REPORT: FINAL PLENARY SESSION

This is a summary of the plenary session held on the afternoon of 4 June, the final day of the International Feminist/Socialist Workshop in Amsterdam. It includes brief summaries of the workshop reports which are presented in full following this report.

1. Women in the left groups

2. On organising women

In our first session we went round the group to find out how everybody works. This was not satisfactory so we decided on more structure and a chairperson.

We saw two ways of organising:

1. Outside the movement, which we talked about in the first session.
2. The women's movement itself: local, national and international. The traditional left ignores our questions, so we start organising autonomously. We want to deepen our insight' in society to find out together how to change to improve the position of women in it.

A synthesis between feminism and socialism is necessary to stimulate the women's struggle, but that demands more analysis.

Two starting-points are important:

1. The personal is political
2. All women work - also housewives - and this has to be integrated in the overall theory.

As individuals we have to apply, in any case, point 1, and see our problems as political problems, whether they are our ways of living, our relationships etc. Concerning

b) instrumental exhortations to party activists. This is really found in Lenin's work, "Her backwardness and her lack of understanding for her husband's revolutionary ideals acts as a drag on his fighting spirit, on his determination to fight."

c) an assumption that the liberation of women is centred on their approximation to the male state as industrial producers, "The first premise for the emancipation of women is the re-introduction of the entire female sex into public industry" (Engels). "The Soviet Government is doing everything in its power to enable women to carry on independent proletarian work" (Lenin). This prescription has only come near to realization in the Soviet Union and the German Democratic Republic.

There are other isolated sentences in Marx and Engels' writings which have all been used in the struggle to provide a socialist theory doing justice to the manifest and manifold oppression of women, but that is all. So for Mary Alice Waters to say that,"marxism for the first time provided a scientific materialist foundation not only for socialism but for women's liberation", a view also shared by Charnie Guettel, doesn't seem right the international organisation, we don't want an international network, but we want to exchange information and experiences.

For this purpose we can use Isis.

Apart from that we want to coordinate our actions internationally and build solidarity.

Next time we very much want more structure in the workshop. We believe that the best way to work towards new theory, is to start with practical events and known facts.

3. Sexuality

Conclusion: women's sexuality is grossly used. There was a controversy as to whether a paper written in the USA some time previously should allowed to be included under "workshop reports". The participants in this workshop on prostitution thought it should. Unresolved issue; its correct place could be with "papers for the conference".

Can prostitution get support from the women's movement? General commotion, it turned out that the group split up. The other part talked about "homosexuality and lesbianism"; they will send in a report.

4. Where we stand - sex and class

This group started on Saturday on "where we stand" and went on next time in "sex and class" because they wanted to talk on with the same women. The discussion linked up with the paper "workers control and reproduction". It takes the line that there are two class-distinctions depending on: economic or sexual standards.

5. Relationship feminism - socialism

There are two ways to build new society:

1. By seeing feminism as part of the revolution of a left-wing party
2. By perceiving feminism in itself as revolutionary The viewpoint of our Italian sisters is: capitalism is a historical phase of patriarchism!

International Announcements.

Clitoridectomy

A Dutch group is active on this issue. They gathered information on this crime against women. They published a dutch brochure: "Clitoredectomy and the right to our own body".

They participated in international action against it, with a petition to the WHO, on a human rights basis.

Now they hesitate about the form our solidarity must take, without becoming "maternalistic" towards our sisters elsewhere in the world! They want to fight for it themselves, and don't want the issue to become a topic on a neo-coloniai platform of men!

Anyhow, let's spread information about it. The German magazine "Emma" offered to do an article.

Abortion in Italy

Italian sisters requested support in regard to the Abortion Bill coming up for approval on 9 June. They feel women will be duped by the bill into thinking that they can now have abortions easily. They feel the bill is a token and are sceptical of it benefitting women.

Italian sisters want telgrams of support showing the Italian government that the women's movement in Italy is not alone in its stand.

(Note: this bill was defeated in the Italian Senate by two votes).

The Italian sisters also appealed solidarity for five women in Ferrara. These women denounced in a pamphlet the criminal methods of childbirth used in thelocal hospital. They are to stand trial for defamation.They need support to show it is no local problem.

At this point a French sister intervened to ask: Why is all this being said, is there press present? The answer was no. A resume of the workshop report will be presented to Isis by the organising collective to be printed in the ISIS bulletin along with the Conference papers. Apart from that many women from women's magazines were here and would probably report on it. The French sister raised the issue of women (journalists) being paid for reproducing, in articles, work done collectively at the workshop.

Forced sterilisation in Bolivia.

A woman from Bolivia reported that in her country under the fascist regime the social organisation of progressive women was not possible. "Although we therefore have different problems and our solidarity is with the total anti-fascist movement, we still also want to be in.solidarity with you".

She asked us to send a telegramme to the Bolivian government with the following content:

"We protest against the forced sterilisation of 11,000 bolivian women and against the Western Germany subsidized immigration of 150,000 whites from S.Africa, Rhodesia and Namibia".

Women in Ireland

There is to be a feminist/socialist conference in London on june 26, on this issue. Papers can be had from: 50 Upper Tollington Park, London N4 (please send donation to cover postage).

Abortion situation in Portugal

Since the revolution, three years ago, we have been demanding abortion. Against us js the Catholic Church. There are 180,000 illegal abortions every year. 2,000 women die as a result.

Currently we are mobilising around a court case of a woman who was denounced by her ex-lover to the police (he was angry that she left him). This man, a prominent left-winger, had signed a petition demanding legalisation.

Noreen Winchester

A Belfast woman, who got seven years jail for murdering her father, who raped her repeatedly.

Her defense committee is based in Holland but wants other countries to help, by sending petitions.

They should be sent to the Home Office and demand Noreen's release (See International Solidarity section of ISIS bulletin).

The Scarlet Women

A newsletter of the soc.fem. current in England, asked the Portuguese and other sisters, to send articles for the newsletter, so issues and information reach more women.

Language problems

A French sister objected to the fact that the international workshop had been held entirely in English.

The Dutch planning group explained that this was mostly a problem of money, simultaneous translation being extremely expensive and only applicable in plenary sessions.

What's more, in workshops where there was a predominance of French speakers, French had been used.

The French sister (apparently not realising how many more languages one has in Europe) restated her disapproval, and felt it was a "violence to keep women silent".

Result of the Questionaire

The need for a follow up was felt by everybody; someone proposed England, no decision was taken.

A vote of thanks was proposed to the organisers, the limited number of participants proved a success and gave possibilities for discussion and contact.

A German sister missed intensive theoretical discussions: we should have had open debating sessions, to hear different opinions.

An Italian sister was glad we did not "kill" sisters we disagreed with. It was a fantastic experience for each of us!

carolien & sandra

 
WORKSHOP REPORTS

Workshops on the First Theme - Where we Stand

These are the general points, as they were summarised for the plenary session.

Question: What is Socialism-Feminism?

Is there a basis for Soc-Fem? There are differences between Soc-Fem and radical feminists as well as differences within the Soc-Fem groupings themselves. How far is it possible to work together given those differences.

What is Soc-Fem practice? There is no definite programme in any country - do we want one, is it possible to create one, create demands etc.?

The question of theory - it is developing and has generally been based on Marxist ideas and "fitted in" to the left - now we are trying to work it out autonomously. How do we organise - is there a Soc-Fem structure? Can we use things from the left and the Women's Movement?

Relations to whole left.

In all countries a common experience - women have been leaving the left, all for much the same reasons (unhappy experiences in left groups, refusal of left groups to recognise feminist socialism etc).

It was interesting in reflecting on the internal problems in any country that different workshops were given a totally different picture of theory and practice in the countries by different women.

There were some similarities in countries like Portugal and Spain where there is a common "outside" enemy and other countries with a social democratic background e.g. Britain and the Federal Republic of Germany.

Issues in common.

Sexism - racism - and imperialism, and the right-wing "backlash" in some countries which is part of the whole crisis. Rise of fascism (Particularly in the Federal Republic of Germany).

Sexuality is a crucial factor in many discussions and has to be understood and raised constantly - both in countries where it had to be fought although it is less visible (Denmark etc.) and in Third World countries, Spain, Portugal etc.

Are there issues around which we can all work together? Abortion, for example, appears to be an issue which unites women.

This is such a representative synopsis of the group reports that were handed in (three) that we have left the details of these reports out.

However questions raised in other groups included:

• Could Soc-Fem groups be used as an effective base for work in the mixed left?
• How could feminist campaigns (e.g. British National Abortion Campaign, with slogan "A woman's right to choose") be located in a socialist strategy?
• Have some people arrived at a stage where they consider they are not of the left but are the left?
• What is a specifically feminist socialist strategy?

Women and Health Workshop

In the workshop on Women and Health, the two basic problems mentioned were building up a network so that women with a health problem could know where to get help straight away, and helping women to challenge the male medical hierarchy which dominates their health care. Experience in many countries was very similar though at different stages and there was a problem of whether self-help groups had to charge in a country where medicine was "free"

The National Women's Health Network in the U.S.A. is at 1302 18th St NW, Ste 203, Washington DC 20036 - and they will give info, on setting up the network.

Sex Class Workshop

About forty-fifty women came to the impromptu "Sex Class Workshop" and the discussion started off around two papers, "Workers control of reproduction" (by Sheila Jeffreys and Natasha Hodson) and "Feminism & Socialism" (from the Feministes Revolutionnaires in Paris). It would help you to read the papers before you read this as we don't intend to summarise them. We list below the points that were made in the discussion without any comment on them:

• Sex class is based on reproduction - and the relationship of this to production is that men control women's reproductive power and direct it according to the needs of production - left men as well as right would not put women's needs first - left men who supported women's demand for abortion and contraception would reverse this if they saw the labour force shrinking in any economy, capitalist or socialist.
• It is dangerous to define women by their relationship to reproduction as it could suit the dominant ideology.
• Reproduction is also production - we should not focus on the task people do but why they do it women bring up children for men and also do other tasks for men. It is the relationship that is important, not the task itself.
• Women as a class are related to production women are like slaves, they get no wages, just upkeep, women's labour power is appropriated by their husbands.
• This is the basis for women's oppression, not the fact that they produce children, but that they produce them for men.
• Had there ever been a matriarchy - had power of reproduction ever been a strength - how had it become a means of repression when it seemed to have been a potential source of power?
• If we based women's class on reproduction, the logical conclusion would be to struggle for the rule of women, not the abolition of class in this sense - did we want this?
• Women had reproductive power, and invented agriculture that did not destroy nature but reproduced it. Before men invented the plough, women were the source of production and reproduction. Hunting was a peripheral activity. But because there was a shortage of women, the hunters became fighters and began to steal and rape women. Women turned to men for protection against other men, because the women that were there were too occupied in reproduction and production to defend themselves. Class society cannot develop without exchange - the men developed women exchange and women became merchandise.

This is the basis of women's oppression.

• Women are the only group who have to reproduce themselves - as mothers, lovers, wives, nurses etc. Nobody else performs this service for women as they perform it for others. - Older women are an embarrassment to the state as they have fulfilled their reproductive function.
• Whatever basis we had for defining women as a class, we all seemed to have agreed that women are a class; could we go onto the next question - Marxist analysis leaves out women, but says it is complete. It does not leave room to discuss sex class, as the economic class is held to be all that is necessary. Since Marxist analysis leaves out women, we therefore cannot leave even the traditional class struggle to the mixed left, as they do not see women's oppression. We must evolve an analysis not just of women's oppression but of society as a whole. The left cannot do this if it leaves out women.
• Women can reproduce and do everything else men can only do everything else, so they have demarcated certain jobs and invested them with high status (often protected by ritual) and economic power. We shouldn't ask why women's jobs are undervalued, but why men's jobs are overvalued. We have to get into those jobs (science today is seen as the ritual prerogative of men).
• Men even use science to develop artificial reproduction in which case we would be completely redundant, so women should fight to keep control of reproduction (the possibility of sex selection of the foetus was also a male threat).
• Men are the enemy now but they have the potential to be human beings. We want a classless society. If women as class is based on reproduction we can never have a classless society but if based on oppression we can eliminate classes - using the terminology of class presupposed that we were aiming at elimination of class.
• everybody has got two class positions - as there are two class systems: economic class and patriarchal class. This finishes the endless arguments about the position of bourgeois capitalist women. They have one position in the economic class and another in the sex class system.
• To find out who was the oppressor of women men or the capitalist class, you subtracted the oppressed from the whole. In the sex class system if you subtracted women from the whole population, what was left were men - they benefitted from extracting the value of women's work.
• Look at the institution of marriage - it is a form of labour relationship - men, by it, acquire women's labour power, by offering protection from other men and some economic security - like serfdom, as the seigneurs appropriated the land, the serfs had to sell themselves to survive. We should study the reason why marriage has developed in the development of capitalism.
• The definition of women as a class based on the relationship to production does not explain men's hate and fear of women, which is to do with our reproductive capacity - there is much evidence for this - the way men treat women after childbirth shows the ambivalence men have towards women's reproductive power.
• There is a parallel between this and the way the bosses fear the workers - perhaps you have to hate people to be able to exploit them.

Summary - it is clear we agreed women were a class - but our different definitions would lead to different strategies. To view women as a class is criticised
as simplistic but it is actually more complicated. Our exploitation benefits men and capitalism, and we must develop this theme.

Seeing women as a class not a "category" gives revolutionary potential.

Report From Group 4: Where We Stand

This group began Saturday with the exchange of information between the women in the workshop. Out of this, differences between socialist feminists were expressed as where we stand on the question of women as a class. The group decided to continue this discussion in relation to theme1.

We discussed what we mean by class and by patriarchy. We then looked at Worker Control of Reproduction (Sheila Jeffreys) and decided its analysis is too simplistic, it is not useful and even misleading to separate patriarchy and capitalism as two separate systems. The links between patriarchy and capitalism are too complex for them to be analysed separately or to be made two separate objects of struggle.

For example:

• Sexism arising form women's role as reproducers is used to further capitalist relations of production in all kinds of ways.
• Women's role as domestic labourers cannot be separated off into reproduction, it is also production.
• In personal relationships when women give men support in the home, we make it easy for them to avoid confronting and struggle against their alienation at the workplace. Refusal to tolerate aggression from husbands etc. can thus play an important role in the struggle against capitalist relations of production.

We then discussed the sexual division of labour, whether it is oppressive per se. General agreement that even if it was not at some time in the past pre-class societies, it is now, and must be abolished with the divisions of labour (mental/manual etc.).

Today we discussed women organising in Trade Unions and in the Community. ki the afternoon we discussed women's sexuality in relation to power and other aspects of women's identity and conditioning.

P.S. Women in the group were from England (3), Germany (1), Holland (3), Denmark.

Women and Class

Note: Among our notes we found two reports on the subject of Women (or sex) and class. We're not quite sure about these reports being from one or two different groups.

Opinions:

1. Women are a class
2. Women belong to the class of their father/husband.

Where do we feel we belong, where do we get most support? To whom do you give most solidarity: the socialist workers or the bourgeois woman? Criticism of the marxist theory: classes are defined with criteria of production, it makes it difficult to place women within this theory.

1. capitalism is a consequence of patriarchy
2. capitalism is a form of patriarchy (as feudalism)

Feminists are going to fight apart, as a consequence this will lead to a fight against capitalism. Reproduction must be more important than production, else it will lead to an inequality between the sexes.

About           Men's-groups          (consciousness-raising groups);

1. optimistic about the future co-operation with these progressive men.
2. women have so much to fight for, that they can't spare energy to co-operate with men.

Sex & Class Report (2nd report)

The workshop was about the strategy and practice which would emerge from analysing society in terms of two class systems, sex-class and economic class.

We need a political, revolutionary feminism which can unite radical feminism and socialist feminism.

What is wrong with radical feminism? Failure to discuss the relationship of sex-class to economic class. Some radical feminists won't use the word class at all, because of marxist connotations. They lack a definition which allows the development of political strategy - to say men are the enemy is not enough.

What is wrong with socialist feminism? The failure to see men as the enemy prevents acceptance of the idea of women as a class.

We then discussed the interrelationship of sex-class and economic class and whether it might be historically appropriate in some tinries and places for women to join men in the economic class struggle rather then fighting in the sex-class struggle, e.g. Bolivia.

We concluded that women must lead the struggle against patriarchy and capitalism. We must say that feminism includes socialism and that we are the new left. To end patriarchy and capitalism at the same time means that women must take control both of the reproduction and production.

Can we struggle with men?

We discussed the suggestion that at some future time when men in the left redefine their socialism on our terms and agree to renounce the benefits that they gain as a class, we might be able to join in struggle with them against patriarchy and capitalism.

We decided that men would never renounce the considerable benefits, sexual, economic and prestige etc. unless they got something in return; e.g. individual men might temporarily renounce their class interests to have a relationship with a feminist because this seemed a greater benefit. We concluded that what we would offer men, e.g. a share of child care and housework, were not attractive enough to induce them to accept a position considerably inferior to that they now occupy, so that we could never count on being able to join in struggle with men. We would have to give them no choice, e.g. achieve a position of power in which we could force them to give up their benefits.

Workshop Women in Left Groups

Women were present from left parties, trade unions, the student movement, the Working Women's Charter Campaign (U.K.) and non-aligned women.

Work and Problems in Different Countries

In Holland only 20 per cent of married women work (employed). There is a union for women not employed outside the home, but as yet, it has not been possible to raise feminist demands, but only general political issues. In the UK the Working Women's Charter Campaign is one way of raising feminist issues within the labour movement. The Charter consists of ten demands which link all areas of women's oppression - at home and at work, by capitalism and by patriarchy.

In Bolivia class confrontation is much sharper and women tend to work in the class struggle against fascism, rather than on specifically women's oppression.

Why We Work in Trade Unions

1. To relate all areas of women's oppression. Many women in unions are conscious of their economic exploitation only.
2. The labour movement is fundamental to achieving socialism and it is important that it should take up all women's demands.
3.  Women must participate in making the trade union movement more democratic.

Why we Work in Revolutionary Parties.

Some feminists feel that it is important to work in revolutionary parties, because they see a connection between their oppression as women and their oppression under capitalism.

Women's oppression exists within left political parties and this can only be changed by the full participation of women in all political activities in the parties themselves.

It was felt that the women's movement should work with revolutionary parties, but not necessarily within them.

Problems of Working within Left Groups and Trade Unions

1. Feminists working within left groups and trade unions find it hard to know where to put our efforts. It is hard to choose between left groups, trade unions and the autonomous women's movement. All were felt to be interrelated but pressure from the autonomous women's movement was felt to be the most important influence in changing left groups and trade unions. Feminists in left groups and trade unions are overworked due to dividing their time between different activities. This is partly because men in left groups and trade unions don't recognise the political value of work in the women's movement, so that feminists are under pressure to work twice as hard. This could be improved by:
   1. left groups recognising the importance of work in the women's movement and by rationalising the number of meetings etc. particularly for women involved in the movement outside their parties.
   2. he women's movement could help by co-ordinating different areas of work more efficiently and by providing an information network.
2. There is the problem of working within male oriented hierarchical structures in parties and trade unions. We need to struggle continuously to preserve our autonomy within groups and parties, recognising that the autonomous movement outside parties is the most important source of change. (All of us in the workshop are organized separately as women within our parties and trade unions).
3. The need to struggle against patriarchy as well as capitalism involves raising feminist demands within left wing movements. These demands are often opposed by the male chauvinism of activists within the political left. The women's liberation movement has brought important new theories and practice to traditional marxism, particularly on the question of reproduction.

Workshop How to Organize Women

Although this group made a very thorough report, somehow the paper got lost. We have tried to reconstruct the report from our own notes. Sorry it's only a brief summary of the original.

The questions this group posed itself were:

      a) why do we want to organize as fem-soc women?

      b) how do we want to organize?

      c) who do we want to organize?

     a) All women are working women, so they all can organize around the issues they have in common. We all have to struggle against patriarchy and capitalism.

     b) We want to organize on different levels:

1) personal - 2) local - 3) national - 4) international.

- ad 1) We must bring the political is personal (and the personal is political) issue into practice and help each other, show solidarity etc.

 - ad 2) How we should be locally organized differs from situation to situation and should be decided on the local level.

- ad 3) Nationally we should have a central point to exchange information.

- ad 4) We should not make our own independent international fem-soc information net, but use ISIS. We can help each other by: sending information, solidarity activities, actions (rape, abortion etc), learning from each other, e.g. an evaluation of the Paris and Amsterdam conference. If there is another conference to be held, should it be big or small, should there be representatives or not? This group thinks in terms of a small conference with more structured workshops that work from practice to theory.

      c) No notes left .

Workshop Women and Sexuality Theme: Homosexuality and its Relations to fem-soc.

Discussed problems of the relationship between lesbians and heterosexual feminists. Some lesbians don't want to work with men or with women who relate to men. The help heterosexual women in their struggles (e.g. abortion), but don't get help in their struggles (e.g. rights of homosexuals). This split was evident in England some years ago (not so much now) and seems still to be a major problem in France. French Lesbians say they can't relate to or discuss with heterosexual women in France as they have no sense of humour! It was suggested that discussion concentrating on "Women's Problems" would be useful, for both 'gay' and 'straight' women (otherwise it can be assumed heterosexuality is without its own problems!) Another problem was between lesbians. Two groups:

1. Older lesbians who discovered their homosexuality before the Women's movement and have had to spend their lives working with men in political parties and Homosexual Rights Groups.
2. "Political lesbians": women who were originally heterosexual, but have become lesbian through

IF EVE

the first woman God ever
made, was strong enough to
turn the world upside down
all alone, these women together
ought to be able to turn it back,
and get it right side up again!
And now they are asking to do it,
the men better let them.

— Sojourner Truth, 1851

contact with the women's movement. They work only with women and the older lesbians consider they "have it easy" and so resentment arises.

We thought that group 1) had too rigid a conception of sexuality (you are born lesbian or not). Also some of 2) think feminists become lesbian because it is fashionable. This ignores the problems of heterosexual feminists who want to cross the real barrier that exists (psychological and physical) and have lesbian relationships. They should rather be helped in this by women who have already done this (become lesbians).

Anarcho-Feminism Workshop

About 28 women from various countries came to this workshop. We discussed the situations that we had come from. There seemed to be an anarcho-feminist network building up in Britain, but in most places we either worked in the women's movement or in community action. We talked about the problems of working in political organisations and combating sexism there or whether it was necessary, as some of us believed, to work with women only, in fighting our common oppression as women.

The problem of power seemed to revolve around two definitions, differentiating power over others and autonomous power to control and change our lives.

It was also thought that anarchist forms of action and organisation lend themselves more easily to the realisation of feminist ideas than any other political theory. The structures of women's movement seemed to be internationally non-hierarchical and often anarchist in orientation even though we may not call ourselves that.

Other topics discussed included food coops, squatting, street theatre, trade unions and other forms of action, trying to find alternatives to reformism. Action in different countries was compared. The need for specifically feminist political action was felt quite strongly by many women. At present it seemed that there is a vacuum which needs to be filled, outside of on-going campaigns, by women who want to take spontaneous action (not in isolation), to draw attention to sexism and to challenge the patriarchy more directly and effectively.