What are structures and why does society put so much emphasis on being structured? If structures are the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of something complex, how do we then formulate a single framework or structure out of those structures that exist in a society guided by many different aspects such as class? Culture, identity, race, sexual preference, and or orientation as well as variation in a belief system?
The women’s liberation movement has as we know been shaped by different things that happen in society, as we know, power relations and dynamics of society have put men on the pedestal of power and have left a lot of women’s rights neglected, therefore the movements were based on ensuring equality in the society that does not discriminate amongst the marginalized groups. However, the overly structured society in which we find ourselves, and the control that structures give others over others has existed over the years and still does today. But these movements like any other still will rise with its leaders, a name is always attached to the movement.
But was a structureless method a means to an end? And what divisions does it further create in the society that we exist in? how often does one use the term “structurelessness”? The same way it appears less in one’s vocabulary is the same way it relates or is used in the movement, instead, it is defined as conscious groups, revolutionary groups, and “woke awakenings” as we know them today. But people generally want to be specific and goal-oriented about the tasks they involve themselves in, it makes more sense because structurelessness has more limitations to it than the solutions that are meant to contribute to the total emancipation of the women’s liberation movement. I will explain this using a paper by Freeman Jo. (1972) “The tyranny of structurelessness”. Berkeley Journal of sociology.
The idea of structureless structures is infeasible, structureless creates uncontrollable room for structures to form because the idea of structurelessness itself does not prevent the formulation of normal structures within a structure but prevents or goes against the formation of formal structures within a structure. For example, the idea of a laissez-faire approach (Adam Smith, 1776) to society promotes the absence of government from interfering in the workings of a free market, but this philosophical approach does not prevent the economically powerful from establishing control over the economy, but only the government from interfering. In this section of the paper, I will be explaining the types of informal structures that formulate themselves within the movement.
POLITICAL IMPORTANCE
What happens when structured groups form? And how effective are these groups? structured groups are focus driven and are quite effective in getting women to talk and express their lived experiences however how much of those different lived experiences get focus or measures put to ensure that things get done? These groups are very focused and devoted to completing certain tasks, especially those that contribute to the success of the project. These tasks can determine if the group is doing a good job completing the project or not and they are able to judge their failures and successes and also make plans for their future projects. There is homogeneity in the group, meaning that there is equality and a state of being the same or similar and people can form a “common language” for better integration within the group.
But people come from different backgrounds and have different personal experiences, but in a group that is task-oriented these differences can be misunderstood and interpreted differently if there is no understanding within the group. But if individuals know each other or everyone else to understand the nuances, then these differences can be accommodated but it is not easy. This is why communication becomes very important, the information must be passed to all participants, opinions checked, and work divided but people’s opinions in their own personal lives cannot be controlled by the group as people can exist as individuals outside of the group. Furthermore, a movement that brings together a wide range of differences in personality, information, and experience is bound not to be skills specific, it is expected that the tasks must be divided amongst the group.
How possible is it in a large political space/ movement for sisters to exist?
When small groups form due to not being able to execute their tasks in large groups due to not being efficient, this often leads to people preferring to work on a small scale. This often restricts and leaves out many groups of society excluded from participation. Groups that are unstructured lead to people turning their energies into controlling each other it is not often dome through malicious desire to manipulate others, but these conditions force them to focus on those specific issues that relate to them. The end of consciousness-raising excludes many and leaves them with no place to participate. They seek other alternatives or join other groups or turn on their ‘sisters’ or just do their own thing. The desire and eagerness of joining meaningful political activities are still there and if they turn to her political organizations, they may acquire the kind of structured, effective activity that they have not been able to find. But some of these political organizations see women’s liberation as only one of the many issues which need to be addressed and often women are devoted to those tasks and open room for new members to join, members that share common values, beliefs, and ideas.
LET’S DISCUSS ELITISM
Elitism can be classified as a belief or attitude that individuals with an intrinsic quality, wealth, intellect, special skills or special traits posses better influence or quality in society more than others, this term is commonly used incorrectly in the women’s liberation movement. “elites” in the movement often refer to individuals who come from a certain group in society that has access to resources that others don’t, however, an individual cannot be an elitist but possess some of these traits. Elitism can refer to a group and not an individual. Elites exist in the political space or are friends of people in the political space, this is a structure that forms on its own.
The concept of elitism is not a new phenomenon the inevitably elitist and exclusive nature has been associated with this group for especially when it comes to the rise of societal imbalance when it comes to issues of women and access in society. We can describe this group as a group that had created a vacuum for the ‘locker room’ mentality to exist in the movement their issues are selectively based on their experiences and what they come across in life as challenges, however, a movement that is supposed to incorporate different women of all parts of the society, how does it involve those that are friends or ones that are allies.
The invisibility or lack of easy identification doesn’t mean that they are not there, it is easy to identify who influences who in a group. Those that are friends will relate more to each other, in any engagement or meeting they will listen attentively, interrupt less, and repeat each other’s points. Everyone knows who it is important to check with before deciding. And since women who chose to form part of structureless groups there is still a criterion of respect and preference for example, in the early days the criteria were more traditional, marriage being a prerequisite of participation. But these groups are bound to form within people who relate to each other for different reasons, for example, those who feel like they are more closer or similar because they come from a similar background, schools, church or workplace, and these connections can be interlinked through mutual friends but then those women who do not fall apart of these groups often feel like they do not belong and even if they form their own groups they will still be the small groups that the elites do not want to associate with.
THE STAR SYSTEM
Structurelessness has created space for the “star system”, the star system is the preferred stars to articulate information or be public advocates for the group, decisions are made, and people are selected to articulate them and explain them to the general public. The public and the press use a mass group opinion to decide who the women are because society does not know how to listen to women as women society wants to understand the vote of the referendum, the public opinion survey as well as the selection of group spokespeople for the particular task and why the person was chosen. There are no criteria in the women’s movement that provide privilege over the others however the public is conditioned to look for spokespeople.
When these women speak for the moment they are often faced by many issues of rejection and resentment even if the movement does not select any women to be their spokesperson, they will be placed there by the press or the public. This comes with a lot of consequences for the ‘star’ women. The press puts them there and not the movement, therefore the movement cannot remove them whether the movement believes that it should have no representatives at all or not. This isolates and brings hatred as resentment towards the woman that the press and the public have chosen as the ‘star’.
This brings trouble to the movement because it divides the ‘sisters’ and they start pointing at each other and deviating from actually uniting with each other, these internal divisions lead to a break of cause and is painfully destructive to the individuals involved. This results in women leaving the entire movement or feel less responsible for her ‘Sisters’. One cannot feel responsible for people who have been the source of such pain without being a masochist, and these women are usually too strong to bow to that kind of personal pressure. Therefore, the backlash to the “star” system in effect encourages the very kind of individualistic non-responsibility that the movement condemns. By purging a sister as a “star,” the movement loses whatever control it may have had over the person who then becomes free to commit all the individualistic sins of which she has been accused.
How do we include those who do not want to be boxed?
Modern-day politics of representation have expanded drastically, the movement has allowed room for those who identify and those who do not to find expression as the cause if against any form of discrimination. Therefore, there are different types of women that exist in society, lesbians, transgender women, non-binary, gender fluid (etc). some of these women still face discrimination from society and cannot find expression due to the social constructs that the general public has been socialized to. Discrimination is not only ethically unacceptable it also entails substantial economic and social costs. Discrimination itself leads to a loss of human capital and talents. This form of abuse undermines people’s productivity and hits heavily on their mental health.
Anti-LGBT discrimination is also detrimental to social cohesion through the persistence of restrictive gender norms that impede gender equality more broadly speaking and, hence, the expansion of social and economic roles, especially for women which put the importance of an inclusive society of sexual and gender minorities. The liberation of women can not be exclusive of the LGBT community however having a structure or not having can also contribute to conflict and failure in the group if there is no understanding. For example, some women chose not to identify as women, but society still perceives them as so and the men still may/may not include them in their spaces these women end up being left out due to this. There is also so group that chooses not to associate because they do not want to be fighting for exactly what they do not want to associate with if they identify or are identified as women. The lack of space available for association leads to people who are fighting for the same cause to form their own structure, perhaps we need to discuss the types of spaces we create for different groups in society and how inclusive they are.
Tabile Tamara Dlamini is the Treasurer General of SASCO. She writes in her personal capacity.