Feminism Is for Everybody: Passionate Politics

In Chapter 7, hooks explains the divisiveness of class differences “[i]n the mostly white circles of a newly formed women’s liberation movement” (37). The imbalanced media attention exacerbated conflicts between the reformists, who supported change within the existing class structure, and the revolutionaries, who called for “fundamental change in the existing class structure” (37). For example, Betty Friedan’s discussion of the problem of housewifery “was presented as a crisis for women” (38) while in reality, “it really was only a crisis for a small group of well-educated white women” (38).

hooks discusses the tension that arises when different classes of women have different definitions of freedom. One woman’s drudgery might be another woman’s pleasure, depending on the kind of work available to her and her education level. As well, some women faced “resistance from husbands and family” (38) when they chose to look for work outside the home. hooks points out that it is the unique situation of “reformist white women with class privilege” (38) who could picture themselves at work, earning “an income which would enable them to be economically self-sufficient” (38). While acknowledging this truth, hooks also mentions that reformist efforts working for equal pay and improved working conditions “had a positive impact on the lives of all women” (39), but the work cannot end there.

hooks credits the discussion of class within the feminist movement with the “open[ing] up of the space where the intersections of class and race were made apparent” (40). At first, “well-educated white women from working-class backgrounds were more visible than black females of all classes” (40), and “between them and their privileged-class comrades there were ongoing conflicts” (40). The women from the privileged class wanted standing equal to the men of their class, which “in effect became white power reformist feminism” (41) that actually supported the patriarchy and destabilized feminism. hooks describes the difficulty that arose when “class power proved to be more important than feminism” (41-42), the same difficulty that impacted the confidence of women of color and discouraged them from embracing the movement. These women of color experienced “fear that feminism was really about increasing white power” (42).

hooks concludes the chapter with a discussion of what she believes is “[t]he only genuine hope of feminist liberation” (43):

a mass-based radical feminist movement that can build on the strength of the past, including the positive gains by reforms, while offering meaningful interrogation of existing feminist theory that was simply wrongminded while offering us new strategies (43).

hooks insists that such a movement requires improved opportunities for education and “low-income housing women can own” (43).

This chapter is dedicated to the complicated matter of “neocolonial paternalism” (45) within the feminist movement, which keeps “women of color in the background so that only conservative/liberal white women would be the authentic representations of feminism” (45).

hooks explains that while there is definitely value in the fact that American feminists recognize the plight of women around the world, “problems arose as those individual feminists with class power projected imperial fantasies onto women globally” (45). This projection assumes that American feminists “have the right to lead feminist movement and set feminist agenda for all the other women in the world, particularly women in third world countries” (45), a thought process that “mirrors the imperialist racism and sexism of ruling groups of Western men” (45).

Because these projections still exist in the American feminist movement, especially around global women’s issues, hooks calls for a way to “decolonize feminist thinking and practice so that these issues can be addressed in a manner that does not reinscribe Western imperialism” (46). Education and consciousness-raising are key components to this plan, as is an examination of “how sexist practices in relation to women’s bodies globally are linked” (46). This link between sexism and the impact on women’s health prevents the misogynistic perception that feminism is “yet another luxury product from the West women in other cultures must fight to have the right to consume” (47).

Again, hooks attempts to present a balanced view to conclude the chapter, complimenting “the important work women are doing to ensure our freedom” (47) and encouraging feminists “to reach out and join global struggles to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression” (47).