Abstract
The evocative title of this latest volume by sociologist Lynn Chancer pushes us to scrutinize closely the development of American feminism: What gave rise to our movement(s)? Where have we made substantial progress? and Why do our gains plateau, leaving us stalled. Nevertheless, this deftly crafted title urges “taking back the revolution,” the reverse of defeatism. This optimism pervades the spirit of both American feminism and the profession of social work; otherwise, why would we be so persistent in our efforts to effect change?
Social workers will appreciate Chancer’s intersectional lens that integrates gender, race, class, and sexuality analyses to identify the reasons for the uneven trajectories of four major areas where the United States has made substantial progress. First, the lack of universal, quality day care, particularly for poor women and women of color, stymies the realization of full political, economic, and educational equality (pp. 49–50). Second, rural/urban and wealth divides that limit reproductive choice undermine achieving sexual freedom (p. 77). Third, heterosexist norms pressuring men to sexualize and coerce women sustain gender violence (p. 118). Fourth, white men’s continued ownership and control of the media impede the transformation of gender representations (p. 138).
Throughout this well documented and cogent book, Chancer puts her finger squarely on the inextricable links between the political and personal in tackling these major issues of American feminism. As a feminist social worker, I have experienced the impact of this progress and its stalling in the lives of people with whom I have worked. The area which I have had the longest term involvement is in working to end gender violence and will assess Chancer’s line of argument here. She quite rightly highlights the benefits of popular opinion shifting from viewing intimate partner violence (IPV) as a private trouble endured in silence to a public issue acted upon collectively (p. 105). She points to sharp declines in sexual violence over the latter part of the twentieth century but also to the stabilization in rates during the twenty-first century.
In analyzing these trends, Chancer identifies two patterns: tenacious gender imbalances of men far outnumbering women in committing IPV (p. 113) and cultural expectations pressuring men to “perform masculinity,” through sexism and heterosexism (p. 121). In response, Chancer advocates that feminists’ center on transforming everyday masculinist norms, which might, in turn, eradicate extremes of male domination and sexual violence at the margins (p. 131).
Reflecting debates within American feminism, Chancer appears ambivalent toward punishing those perpetrating the violence. On the one hand, she supports criminal legal measures that “punish” those responsible for the violence (p. 131). On the other hand, she recognizes that the increased reliance on the criminal legal system skews outcomes toward punishing and incarcerating low-income and racialized populations (p. 131). Her well-taken proposal is to reinvigorate cross-racial and cross-class alliances that attend to both common and distinct issues. Unlike social workers, she, however, does not focus on practice approaches that might mediate among the disparate interests of social groups.
While recommending reeducation to change beliefs that deny or excuse IPV, she does not consider how positive identifications, such as being fathers or members of a cultural community, could motivate change. Nor does she mention restorative approaches, which include peacemaking circles to change community norms and encourage persons causing harm and the larger community to take responsibility, and family group conferencing to build supports and protections around child and adult family members and foster pride as family. Underlying her views is the assumption that intersectionality means “multidimensional and overlapping discriminations” (p. 8); thus, limiting her vision of how to grow change from within and across cultural groups.
Nevertheless, American feminism as portrayed by Chancer is based on social movements that offer flexibility in analysis and action. These movements are not stuck as seen in the “rise and fall” of different empires, most often referenced for the Romans. “Stall” is far more sanguine than “fall” and bodes well for “taking back a revolution” and extending it outward to identify the centrality of gender in other increasingly prominent issues, including mass migrations and climate change.
