Introductory texts on feminism and politics frequently start by noting the difficult relationship between feminist approaches and political science (Phillips 1998; Randall 2002).
The dilemmas that feminists face when studying the field are particularly clear regarding one of its key concepts: the state. Feminists have been ambivalent about the need to theorize the state.
In the 1960s, the so-called second wave feminist movement searched for alternative channels of political influence mainly from the civil society. Later, the idea of a feminist state theory resulted in deep uneasiness among feminist scholars. Some claimed that such theory was non-existent and sorely needed (MacKinnon 1989), others that it was unnecessary (Allen 1990). Typically feminist engagements with the concept have ranged between the promise of significant gains in struggles for gender equality and fears of co-optation and compromise.This has been the case particularly in the Anglo-American context, where feminist debates about the state were paralysed by an ‘in’ and ‘out’ dichotomy. In feminist state theories, liberal feminists represented the ‘in’ the state position. Here the aim was to reform the state from ‘inside’. Critics of liberal feminism argued that they risked co-optation to the state’s patriarchal structures. Radical feminists, in contrast, represented the ‘out’ of the state position. They steered away from the state, searched for alternative ways of working, and aimed to develop an extra-statist form of politics. This categorization reduced feminist strategies in dealing with the state into two: either integration (inside the state) or autonomy (outside the state). Since, many feminist scholars have directed their energies at deconstructing the dichotomy, which still continues to haunt feminist perspectives on the state.
This chapter will reach beyond the dominant Anglo-American strand in feminist state theory, epitomized by the ‘in and out’ dichotomy. The endeavour is underpinned by a desire to emphasize diversity within feminism and to focus on feminisms (Randall 2002). Feminist contributions to the debates about the state are diverse and at times approaches contradict one another.
Despite such disagreements, however, feminism’s main contribution has been to expose the gendered and patriarchal character of state institutions, practices and policies. In gendered processes, advantage and disadvantage, exploitation and control, meaning and identity, are patterned through a distinction between male and female, masculine and feminine (Acker 1992: 251-5). Feminists show that the state impacts on women in gender-specific ways and helps to construct gender relations, but at the same time, the activities of different women and women’s movements impact on the state and are in turn impacted on by the state (Waylen 1998: 1).The main goal of this chapter is to map out the diversity of feminist perspectives on the state. These include liberal, radical, Marxist and socialist, Nordic, and poststructural feminisms. These have theorised the state, respectively, as: (i) the neutral state, (ii) the patriarchal state, (iii) the capitalist state, (iv) the women-friendly welfare state, and (v) the poststructural state. The chapter begins by exploring the contributions of each of these perspectives. It then focuses on the criticisms directed at these ways of conceptualizing the state. Finally, the chapter considers current feminist debates about the state by analysing two opposing trends. On the one hand, some scholars question the utility of strategies of state reform for feminists and women’s movement activists. On the other hand, feminists are increasingly engaging the state, both theoretically and in practice. The chapter argues that understanding the pitfalls and benefits of the two tendencies requires being explicit about the notion of the state underpinning our analyses.
More on the topic Introductory texts on feminism and politics frequently start by noting the difficult relationship between feminist approaches and political science (Phillips 1998; Randall 2002).:
- Pluralism has been one of the most dominant frameworks for understanding politics in mainstream political science.
- THE INJUSTICE OF INTERSEX: FEMINIST SCIENCE STUDIES AND THE WRITING OF A WRONG
- This chapter explores and evaluates poststructuralist approaches to the political theory and analysis of the state.
- Clausewitz’s aphorism—‘War is a continuation of politics by other means’—may be read as a policy prescription identifying the appropriate relationship between state authorities and institutions of violence.
- 1.3 HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT AND THE POLITICS OF POWER
- 1.2 HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT AND POLITICS
- Current feminist debates
- Chapter 6 Feminism
- Feminist contributions
- The relationship between law and justice
- No concept is more central to political discourse and political analysis than that of the state.