From the days of the “Women’s Social and Political Union”, the Suffragettes and the fight for the vote to more resent campaigns for equality in various walks of life. The WSPU were formed in 1903, Manchester, by Emmeline Pankhurst and unlike their predecessors, or parent organisation it could be argued, the Suffragists were predominantly, though not exclusively working-class women.
The Suffragettes' main reason for existence was to secure the vote for all women, especially the working-class which is where they differed from the earlier middle-class, Suffragists or officially the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies formed by Millicent Garrett Fawcett in the mid-19th century. The Suffragettes also took more than a passing interest in the working conditions endured by women as the second Industrial Revolution moved along. In 1913 Suffragette, Emily Davidson, threw herself under the King's horse at the Epsom Derby forcing the abandonment or postponement of the race but costing Emily her life. The WSPU believed in violent means to achieve their goals including petrol bombing MPs homes and throwing bricks at policemen. When put in prison the women went on hunger strike and were often force fed using inhuman methods, a tactic used by the British on Irish republican prisoners later on.
The NUWSS or Suffragists as they were commonly known were much more peaceful than the latter Suffragettes. Their methods included petitions and talking nicely to male MPs about women’s suffrage. They were made up of middle-class women and their campaign was for the vote for middle-class women with property qualifications over the age of thirty. They cared little for the use of violence and actually opposed such methods later adopted by the working-class Suffragettes. They cared equally little for the plight of working-class women or their right to vote which the Suffragists believed working-class women should not get. In 1918 under the “Representation of the People Act” the aims of the bourgeois Suffragists were reached when the vote was granted to women with property qualifications over the age of thirty. Not until 1928, in Britian, did women get universal suffrage. In the 26 counties all women received the vote in 1922 after the formation of the Irish Free State.
Today we see women’s groups not fighting for the vote but for equality. These groups are based very much on class lines in much the same way as the earlier models outlined above were. The orthodox or bourgeois feminists are middle-class driven and show little interest in their working-class co genderists working in sweatshops for shit wages. The orthodox feminists are more about promoting women’s equality in the Boardroom or in the financial sector such as banking. It could well be argued, in fact I would argue, that many of the bourgeois feminist demands have been met and even surpassed. For example women executives in large companies are now common place and many of these women can be and often are tyrannical as employers or managers. Some of these women with their new found powers are not and perhaps never were looking for equality but superiority over their male counterparts. In many boardrooms they have achieved this aim beyond doubt. If anybody watched the series; Mr Bates Vs the Post Office it could not be failed to notice most of the lying bosses in the Post Office who were persecuting and prosecuting the Sub-Post Masters, were in fact women. One of them even went to church preaching for the God Squad as a Deaconess on Sunday before returning to her full-time post of lying through her teeth on Monday.
Not all the management team were women, there were men equally as culpable but much less convincing. This is just one example but as a former trade union negotiator and supporter of women’s rights and equality I did find negotiating with women bosses a harder job than negotiating with men as women tended to believe they had the right to ride rough shod over long-standing agreements. In many London local authorities most Senior Personnel Officers were, and no doubt still are, women with men as their juniors. The way some of these female Hitlers spoke to their underlings can only be described as misandry and if the boot was on the other foot there would be cries of misogyny from the roof tops. So in this area in many cases women have achieved not only equality, and rightly so, but superiority. Equality means the clock stops at six o’clock not five to six or five past six, but on the hour of six. This divides the clock into two ‘equal’ halves.
In the financial sector, Banking in particular, many managers are now women, that is if you can ever see a Bank manager, male or female, so it could be argued the middle-class feminist movement have made gains in this department. They appear to have no interest, apart from exploiting, working-class women or their plight.
In the world of parliamentary politics women have achieved a lot with Britain having had three female Prime Minister in a comparatively short period of time since 1979. This must reflect the advances women have made in this area. In Ireland Sinn Fein, the largest party in the six counties and the main opposition party in the 26 county Dail are led by two women, Mary Lou McDonald who is national SF President, and Michelle O’Neil, Vice President and leader of the party in the six counties. The Irish Labour Party is now led by a woman, Ivana Bacik and the Social Democrats are also led by a woman, Holly Cairns. Many independent TDs are women as the Dail slowly fills up with women TDs. This is progressive and if these women show the electorate that they have what it takes, that is in a liberal democratic sense where whoever spouts the most convincing hot air gets the backing of the electorate, and are elected then that’s good enough.
In the financial sector, Banking in particular, many managers are now women, that is if you can ever see a Bank manager, male or female, so it could be argued the middle-class feminist movement have made gains in this department. They appear to have no interest, apart from exploiting, working-class women or their plight.
In the world of parliamentary politics women have achieved a lot with Britain having had three female Prime Minister in a comparatively short period of time since 1979. This must reflect the advances women have made in this area. In Ireland Sinn Fein, the largest party in the six counties and the main opposition party in the 26 county Dail are led by two women, Mary Lou McDonald who is national SF President, and Michelle O’Neil, Vice President and leader of the party in the six counties. The Irish Labour Party is now led by a woman, Ivana Bacik and the Social Democrats are also led by a woman, Holly Cairns. Many independent TDs are women as the Dail slowly fills up with women TDs. This is progressive and if these women show the electorate that they have what it takes, that is in a liberal democratic sense where whoever spouts the most convincing hot air gets the backing of the electorate, and are elected then that’s good enough.
This liberal democracy bollocks applies to men and women alike. In Germany since unification the first woman Chancellor, Angela Merkel, held office for sixteen years. All across the globe in various so-called parliaments women are ascending to the top positions. In the United States although there has not yet been a female President women and women’s voices can be heard increasingly around Congress. So in this department women have made huge gains, but they can only make these steps forward if elected. A far cry from Constance Markievicz becoming the first woman elected to the Westminster Parliament and Nancy Aster the first woman MP to take her seat in the same building. Markievicz was elected on an abstentionist platform in the 1918 general election for Sinn Fein. In the same election Sinn Fein stood another woman for East Belfast, her name was Winifred Carney, the former Secretary to trade union organiser and revolutionary, James Connolly. Carney was also a former member of the Irish Citizen Army. This was at a time when women entering elections, let alone getting elected was unheard of.
So, many gains have been made in the areas briefly outlined above. The orthodox feminist movement have achieved and even surpassed in some areas their goals. It must be wondered now, what exactly are these bourgeois Feminists ultimate aims, equality or superiority for women?
The gains made by women at the higher end of society are in stark contrast to the virtually non-existent advances made at the lower end. Marxist Feminists, the militant end of the working-class women’s movement have had a much less impact on the employers or society. This is no coincidence as the demise in trade union power weakens their arm also declines certainly in Britian. Marxist Feminists view women’s liberation in its true form as part of the overall class struggle. However, that does not mean women’s rights in the workplace should not be fought for on a daily basis. Many of these rights are denied working-class women by female bosses and CEOs whose lofty position is very much down to bourgeois Feminist groups and their bourgeois male supporters pressurising over the years. Many of these female middle-class bosses are bullies, this I have witnessed first-hand, bullying frightened female workers terrified of losing their jobs!
Back in 1976 until 1978 at the Grunwick Film Processing Plant in London a strike took place. It lasted two years and much police violence was meted out to pickets, many of them Asian Women. The strike was called over the dismissal of Devshi Bhudia from his job at the plant. The strike was also over union recognition and the right to negotiate. Many of those on strike, in fact a majority, were women many of them Asian migrant workers. Where were the orthodox Feminist groups then to fight for these women? Nowhere, nowhere to be seen or heard. Fortunately trade unionists from around the country rallied to the call including then Yorkshire NUM President, Arthur Scargill, who led thousands of miners onto the picket line alongside these women. Indian born Jayaben Desai, a striking woman and trade unionist, said: “The strike is not so much about pay, it’s a strike about human dignity”. The outcome of the strike was a House of Lords ruling that the employer did not have to recognise the union or negotiate. The employer did not have to reinstate workers, despite the Scarman Report recommending such compromises by the employer be made.
Another point of exploitation of workers and women in particular is the contract cleaning industry. Some women are working for a pittance of a wage having to do three or four jobs for these cowboy employers, what about equality here? Many supervisors in this industry are women from the petty bourgeois strata and bully their underlings, particularly migrant women workers. Where are the voices who cry so loud about women’s representation or, in their tunnel opinion lack of, in the higher echelons of society where are these people campaigning for the rights of young mothers having to work all hours to feed their children? Perhaps we should not only by looking at women’s equality with men but also women’s equality with women!
The early genuine pioneers of women’s rights at work, including union recognition and the right to a healthy working environment was fought for not by bourgeois feminist or Suffragist movements. These rights were fought for by the women workers and teenage girls, the working-class, at the Bryant and May match works factory in Bow, East London. This strike was almost unanimously women workers in 1888. This strike paved the way for what became known as ‘New Unionism’ meaning for the first-time unskilled workers could organise and win. Then, as now, the bourgeois Feminist groups could not care a fuck for their co-genderists in the working-class and they are out for women’s superiority, that is bourgeois women’s superiority which has little if anything to do with women’s equality across the board.
So, many gains have been made in the areas briefly outlined above. The orthodox feminist movement have achieved and even surpassed in some areas their goals. It must be wondered now, what exactly are these bourgeois Feminists ultimate aims, equality or superiority for women?
The gains made by women at the higher end of society are in stark contrast to the virtually non-existent advances made at the lower end. Marxist Feminists, the militant end of the working-class women’s movement have had a much less impact on the employers or society. This is no coincidence as the demise in trade union power weakens their arm also declines certainly in Britian. Marxist Feminists view women’s liberation in its true form as part of the overall class struggle. However, that does not mean women’s rights in the workplace should not be fought for on a daily basis. Many of these rights are denied working-class women by female bosses and CEOs whose lofty position is very much down to bourgeois Feminist groups and their bourgeois male supporters pressurising over the years. Many of these female middle-class bosses are bullies, this I have witnessed first-hand, bullying frightened female workers terrified of losing their jobs!
Back in 1976 until 1978 at the Grunwick Film Processing Plant in London a strike took place. It lasted two years and much police violence was meted out to pickets, many of them Asian Women. The strike was called over the dismissal of Devshi Bhudia from his job at the plant. The strike was also over union recognition and the right to negotiate. Many of those on strike, in fact a majority, were women many of them Asian migrant workers. Where were the orthodox Feminist groups then to fight for these women? Nowhere, nowhere to be seen or heard. Fortunately trade unionists from around the country rallied to the call including then Yorkshire NUM President, Arthur Scargill, who led thousands of miners onto the picket line alongside these women. Indian born Jayaben Desai, a striking woman and trade unionist, said: “The strike is not so much about pay, it’s a strike about human dignity”. The outcome of the strike was a House of Lords ruling that the employer did not have to recognise the union or negotiate. The employer did not have to reinstate workers, despite the Scarman Report recommending such compromises by the employer be made.
Another point of exploitation of workers and women in particular is the contract cleaning industry. Some women are working for a pittance of a wage having to do three or four jobs for these cowboy employers, what about equality here? Many supervisors in this industry are women from the petty bourgeois strata and bully their underlings, particularly migrant women workers. Where are the voices who cry so loud about women’s representation or, in their tunnel opinion lack of, in the higher echelons of society where are these people campaigning for the rights of young mothers having to work all hours to feed their children? Perhaps we should not only by looking at women’s equality with men but also women’s equality with women!
The early genuine pioneers of women’s rights at work, including union recognition and the right to a healthy working environment was fought for not by bourgeois feminist or Suffragist movements. These rights were fought for by the women workers and teenage girls, the working-class, at the Bryant and May match works factory in Bow, East London. This strike was almost unanimously women workers in 1888. This strike paved the way for what became known as ‘New Unionism’ meaning for the first-time unskilled workers could organise and win. Then, as now, the bourgeois Feminist groups could not care a fuck for their co-genderists in the working-class and they are out for women’s superiority, that is bourgeois women’s superiority which has little if anything to do with women’s equality across the board.
 |
| Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent Socialist Republican and Marxist. |
No comments