Ambivalenser och strategiska val. Om problem kring begreppen särart och jämlikhet i kvinnorörelsen och i feministisk teori

Abstract

Although previous research about the old feminist movement has deconstructed the equality versus difference dichotomy as false, recent Swedish research applies the same dichotomy, arguing that the demise of second wave feminism in Sweden was due to a swing from "equality feminism" "difference feminism". Based on her own extensive research on feminism in the 1960-80's, Dahlerup argues that cultural feminism of that period, including such phenomena as all women bands, films and women's literature, rather should be interpreted as a gigantic search for new feminist identities. Studies of old as well as newer feminist movements show that it has been possible for feminists to argue for equality (the political dimension) without agreeing or even clarifying for themselves the troublesome question of sameness or difference between the sexes (the onthological dimension). This article rejects the new dichotomy of biological essentialism versus constructivism, partly as a consequence of feminist theory's own rejection of the distinction between sex and gender. The article states that all feminisms see women's position as socially constructed, although in varying degrees; and that even "difference feminism" includes some protest against patriarchal biologism. In general, feminism is full of ambivalence and strategic choices rather than dichotomous thinking. The author also modifies the pendulumtheory of historical swings between feminism of sameness and feminism of difference. The article ends with recommendations for feminist movement research: A synchronous perspective is necessary, even in diachronous analyses. Further, dichotomous analytical concepts should be replaced by idealtypes which allow for differences in degree. Finally, it should be considered an empirical question, whether, when and on what issues women in history have constituted a group.