Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 09:32:15 +0100
From: Hugh Rodwell <m-14970-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: M-TH: Re: Feral revolutionism


I wrote:

>>2) The Women of the Waterfront  were very successful on their own terms,
>>they were fighting for *their own immediate interests* given the social
>>structures capitalist Britain forced on them. The oppression they felt and
>>fought against was class oppression rather than gender oppression. They
>>expressed their particular gender identity in this struggle through a
>>gender-specific organization of working-class women to counter-attack
>>against the bosses and government and bureaucratic oppression. This is a
>>new development -- the women weren't this well-organized during the
>>miners' strike, for instance.

and Yoshie wrote:

>Why do you call this a new development?

Because of the level of organization and the independence of their activities.

>Have you ever seen the documentary _With Babies and Banners_?

No. Tell us about it.

>Women have been always in supporting roles in their male partners' >struggles.

So? Yoshie almost makes it sound bad. What better alternatives can she
provide *in a situation of struggle*? And she forgets that the bourgeoisie
always attempts to drive a wedge between the men and their women to try and
get the women to pressure the men to capitulate -- that "always" of hers
isn't self-evident.

>>3) Support is important. Heroic support is not to be sneered at. "Old" is
>>irrelevant. As women come to the fore in struggle, men will be seen at
>>their side supporting them.
>
>This is not going to be an automatic development.

Who said it was? I didn't say *all* men. I'm confident that enough men will
be around who express active solidarity with their partners for a
difference to be made. Maybe Yoshie isn't. We'll see what happens.

Cheers,

Hugh




     --- from list marxism-thaxis-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---