.jpg)
The personal is political, also termedThe private is political, is a political argument used as a rallying slogan bystudent activist movements andsecond-wave feminism from the late 1960s. In thefeminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s, it was seen as a challenge to thepatriarchy,nuclear family andfamily values. The phrase was popularized by the publication of feminist activistCarol Hanisch's 1969 essay, "The Personal Is Political." The phrase and idea have been repeatedly described as a defining characterization of second-wave feminism,radical feminism,women's studies, or feminism in general.[1] It has also been used by some female artists as the underlying philosophy for their art practice.
The phrase "the personal is political" was popularized bysecond-wave feminism in the late 1960s and was also important in thecivil rights movement,student movement, andblack power movement. It underscored the connections between personal experience and larger social and political structures. In the feminist movement of the 1960s and 1970s, it was a challenge to thenuclear family andfamily values that resulted from the embeddedpatriarchy structure. It forced popular social movements to challenge what was considered to be "political" and to reflect upon how lived experiences impact the perception of reality.[2] Issues that had previously been considered moral or trivial offenses in everyday actions were being acknowledged as oppressive structural norms.[2]
The idea that women were unhappy in their roles as housewives and mothers was previously seen as a private issue. However, "the personal is political" argues that women's personal issues (e.g. sex,childcare, and women not being content with their lives at home) are political issues that need political intervention to generate change. "The personal is political" drew attention to this relationship and resisted the claim that these issues are personal problems that should be solved in private and by the individual.[3] This emphasized that politics were in play even in the most personal circumstances and relationships.[4] Furthermore, the slogan tackles the perception that women enjoy a transcendent identity irrespective ofethnicity,race, class, culture,marital status,sexuality anddisability by encouraging individuals to think about personal experience politically.[5]
In 1970, the phrase was popularized by the publication of a 1969 essay by feministCarol Hanisch under the title "The Personal Is Political".[6] Hanisch disavows authorship of the phrase, saying that "As far as I know, that was done byNotes from the Second Year editorsShulie Firestone andAnne Koedt afterKathie Sarachild brought it to their attention as a possible paper to be printed in that early collection".[7] According to Kerry Burch, Shulamith Firestone,Robin Morgan, and other feminists given credit for originating the phrase have also declined authorship. Burch writes, "Instead, they cite millions of women in public and private conversations as the phrase's collective authors."[8]Gloria Steinem has likened claiming authorship of the phrase to claiming authorship of "World War II".[8]
The phrase has been repeatedly described as a defining characterization of second-wave feminism,radical feminism,women's studies, or feminism in general.[9][10]
Carol Hanisch, a member ofNew York Radical Women and a prominent figure in theWomen's Liberation Movement, drafted an article defending the political importance ofconsciousness-raising groups in February 1969 inGainesville, Florida.[11] Originally addressed to the women's caucus of theSouthern Conference Educational Fund in response to a memo written by SCEF stafferDorothy Zellner, the paper was first given the title, "Some Thoughts in Response to Dottie [Zellner]'s Thoughts on a Women's Liberation Movement". At the time Hanisch was a New York City-based staffer of the Fund and was advocating for engagement in dedicated organizing for women's liberation in theAmerican South.[11] Hanisch sought to rebut the idea thatsex,appearance,abortion, childcare, and thedivision of household labor were merely personal issues without political importance. To confront these and other issues, she urged women to overcome self-blame, discuss their situations with each other, and organize collectively against male domination of society.[11] In her essay, Hanisch's central argument is that women's "therapy" groups (later known as "consciousness-raising groups") should not be dismissed as "apolitical" or "navel-gazing" as some critics have argued[12] but instead are deeply political as they address issues that affect the lives of women due to the organisation of the social system. She takes pains to highlight the fact that these issues should not be seen as problems caused by women's failures but rather by an oppressive system and should be treated as such, even though they may appear purely personal.[7]
Hanisch does not herself use the phrase "the personal is political" in the essay, but writes:[11]
The essay was published under the title, "The Personal Is Political," inNotes from the Second Year: Women's Liberation in 1970. The essay's author believes thatShulamith Firestone andAnne Koedt, the book's editors, gave the essay its famous title.[11] The essay has since been reprinted inRadical Feminism: A Documentary Reader.[13]
The phrase has adopted a number of meanings since first being coined in the 1960s. Hanisch herself observed in 2006 that "Like most of the theory created by thePro-Woman Line radical feminists, these ideas have been revised or ripped off or even stood on their head and used against their original, radical intent."[11] This highlights how feminists have interpreted the nature of the connection between the personal and political in divergent ways.
The phrase has heavily figured inblack feminism, such as "A Black Feminist Statement" by theCombahee River Collective,Audre Lorde's essay "The Master's Tools Will Never Dismantle the Master's House", and the anthologyThis Bridge Called My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, edited byGloria E. Anzaldúa andCherríe Moraga. More broadly, asKimberlé Crenshaw observes: "This process of recognizing as social and systemic what was formerly perceived as isolated and individual has also characterized theidentity politics of African Americans, other people of color, and gays and lesbians, among others."[20] Black feminists expanded on the concept of "the personal is political" by dealing with theintersections of race, class and sex.[21][non-primary source needed]
Other authors such asBetty Friedan (author ofThe Feminine Mystique)[22] have also been seen to adapt the argument. Betty Friedan broke new ground as she explored the idea of women finding personal fulfilment outside of their traditionally seen roles. Friedan helped advance the women's rights movement as one of the founders of theNational Organization for Women.[23]Susan Oliver author of the biographyBetty Friedan: The Personal Is Political, relies on the phrase in her attempt “to pull Friedan from the shadow of her most famous work and invites us to examine her personal life in order that we may better understand and appreciate 'the impact and influence' of her activities on the women's rights movement”.[24][25]
The centrality of the "personal is political" to the second-wave feminist movement means that it is the impetus behind many policy and law changes, including the following in England:
It also led to many non-state political action, includingwomen's strikes, women's protests (including protests againstMiss World 1970), Women's Liberation Movement (WLM) conferences, and the setting ofwomen's refuges,rape crisis centres, andwomen's communes.[28][failed verification]
Boththird-wave feminism andpostfeminism hold the argument of "the personal is political" as central to their beliefs, "the second-wave' understanding of 'the personal is political' quickly evolved away from its explanatory and analytical power to become a prescription for feminism living—a shift that ultimately collapsed the terms together."[29] Thus the concept continues to impact contemporary feminist discussion.
Third-wave feminists tend to focus on 'everyday feminism' for example, combining feminist values and statements with fashion, relationships and reclaiming traditionally feminised skills. Valuing these elements and openly declaring them to be political is considered to combine the person with the political, however this, like the meaning of the term, is contested. Some second-wave feminists believe that declaring all personal choices to be political, such as whether to wear nail polish, does not focus enough on how political structures shape "the personal".[30] Other feminists argue that viewing the personal as political the way "everyday feminists" do does not necessarily mean ignoring how second-wave feminists used the term, and that both interpretations and applications are compatible.[18]
Artists such as the AustralianAnn Newmarch, founding member of theWomen's Art Movement inAdelaide in 1976,[31][32] used the philosophy to underpin her work, such as in herscreenprint,Women Hold Up Half the Sky.[33]
The Personal Is Political: Feminist Art from the Sara M. and Michelle Vance Waddell Collection was an exhibit in Cincinnati that showed howfeminist artists connect their daily lives to the politics around their bodies. These artists used their creative expression to reveal connections between the personal and political realms of their lives.[34]
Martha Wilson is a New York artist whose work reveals how her identity as a woman has been shaped by forces around her, like power relationships, culture and gender. Her work in thePortrait Society in 2009 made use ofself portraits to explore how the personal is political.[35]
As argued by Frances Rogan and Shelley Budgeon inThe Personal Is Political: Assessing Feminist Fundamentals in the Digital Age, technology has broken down the distinction between what is private and public even further. Private items, likesmartphones, become products of connectivity and public communication. This technology can be seen as oppressive or as an opportunity for women. Social media grants a larger amount of visibility to women's experiences, which in turn can increase social surveillance, scrutiny andself-monitoring, and can be harmful.[3]
They assert that at the same time, social media can act in a way that portrays women's bodies and appearance as signifiers of worth. Digital spaces like social media can give a user the ability to empower themselves through the platform. These platforms are also useful in bringing awareness to important gendered issues, and communicating experiences to a larger audience.[3]
On platforms such as Twitter and Instagram, personal stories often carry political weight. Li[36] (2020), analyzed tweets and hashtags such as #MeToo and #WhyIDidntReport which shared intimate stories of sexual assault, which led directly into political discourse. Responses to these tweets called for activism and protests, rather than keeping the issue personal. Additionally, Lu[37] (2023) adds that feminist campaigns on Instagram intensifies this effect because they use intense images and graphics to break the silence on taboo issues. Survivors posts become a “collective voice” that unifies experiences. Personal stories become means to ignite political discourse online. Ureta (2021)[38], tells us that the “personal is political” has transcended individual cases to form a shared collective struggle with the #MeToo campaign.
Liberal feminists argue that the phrase is dangerous because it erodes necessary political boundaries. This is because it is said to take away the importance of the public aspect of politics.[39] It is further criticised byHannah Arendt that, in this process of eroding political boundaries, the public space of politics is transformed into a pseudo-space of interaction in which individuals no longer 'act' but merely behave aseconomic producers and consumers.[40]
Furthermore, according to some critics, the interpretation of the phrase to be about women being oppressed in the home has a very narrow focus on middle-class white women.[15] This excludes women who work, lesbian couples, women who can not afford childcare and the experiences of other cultures.[clarification needed]
The phrase "the personal is political" has given rise tocultural feminism, which many female activists see as a hindrance to political action and reform. It is argued that cultural feminism encourages activists to move away from politics and give in to traditional roles of the patriarchy.[4]
I wish to take issue with the belief that... these groups are 'navel-gazing' or 'personal therapy'.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
