“To Repulse the State from Our Uteri”

IF 0.7 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
Spencer Beswick
{"title":"“To Repulse the State from Our Uteri”","authors":"Spencer Beswick","doi":"10.1215/01636545-10846837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article analyzes how anarcha-feminists in the United States critiqued the state and attempted to build feminist dual power in response to the New Right’s attacks on reproductive freedom. Anarcha-feminists in the Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation (1989–98) argued that petitioning the state for reproductive rights was a dead end because, as their political statement put it, patriarchy “operates as a foundation of state power, used to justify a paternalistic relationship between the rulers and the ruled.” Anything the state gives—including Roe v. Wade—can be taken away, for it is ultimately a tool of sexual and class violence in the hands of the patriarchal, capitalist ruling class. Building on the legacy of anarcha-feminists in the women’s liberation movement, Love and Rage argued that the only way to guarantee reproductive freedom was to struggle for autonomy against the state rather than reform within it. This article explores how anarcha-feminists sought to build grassroots infrastructure, knowledge, and organizations with an orientation toward establishing feminist dual power. Ultimately, Love and Rage argued, the only way to guarantee reproductive freedom and women’s liberation is the revolutionary construction of a libertarian socialist society.","PeriodicalId":51725,"journal":{"name":"RADICAL HISTORY REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RADICAL HISTORY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-10846837","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article analyzes how anarcha-feminists in the United States critiqued the state and attempted to build feminist dual power in response to the New Right’s attacks on reproductive freedom. Anarcha-feminists in the Love and Rage Revolutionary Anarchist Federation (1989–98) argued that petitioning the state for reproductive rights was a dead end because, as their political statement put it, patriarchy “operates as a foundation of state power, used to justify a paternalistic relationship between the rulers and the ruled.” Anything the state gives—including Roe v. Wade—can be taken away, for it is ultimately a tool of sexual and class violence in the hands of the patriarchal, capitalist ruling class. Building on the legacy of anarcha-feminists in the women’s liberation movement, Love and Rage argued that the only way to guarantee reproductive freedom was to struggle for autonomy against the state rather than reform within it. This article explores how anarcha-feminists sought to build grassroots infrastructure, knowledge, and organizations with an orientation toward establishing feminist dual power. Ultimately, Love and Rage argued, the only way to guarantee reproductive freedom and women’s liberation is the revolutionary construction of a libertarian socialist society.
"将国家赶出我们的子宫"
本文分析了美国的无政府主义女权主义者如何批判国家,并试图建立女权主义的双重力量,以应对新右翼对生育自由的攻击。爱与愤怒革命无政府主义联合会(1989-98 年)中的无政府主义女权主义者认为,向国家请愿争取生育权是一条死胡同,因为正如她们的政治声明所说,父权制 "是国家权力的基础,用来为统治者与被统治者之间的家长式关系辩护"。国家给予的任何东西--包括 "罗伊诉韦德案"--都可以被剥夺,因为它最终是父权制、资本主义统治阶级手中性暴力和阶级暴力的工具。在妇女解放运动中的无政府主义女权主义者的遗产基础上,《爱与愤怒》认为,保障生育自由的唯一途径是与国家进行斗争,争取自主权,而不是在国家内部进行改革。本文探讨了无政府主义女权主义者如何以建立女权双重权力为导向,寻求建立基层基础设施、知识和组织。最终,《爱与愤怒》认为,保障生育自由和妇女解放的唯一途径是革命性地建设一个自由社会主义社会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Individual subscribers and institutions with electronic access can view issues of Radical History Review online. If you have not signed up, review the first-time access instructions. For more than a quarter of a century, Radical History Review has stood at the point where rigorous historical scholarship and active political engagement converge. The journal is edited by a collective of historians—men and women with diverse backgrounds, research interests, and professional perspectives. Articles in RHR address issues of gender, race, sexuality, imperialism, and class, stretching the boundaries of historical analysis to explore Western and non-Western histories.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信