Radical feminists claim that patriarchy is a system of power that organizes society into complex relationships based on an assumption that ‘male supremacy’ oppresses women. For radical feminists, men are the enemy; they are the source of women’s oppression. Radical feminist make three claims: patriarchy is universal, patriarchy is the primary and most fundamental form of social inequality and conflict and all men oppress all women.
Radical feminists claim that patriarchal oppression is direct and personal. Not only does it occur in the public sphere of work and politics but also in the private sphere of the family, domestic labour and sexual relationships. Radical feminists refer to these relationships as sexual politics. Radical feminists therefore focus on the ways in which patriarchal power is exercised through personal relationships, often through sexual or physical violence or the threat of it. Brownmiller notes that fear of rape is a powerful deterrent against women going out alone at night.
Radical feminist have come up with three solutions in order for women to be free. These include separatism, consciousness-raising and political lesbianism. Separatism is where men and women live apart creating a new culture of female independence, free from patriarchy. Consciousness-raising is where women share their experiences in women only groups, this way woman can see what other women face and may have the same problem and this may lead to collective action. Lastly many radical feminists argue that heterosexual relationships are inevitably oppressive because they involve ‘sleeping with the enemy’ and that lesbianism is the only non-oppressive form of sexuality. Radical feminist are criticized on the basis that they offer no explanation of why female subordination takes different forms in different societies. Similarly, it assumes all women are in the same position and ignores class and ethnicity.
Marxist feminist see religion as another tool of women’s oppression alongside capitalism and one which reinforces their social and economic status. They claim that capitalism reinforces women’s inferior social status; women can provide free domestic labour (cook, clean, rear children). Capitalism benefits from this, as husbands are able to work longer hours. There is also the false belief that women will be compensated for their sufferings in heaven. This is very similar to Marx’s false consciousness.
For Marxist feminist, women’s subordination performs a number of important functions for capitalism. Firstly, women absorb anger, Ansley (1972) describes wives as ‘takers of shit’ who soak up the frustration their husbands feel because of the alienation and exploitation they suffer at work. Secondly, women are a reserve army of labour that can be moved into the labour force during economic booms and out again at times of recession. Thirdly, women are a source of cheap, exploitable labour, they can be paid less because it is assumed they will be partially dependent on their husbands’ earnings. Lastly, women reproduce the labour force through their unpaid domestic labour both by nurturing and socialising children to become the next generation of workers and by maintaining and servicing the current generation of workers (their husbands), they do this at no cost to capitalism.
All Marxist feminists argue that women’s subordination within the family performs important economic functions for capitalism. Barrett argues that we must give more emphasis to women’s consciousness and motivations and to the role of ideology in maintaining their oppression. Barrett believes that the overthrow of capitalism is necessary to secure women’s liberation, she argues that it is not sufficient. We must also overthrow the ideology of familism that underpins the conventional family and its unequal division of labour. This would free the sexes from restrictive stereotypes and ensure domestic labour was shared equally. However, Marxists feminist fail to explain women’s subordination in non-capitalist societies. Also, unpaid domestic labour may benefit capitalism, as Marxist feminists claim, but this doesn’t explain why it is women and not men who perform it. Hartmann (1981) argues that this is because Marxism is ‘sex-blind’.
Dual systems feminists regard patriarchy and capitalism as intertwined, though sometimes in conflict. Hartmann sees capitalism and patriarchy as two intertwined systems that form a single entity, ‘patriarchal capitalism’. Difference and poststructuralist feminists argue that other feminist theories are essentialist and disregard differences between women. Difference feminism argues that feminist theory has claimed a ‘false university’ for itself - it claimed to be about all women, but in reality was only about the experiences of white, Western, heterosexual, middle-class women. They argue that liberal, Marxist and radical feminists are essentialist, and they see all women as the same. However, they fail to reflect the diversity of women’s experiences and they exclude other women and their problems.
Poststructuralism is concerned with discourses and power/knowledge. Discourses are ways of seeing, thinking or speaking about something. Postructuralists argue that the Enlightenment project is simply a discourse. Butler argues that the Enlightenment ideals were simply a form of power/knowledge that legitimated the domination of Western, white, middle-class males over the other groups. She also argues that white, Western, middle-class women who dominate the feminist movement have falsely claimed to represent ‘universal womanhood’. She further argues that feminists are wrong to believe they can adapt the Enlightenment project so that it somehow includes all women, because women are not single entities who all share the same ‘essence’. Butler claims that postructuralism offers advantages for feminism, it enables feminists to ‘de-construct’ different discourses to reveal how they subordinate women. On the other hand, Segal criticises postructuralist feminism for abandoning any notion of real, objective social structures.
Functionalism is a structural perspective that sees social order as based on value consensus and performing positive functions for society and individuals. Parsons see society as a system of interdependent parts such as sub-systems, institutions and status roles. The function of each part is to help meet the needs of the system. Individuals are integrated into the system through socialisation into the shared culture and social control, ensuring that they perform the roles expected of them. However critics argue that functionalism is a conservative ideology that neglects conflict, exploitation and change.
Another conflict theory similar to feminism is Marxism. Marxism is a structural perspective that sees society as based on class conflict. In capitalism, the bourgeoisie exploit the labour of the proletariat. They maintain their position through control of the repressive state apparatus and through ideology or hegemony. However, Marx believed that ultimately, revolution leading to a classless communist society was inevitable. Marx has been criticised for being too deterministic as there are differences between Marxists.