What do you think?
Rate this book
نقد الحركة النسوانية
'The history of women's struggles is so broad and rich that I have found t difficult to select. I have chosen to deal with the struggles as they reach their peaks. On a mountain peak one gets a much clearer general view...'
Ranging from 1640 from the present day, this book looks at the long struggle for women's liberation- and particularly the different movements which have soight to achieve women's liberation iver the past 100 years, for these have explained women's opretion in very different ways and have persued strategies quite opposed to one another.
Under capitalism, argues Tony Cliff, the production of necessities of life is a social process while, reproduction- the rearing of children- is a private process, taking place largely in the enclosed family. The oppression of women is rooted in this dichotomy.
But oppression in itself does not lead to a struggle for liberation. The oppression of wome, by dividing them and imprisoning them in the four walls of the home, leads most often to powerlessness and submission. Only women, as workers, have collective power in their workplaces and unions, do they gain confidence to fight. For this reason Tony Cliff looks particularly at the struggles of the working class women.
'Our argument is that women's liberation cannot be achieved without victory of socialism and that socialism is impossible without women's liberation.'
Ranging from 1640 from the present day, this book looks at the long struggle for women's liberation- and particularly the different movements which have soight to achieve women's liberation iver the past 100 years, for these have explained women's opretion in very different ways and have persued strategies quite opposed to one another.
Under capitalism, argues Tony Cliff, the production of necessities of life is a social process while, reproduction- the rearing of children- is a private process, taking place largely in the enclosed family. The oppression of women is rooted in this dichotomy.
But oppression in itself does not lead to a struggle for liberation. The oppression of wome, by dividing them and imprisoning them in the four walls of the home, leads most often to powerlessness and submission. Only women, as workers, have collective power in their workplaces and unions, do they gain confidence to fight. For this reason Tony Cliff looks particularly at the struggles of the working class women.
'Our argument is that women's liberation cannot be achieved without victory of socialism and that socialism is impossible without women's liberation.'
384 pages, Unknown Binding
First published April 20, 1984
17 people are currently reading
225 people want to read
About the author
Tony Cliff
70 books65 followersBorn in Palestine to Zionist parents in 1917, Ygael Gluckstein became a Trotskyist during the 1930s and played a leading role in the attempt to forge a movement uniting Arab and Jewish workers. At the end of of the Second World war, seeing that the victory of the Zionists was more and more inevitable, he moved to Britain and adopted the pseudonym Tony Cliff.
In the late 1940s he developed the theory that Russia wasn’t a workers’ state but a form of bureaucratic state capitalism, a theory which has characterised the tendency with which he was associated for the remaining five decades of his life. Although he broke from “orthodox Trotskyism” after being bureaucratically excluded from the Fourth International in 1950, he always considered himself to be a Trotskyist although he was also open to other influences within the Marxist tradition.
In the late 1940s he developed the theory that Russia wasn’t a workers’ state but a form of bureaucratic state capitalism, a theory which has characterised the tendency with which he was associated for the remaining five decades of his life. Although he broke from “orthodox Trotskyism” after being bureaucratically excluded from the Fourth International in 1950, he always considered himself to be a Trotskyist although he was also open to other influences within the Marxist tradition.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
March 8, 2026
This book confirms the fundamental Marxist arguments concerning how and how not to fight women’s oppression with the use of the history of struggles for women’s rights, spanning from the seventeenth century to the present day.
Sharpening class struggle polarises women into opposing camps and the unassailable differences between working class women and ruling class women become clear. For example, in Russia at the start of the first world war, bourgeois feminist groups called for women to mobilise for the war effort. For working women in Russia, the war increased their misery and oppression. The working class faced bread shortages, and women would often lead bread riots. This is compared to the bourgeois women, whose class were enriched from the war. In 1917, women workers in Russia famously started the Russian revolution. This shows how women from different classes have opposing interests and cannot be united in spite of them.
This is put beautifully by Elizabeth Gurley Flynn in the IWW call to women:
“The 'queen in the parlor' has no interest in common with 'the maid in the kitchen'; the wife of a department store owner shows no sisterly concern for the seventeen-year-old girl who finds prostitution the only door open to a $5-a-week wage clerk. The sisterhood of women, like the brotherhood of men, is a hollow sham to labour. Behind all its smug hypocrisy and sickly sentimentality look the sinister outlines of the class war.”
When working class organisations are strong and militant they take organising women very seriously (eg early SPD, Bolsheviks, IWW). When working class organisations take poor stances on women it reflects their weakness. Standing in solidarity with women is important to further the position of the entire working class.
Women are powerful as workers- united with working class men. The workplace is where women have power. Equal pay and abortion rights in Britain were won, when women fought alongside men in their unions. When the working class is exercising their power and fighting, all workers are lifted up including women. A good example of this is when there was a wave of class struggle in Britain, women workers were inspired to fight back and struck and won often.
CRITICISMS:
Cliff criticises the women’s liberation movement for focusing on the individual and individual experiences, which is warranted, but I think he takes it too far.
“Radical feminists seek to withdraw the individual from the social. This is encapsulated in the women's liberation movement slogan 'the personal is political' This turns politics into a personal matter, redefining it and negating collective action aimed at political change.”
I don’t know if he is being wilfully ignorant here. The point of ‘the personal is political’ slogan is to say the individual experiences of sexism women face- the burden of domestic labor and sexist abuse- are political problems, reflecting the broader oppression of women in society, that need to be challenged. This does not negate ‘collective action aimed at political change’.
He makes some fair criticisms of the women libs movement consciousness raising groups, which are good. But I don’t agree that it’s all bad.
It is actually good for men and women to read about sexism and apply it to their own lives. A lot of consciousness raising is basically critically thinking about the sexist conditioning of society, discussing it in groups, and attempting to overcome it in your own life. This is about questions of consent, questioning why women do the majority of domestic labor, etc. The mistake that the women’s lib movement made was thinking this ‘consciousness raising’ could change society at large. For that, you would need to challenge the system of capitalism that is the basis of women’s oppression.
I think it’s really bad Cliff doesn’t make an argument for the left itself to combat sexism in its ranks, and it would be actually good if more of the left took sexism more seriously. He talks about how the women’s liberation movement was founded LITERALLY because the new left in America was despicably sexist. One example is a prominent magazine of the new left featuring a picture of a woman with her head cut off, wearing a badge that says ‘women power’- there is big text over the image saying ‘two tits, no brain’. Disgusting. It speaks to the crap politics of the SDS but also how insidious sexism is. Tony Cliff rips consciousness raising of the women’s lib movement to shreds, but clearly it is important to combat sexism on an individual level. but also tony cliff treated his wife pretty bad so…. Mm.
A lot of the stuff in the chapter ‘a haven in a heartless world’ is very outdated. He talks about how working class women strive to marry, often do so very young and would prefer being a full time housewife over paid work. The average age of marriage in Australia in 2025 was 30-35. A study from the New York Times shows 48% of women in America said that being married was not too or at all important for a fulfilling life (compared to 39% of men). I’m skeptical if the claim ‘women would prefer to be a full time housewife over paid work’ is actually true of the UK in the 80s or if tony cliff is just making an assertion. He does not quote any opinion polls, just anecdotal evidence.
Also this book is meant to deal with how socialists should relate to feminism and feminist groups/movements and I feel like it completely fails to do that.
Sharpening class struggle polarises women into opposing camps and the unassailable differences between working class women and ruling class women become clear. For example, in Russia at the start of the first world war, bourgeois feminist groups called for women to mobilise for the war effort. For working women in Russia, the war increased their misery and oppression. The working class faced bread shortages, and women would often lead bread riots. This is compared to the bourgeois women, whose class were enriched from the war. In 1917, women workers in Russia famously started the Russian revolution. This shows how women from different classes have opposing interests and cannot be united in spite of them.
This is put beautifully by Elizabeth Gurley Flynn in the IWW call to women:
“The 'queen in the parlor' has no interest in common with 'the maid in the kitchen'; the wife of a department store owner shows no sisterly concern for the seventeen-year-old girl who finds prostitution the only door open to a $5-a-week wage clerk. The sisterhood of women, like the brotherhood of men, is a hollow sham to labour. Behind all its smug hypocrisy and sickly sentimentality look the sinister outlines of the class war.”
When working class organisations are strong and militant they take organising women very seriously (eg early SPD, Bolsheviks, IWW). When working class organisations take poor stances on women it reflects their weakness. Standing in solidarity with women is important to further the position of the entire working class.
Women are powerful as workers- united with working class men. The workplace is where women have power. Equal pay and abortion rights in Britain were won, when women fought alongside men in their unions. When the working class is exercising their power and fighting, all workers are lifted up including women. A good example of this is when there was a wave of class struggle in Britain, women workers were inspired to fight back and struck and won often.
CRITICISMS:
Cliff criticises the women’s liberation movement for focusing on the individual and individual experiences, which is warranted, but I think he takes it too far.
“Radical feminists seek to withdraw the individual from the social. This is encapsulated in the women's liberation movement slogan 'the personal is political' This turns politics into a personal matter, redefining it and negating collective action aimed at political change.”
I don’t know if he is being wilfully ignorant here. The point of ‘the personal is political’ slogan is to say the individual experiences of sexism women face- the burden of domestic labor and sexist abuse- are political problems, reflecting the broader oppression of women in society, that need to be challenged. This does not negate ‘collective action aimed at political change’.
He makes some fair criticisms of the women libs movement consciousness raising groups, which are good. But I don’t agree that it’s all bad.
It is actually good for men and women to read about sexism and apply it to their own lives. A lot of consciousness raising is basically critically thinking about the sexist conditioning of society, discussing it in groups, and attempting to overcome it in your own life. This is about questions of consent, questioning why women do the majority of domestic labor, etc. The mistake that the women’s lib movement made was thinking this ‘consciousness raising’ could change society at large. For that, you would need to challenge the system of capitalism that is the basis of women’s oppression.
I think it’s really bad Cliff doesn’t make an argument for the left itself to combat sexism in its ranks, and it would be actually good if more of the left took sexism more seriously. He talks about how the women’s liberation movement was founded LITERALLY because the new left in America was despicably sexist. One example is a prominent magazine of the new left featuring a picture of a woman with her head cut off, wearing a badge that says ‘women power’- there is big text over the image saying ‘two tits, no brain’. Disgusting. It speaks to the crap politics of the SDS but also how insidious sexism is. Tony Cliff rips consciousness raising of the women’s lib movement to shreds, but clearly it is important to combat sexism on an individual level. but also tony cliff treated his wife pretty bad so…. Mm.
A lot of the stuff in the chapter ‘a haven in a heartless world’ is very outdated. He talks about how working class women strive to marry, often do so very young and would prefer being a full time housewife over paid work. The average age of marriage in Australia in 2025 was 30-35. A study from the New York Times shows 48% of women in America said that being married was not too or at all important for a fulfilling life (compared to 39% of men). I’m skeptical if the claim ‘women would prefer to be a full time housewife over paid work’ is actually true of the UK in the 80s or if tony cliff is just making an assertion. He does not quote any opinion polls, just anecdotal evidence.
Also this book is meant to deal with how socialists should relate to feminism and feminist groups/movements and I feel like it completely fails to do that.
May 12, 2025
اشتريت الكتاب لثقتي في الاستاذة الراحلة اروى صالح انها لن تترجم كتاب ملوش قيمة ابدا،
وفعلا الكتاب قيم، بحث مفصل في اوضاع المرأة في تاريخها الحديث وبالشخصيات والارقام كمان في اهم دول العالم الحديث، انجلترا وروسيا والمانيا وامريكا وطبعا فرنسا،
مشكلة الكتاب انه مستفيض، بيتكلم بالوقائع والتطورات في الاحداث واثرها على المرأة عموما،
لكن المتكرر في كل التجارب هو ان طبقة النساء البرجوازية والنبيلة لايمكن ابدا ان تتواصل مع طبقة النساء العاملات لانها لا تشعر حقاً باحتياجاتهم،
كمان الرجل ليس هو عدو المرأة كما تقع دائما الحركات النسوية،
وانما العدو الاول هو نظام العمل المجحف الذي يضر بمركز الرجل والمرأة معاً،
مش عوزين هنا نحلل افكار الشيوعية عن الاسرة والزواج، لكن حياة بلا زواج بروابط اسرية تسممها دائما النظم الرأس مالية هو المنشود، من اجل علاقات متوازنة وصحية،
ايضا وقع جميع المطالبين البرجوازيين في تهميش المرأة ووصل بهم حد التقليل منها والعنصرية عليها،
اخر ٣ فصول عظمة علشان بعدوا عن سرد التطورات وبدا الكاتب فيهم يكلمنا عن رايه بعد البحث،
اي محب او متخصص في الشأن النسوي او الشيوعي لابد ان يقرأه،
ويسلام لو نسويات بلدنا يقرأوه بدل قعدتهم في الورش والاجتماعات من اجل تثقيف غيرهم من البورجوازيات وترك المرأة العاملة التي تنهشها عجلة الرأس مالية تولع .
وفعلا الكتاب قيم، بحث مفصل في اوضاع المرأة في تاريخها الحديث وبالشخصيات والارقام كمان في اهم دول العالم الحديث، انجلترا وروسيا والمانيا وامريكا وطبعا فرنسا،
مشكلة الكتاب انه مستفيض، بيتكلم بالوقائع والتطورات في الاحداث واثرها على المرأة عموما،
لكن المتكرر في كل التجارب هو ان طبقة النساء البرجوازية والنبيلة لايمكن ابدا ان تتواصل مع طبقة النساء العاملات لانها لا تشعر حقاً باحتياجاتهم،
كمان الرجل ليس هو عدو المرأة كما تقع دائما الحركات النسوية،
وانما العدو الاول هو نظام العمل المجحف الذي يضر بمركز الرجل والمرأة معاً،
مش عوزين هنا نحلل افكار الشيوعية عن الاسرة والزواج، لكن حياة بلا زواج بروابط اسرية تسممها دائما النظم الرأس مالية هو المنشود، من اجل علاقات متوازنة وصحية،
ايضا وقع جميع المطالبين البرجوازيين في تهميش المرأة ووصل بهم حد التقليل منها والعنصرية عليها،
اخر ٣ فصول عظمة علشان بعدوا عن سرد التطورات وبدا الكاتب فيهم يكلمنا عن رايه بعد البحث،
اي محب او متخصص في الشأن النسوي او الشيوعي لابد ان يقرأه،
ويسلام لو نسويات بلدنا يقرأوه بدل قعدتهم في الورش والاجتماعات من اجل تثقيف غيرهم من البورجوازيات وترك المرأة العاملة التي تنهشها عجلة الرأس مالية تولع .
July 31, 2023
I didn’t find Tony Cliff yo be someone who has a deep understanding or empathy with Feminism and women’s struggles.
He is mostly pre-occupied with forcing the idea that feminism should’ve aligned itself with socialism and whenever feminists have failed, it’s because they were distant from socialistic purposes. In fact, he considers feminism to be a failure up to now and, sadly, fails to appreciate the achievements of several feminist movements.
The last two/three chapters of the book are almost inconsistent with the rest of the book and its historic approach.
In general, I bought this book thinking I would learn a lot, but I mostly realized what a great obstacle socialists must have been in decades of feminist struggles.
و در مورد ترجمه کتاب به فارسی؛ نمیدونم نشر «افکار جدید» چطور خودش رو مجاز دونسته که عنوان کتاب رو به «تاریخ سیاسی زنان» تغییر بده. کتاب به وضوح درباره مبارزات زنان در دو سه قرن اخیر در کشورهای آلمان، فرانسه، انگلیس و آمریکا، در چارچوب و در قیاس با مبارزات طبقاتی هست. وقتی میگین تاریخ سیاسی زنان، یعنی موضوعی خیلی خیلی فراتر از موضوع کتاب حاضر. شما میاین یه کتاب رده چهار، پنج درباره مطالعات زنان رو ترجمه میکنید و میخواید با گذاشتن یک عنوان دهنپرکن فروش رو بیشتر کنید. و البته که ترجمه هم عاری از غلط های ویرایشی متعدد نبود.
He is mostly pre-occupied with forcing the idea that feminism should’ve aligned itself with socialism and whenever feminists have failed, it’s because they were distant from socialistic purposes. In fact, he considers feminism to be a failure up to now and, sadly, fails to appreciate the achievements of several feminist movements.
The last two/three chapters of the book are almost inconsistent with the rest of the book and its historic approach.
In general, I bought this book thinking I would learn a lot, but I mostly realized what a great obstacle socialists must have been in decades of feminist struggles.
و در مورد ترجمه کتاب به فارسی؛ نمیدونم نشر «افکار جدید» چطور خودش رو مجاز دونسته که عنوان کتاب رو به «تاریخ سیاسی زنان» تغییر بده. کتاب به وضوح درباره مبارزات زنان در دو سه قرن اخیر در کشورهای آلمان، فرانسه، انگلیس و آمریکا، در چارچوب و در قیاس با مبارزات طبقاتی هست. وقتی میگین تاریخ سیاسی زنان، یعنی موضوعی خیلی خیلی فراتر از موضوع کتاب حاضر. شما میاین یه کتاب رده چهار، پنج درباره مطالعات زنان رو ترجمه میکنید و میخواید با گذاشتن یک عنوان دهنپرکن فروش رو بیشتر کنید. و البته که ترجمه هم عاری از غلط های ویرایشی متعدد نبود.
April 10, 2022
کتاب خیلی خوبی در خصوص تاریخ مبارزات زنان و برخی علل ناکامی های زنان بود
July 25, 2020
pretty great overview of the history of women’s movements and their weaknesses, and an essential read for anyone who wants to better understand how to fight for women’s liberation and why Marxist politics must be central in that fight
April 19, 2020
One of the best books ever written about women's liberation. Do yourself a favour and read this.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews