is often equated with the struggle for white women's rights.
Meanwhile, some other women consider feminism to be a synonym for lesbianism - homophobia makes them refuse to be associated with those who are pro-lesbian.
Meanwhile, some of them avoid feminism because they are worried about being seen as affiliated with political movements - especially those that are considered radical.
'I Advocate Feminism'
So, what is a decent definition of feminism? The slogan " the personal is political" — first echoed in the second wave of the feminist movement to emphasize that women's everyday realities are shaped by politics — became a means to encourage thinking that experiences of discrimination, exploitation or oppression are automatically connected to an understanding of ideology and institutions. which shapes women's social status.
A broader feminist perspective, according to Hooks, will only emerge when we examine aspects of "the personal is political", the politics of society as a whole, as well as global politics.
When feminism is defined in a way that draws attention to women's diverse social and political realities, and brings to the fore the experiences of all women — especially those whose social conditions have been least written about, studied or changed by political movements, when feminists no longer focus on the simplistic "men are the enemy" attitude, we are forced to examine systems of domination and our role in their perpetuation.
Furthermore, for hooks: “Feminism is the struggle to end sexist oppression. The aim is not to benefit certain groups of women, women of a certain race or class.”
Feminism, according to him, does not prioritize women over men and most importantly, feminism is not a ready-made lifestyle or identity.
Shifting the expression from “I am a feminist” to “I advocate feminism” can serve as a useful strategy for removing the focus on identity and lifestyle.
The expression “I advocate feminism” can serve as a way for women who care about feminism and other political movements to express their support while avoiding linguistic structures that privilege one particular group.
“I advocate feminism” also encourages broader exploration in feminist theory.
