The Persistent Struggle for Women's Liberation Within Traditional Left Organisations

Revolution's Blind Spot?

Jun 13, 2025

The history and current state of many traditional organisations on the left reveal a persistent failure to fully integrate the struggle for women's liberation into their core organising and political work. This isn't simply an oversight but is often rooted in specific theoretical misunderstandings, practical barriers, and internal dynamics that have historically marginalised women's issues and activists. This struggle within left organisations is a widespread phenomenon, experienced across different countries and contexts.

Failure to Grasp the Structural Nature of Women's Oppression

One of the most significant reasons for this shortfall is a fundamental failure to understand women's oppression as deeply structural and interwoven with the capitalist system. Instead of being viewed as a central aspect of class oppression, it's too often reduced to secondary issues like "male prejudice" or a separate "social issue" detached from the primary "industrial" or class struggle. This perspective can lead to a "social-democratic approach" that focuses primarily on reforms within the existing system, such as pursuing "equal rights" through legislation on Equal Pay and Sex Discrimination. While these reforms can be useful, they often fail to challenge the fundamental structures of the family and the economy that underpin women's oppression.

This limited view manifests in various ways across the left:

The traditional trade union movement often considers issues like abortion to be outside their "industrial terrain," focusing narrowly on workplace issues while failing to fully integrate broader social demands essential for working-class women
Some left organisations have historically treated feminist claims as "secondary and unimportant," with union bureaucracies sometimes lacking a tradition of debate or activity on issues central to women's liberation
Trade unions in various contexts have sometimes classified women's strikes as "political strikes," effectively ruling them out of bounds

In contrast, "class struggle feminism" posits that all women are oppressed, but not in the same way. This current understands that traditional class exploitation intertwines with and shapes patriarchal oppression. As outlined in the Fourth International's 1979 document "Socialist Revolution and the Struggle for Women's Liberation," the fight for the emancipation of women is tied to that of all the oppressed, viewing the feminist fight not as subordinate to the socialist fight, but as intrinsically linked.

Dismissal as 'Just' Identity Politics

The tendency to dismiss organising for women's equality as 'just' identity politics stems directly from this limited understanding of women's oppression. Some comrades fail to connect the specific experiences of oppression faced by different groups of women – such as black women, indigenous women, LGBTQ+ individuals, or working-class women – to the broader systemic issues of capitalism and patriarchy. This can manifest as an extreme focus on the personal responsibility of individual 'allies' rather than attacking the larger social and economic structures.

When specific oppressions are raised, this approach, disconnected from real movement presence, sometimes leads to accusations of "political correctness" or causing "division of the left". Instead of seeing how fighting against gender violence or for reproductive rights strengthens the entire working class's ability to resist oppression in all its forms, this narrow view focuses on perceived individual concerns that don't challenge the root system. The struggle within left organisations has also involved challenging the traditional conception of the working class, which historically centred on sectors like heavy industry that were predominantly male.

Internal Barriers: Male Domination and Bureaucracy

Traditional organisations, particularly trade unions, have been historically male-dominated and bureaucratic, creating environments that are often distant or even actively hostile to women's specific needs and struggles. This male domination and bureaucratic structure can lead to organisations underestimating the importance of women's issues, contributing to young women's suspicion of the left, its organisations, and its usually male leaders. Some critiques from the women's liberation movement have suggested that traditional political organization forms are inherently "masculine," hierarchical, and unable to adequately include women and feminist issues, though others argue that basic principles like democracy and collective action, when truly respected, can be effective ways to ensure women and feminist issues are taken into account.

Beyond formal structures, internal dynamics reproduce the sexual division of labour within revolutionary organisations. Women often tend to take on more administrative and technical tasks. Even when women are given political responsibilities, the role can be subtly redefined; for instance, a trade union organiser role held by a man might focus on political analysis, while the same role held by a woman might primarily involve ensuring meetings are organised and documents distributed. Both men and women can internalise this gendered conception of tasks. Women may internalise the administrative focus as "safer" than complex political analysis, while men may assume their capability for political analysis more readily. This can even manifest as "unconscious arrogance" from younger male comrades towards more experienced women.

There is also a tendency for the political contributions of women to be devalued. Leaders of women's movement work who have extensive experience leading mass movements, creating alliances, and developing theoretical analyses may be seen simply as "specialists of women's work," with their skills not automatically seen as applicable to other political areas. Meanwhile, a young male comrade who has led a student struggle might immediately be seen as capable of leading other areas of work. A frequent occurrence noted by women is saying something in a discussion that is ignored until a man makes the same point, after which it gains traction. This experience has been likened to a "reverse King Midas" effect, where everything women touch turns to something less important than when a man was doing it.

Individual relationships within left organisations can also be affected by unequal power dynamics from society. Passionate political discussions can feel like power struggles when between a man and a woman due to internalised societal norms. Some men may struggle to see women as political individuals outside of formal meetings, with conversations often shifting to personal topics rather than continuing political discussion. This contributes to a feeling among women that they are still under-valued as political beings.

The persistent presence of sexism and sexual harassment within parties is another significant barrier. The high percentage of cases involving machismo, harassment, and violence against women reported by ethics committees in some left organisations highlights the scale of this ongoing internal struggle. Conscious effort is needed to counter this "natural" dynamic of exclusion. As some feminists argue, organisations have a responsibility for the private life and individual behavior of comrades, particularly concerning behavior that contradicts the organisation's principles or endangers members. This is linked to maintaining credibility and demonstrating the values fought for.

Lack of Concrete Support and Resources

Beyond theoretical shortcomings and male dominance, the practical lack of support within some organisations actively hinders women's participation and development as activists:

Quotas/Parity: Some parties have formal rules promoting women's participation, with various quota systems and parity requirements for leadership bodies and public representation. However, many organisations struggle to meet their stated aims for gender representation. The argument for setting quotas or targets is that while it may seem "artificial," it is necessary because the "natural course of events" does not lead to sufficient women in leadership. Leadership election via a slate system has been proposed as a method to guarantee representation, not only by gender but also geographically, by area of activity, and by generation.
Childcare: Provision of childcare for meetings is often inconsistent or only available upon request. Many organisations provide childcare for major national events but rarely for local meetings unless specifically requested. While childcare is important, it is highlighted that it is not the sole or primary obstacle for women's participation, as a general dynamic of exclusion affects all women regardless of whether they have children. The question is also raised whether organisations should only provide for their own members or fight for collective childcare for all women as a state or local government provision.
Addressing Sexism: Procedures for dealing with sexism and sexual harassment within parties can be weak or inconsistent. While many mention sexism or discriminatory behaviour in their statutes/resolutions, specified procedures for dealing with sexual harassment cases are sometimes lacking. Ethics committees exist in some organisations, but dedicated gender violence commissions are rare. It is argued that sexist behaviour contradicts party programmes, and sanctions are necessary for women to participate in confidence. Taking the victim's word in harassment cases is advocated, drawing on lessons from the women's movement in identifying oppressive behaviour. Procedures for examining allegations should be clear, unbiased, confidential, and transparent, with support for the victim being paramount. Organisations also have a collective responsibility to address the underlying power inequalities that enable such behaviour.
Dedicated Structures: Some organisations lack a permanent, dedicated national body for women's work or feminist themes, with work often carried out by comrades individually or through temporary commissions. The establishment of organised feminist work within the party is seen as essential, not just as an individual interest. Mechanisms like internal women-only meetings are also seen as necessary "counterweights" to the prevailing dynamics, ensuring women's experiences are heard and can influence the whole organisation. While some historical views considered women-only meetings "anti-Leninist" as they were based on a "biological sector," the counter-argument is that they are necessary precisely to overcome obstacles to women's expression and participation and ensure women's experiences are heard for true democracy.

Contemporary Patterns in Women's Movements

Recent mobilisations around International Women's Day reveal both the potential and limitations of current feminist organising. Across different national contexts, March 8th mobilisations have shown varied levels of success, often characterised by political fragmentation and the absence of unified calls for feminist strikes. However, these movements have demonstrated qualitative growth, with increasing participation from diverse sectors including black women's organisations, indigenous women's organisations, and peasant women, alongside growing visibility of trans women's issues.

Common demands emerging from these mobilisations include opposition to gender violence, economic justice, recognition of domestic work, and broader anti-austerity measures. A "new feminist wave" has been identified by many activists, characterised by generational differences, new issues and language, and positioning as part of a global anti-capitalist, anti-patriarchal, and anti-colonial alternative. However, this growth occurs alongside challenges including state repression, the rise of far-right and religious fundamentalism, and the persistence of liberal, individualistic identity politics that can undermine collective organising.

Fragmentation and External Challenges

The political fragmentation of the women's movement itself can make it challenging for left organisations to identify unified fronts for engagement. While some organisations participate in broad coalitions for events like March 8th, national, unified action isn't always possible.

Furthermore, external factors such as political repression and the rise of the far-right and religious fundamentalism pose significant challenges:

Political repression, such as authoritarian measures in various countries, can hinder mobilisation and lead to comrades taking extra precautionary measures
The rise of the far-right and religious fundamentalism, including anti-"gender ideology" campaigns, creates new reactionary currents concerning gender relations, with contexts where there is a war against women, poor people, black people, and LGBTIQ+ individuals, fuelled by hate speech and resulting in increased police and state violence
These external pressures can trap the movement in a "state of emergency," draining energy and limiting the space for developing new strategies or qualitative growth

Conclusion

The historical reluctance and ongoing failures of many traditional left organisations to fully embrace women's liberation are the result of a complex interplay of theoretical limitations that reduce women's oppression to a secondary issue, the dismissal of specific struggles as mere "identity politics," deeply ingrained male domination and bureaucracy, insufficient practical support structures, and the challenges posed by the fragmentation of the movement and external political attacks.

As the Fourth International's 1991 document "Changing forms of the struggle for women's liberation" emphasises, recognising and actively combating these issues within our own ranks is essential for building a truly unified and revolutionary movement capable of achieving liberation for the entire working class. The development of what Cinzia Arruzza and others have called "Feminism for the 99%" offers a framework for understanding how women's liberation and class struggle are fundamentally interconnected, requiring both autonomous women's organising and broader left unity. The historical relationship between the women's movement and traditional labour organisations demonstrates that while winning lasting victories often requires the solidarity of other workers, this solidarity must be built on a genuine understanding of women's oppression as central to the capitalist system, not peripheral to it.