Feminism: A Very Short Introduction

Very Short Introductions #141

by Margaret Walters

This is a historical account of feminism that looks at the roots of feminism, voting rights, and the liberation of the sixties, and analyzes the current situation of women across Europe, in the United States, and elsewhere in the world, particularly the Third World countries. Walters examines the difficulties and inequities that women still face, more than forty years after the "new wave" of 1960s feminism--difficulties, particularly, in combining domesticity, motherhood and work outside the home. How much have women's lives really changed? In the West, women still come up against the "glass ceiling" at work, with most earning considerably less than their male counterparts. What are we to make of the now commonplace insistence that feminism deprives men of their rights and dignities? And how does one tackle the issue of female emancipation in different cultural and economic environments--in, for example, Islam, Hinduism, the Middle East, Africa, and the Indian sub-continent?

Genres: Feminism, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Politics, Sociology, Gender

159 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

Reviews

[Samadrita · Rating 4 out of 5]

Margaret Walters sounds doubtful in this book about whether the feminist movement will be able sustain its pace and pertinence in a world in which there is no longer any need for suffragettes to brave being arrested and force-fed to demand the vote, or for women to smuggle contraceptives to be able to enjoy a sexual act as much as a man.

But a 10 year old Paraguayan rape victim, pregnant with the child of her rapist step-father has been denied abortion as I type this. There is the 'war on women' being waged by Republicans in the U.S. There are the alarming statistics on rapes on college campuses in the same nation. There is the refusal of the Indian government to rewrite obsolete laws and make specific provisions for marital rape as a crime. There are the honour killings. There are men I know in real life who think pay gap is a myth. Then there is Saudi Arabia.

Feminism, as a movement, as a moral force, as a panacea for remedying gender discrimination is as relevant as ever. I think.

This is a moderately well-researched introduction to a topic whose depth is immense and which is today a polished academic discipline. The focus here is the history of feminism in England (starting with women first beginning to let their voices be heard intending to broadcast the truth of their religious visions for public benefit) with the movements in USA mentioned very briefly in comparison. But brownie points to Walters for not failing to address third world/postcolonial feminism featuring issues faced by Latina women in Brazil and Mexico and in the middle east. She even poses rational arguments regarding the hotly debated issue of the hijab. Although I confess the following seems like a weak, inchoate argument to me -

...many women have argued that the veil can be liberating; that it allows them to observe, rather than be observed, not only freeing them from the vagaries of fashion but helping them avoid sexual harassment.

But I will withhold further comment until I become well acquainted with the finer points of of Islamic feminism. I will keep on considering all major religions inherently misogynistic until its practitioners disprove my observations, until I see as many female Bishops as male ones, as many female priests in Hindu temples as male ones. Accurate interpretation of scriptures hardly matter when the ones in power are fudging them to suit their own agendas and real women are being victimized. Religion is after all a tool of domination used by the patriarchy to terrorize votaries into blind submission and acceptance.

One of the reasons I am not giving it the 5 stars is because Walters fails to bring in Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak in her chapter on feminists the world over. One does not discuss third world (a fabulously pejorative term which didn't bear such connotations when it was first coined btw) feminism without invoking Spivak. Also there is no mention of Doris Lessing or Sylvia Plath or Adrienne Rich or Angela Y. Davis or Patricia Hill Collins and other American and Canadian feminist writers of considerable importance (Kate Chopin, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, Margaret Atwood, Alice Walker, Toni Morrison) or Jean Rhys. There is no information on feminism in China, Japan, S Korea, India (a glaring omission) or any mention of African feminist critics or writers either (Mariama Bâ, Buchi Emecheta, Tsitsi Dangarembga?). Quite a lot of omissions if you ask me. But for a VSI it is quite useful and I did learn a lot of interesting details about the history of English feminism and tidbits about Arab feminism in general so 4 stars is a valid rating.

[Jibran · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was destined to be my very first Very Short Introduction™. The books in this series, are still very expensive relative to their small size for buyers over here. It wasn't until OUP Pakistan printed many titles locally that I was able to access them without denting my wallet. Of the few I have read some were very good but others I found to be lacking in their stated purpose, sometimes the content being too thinly spread or densely packed to serve as a good introduction to the uninitiated.

This VSI is history-driven as opposed to purely issue-driven, giving us a comprehensive and inclusive view of the development of the idea and practice of feminism through the centuries down to the issues that make up contemporary feminist debate. It begins with the very first women who argued for the case from within the Judeo-Christian religious tradition, promoting the cause of their gender by whatever benign reference they could locate in the Bible and other canonical texts, if for nothing then to tone down the suffocating misogyny of the traditionist menfolk, aided in turn by conformist women, to whom every woman who had an opinion on worldly matters was a threat to be immediately nuetralised with the two-edged sword of religion and tradition. Women fought this by the same weapons, by asking uncomfortable question and offering 'radical' interpretations. The blame for Original Sin having been put on women's shoulders, Rachel Speght, with a startling interpretation of the story, blamed Adam as much as Eve for eating the Forbidden Fruit. She wrote in 1617.

"If Adam had not approved that deed which Eve had done, and been willing to tread the steps which she had gone, he being her head would have reproved her, have made the commandments a bit to restrain him from breaking his master's position."

In the 'secular age' of industralisation mass education engendered a consciousness that, along with the divine rights of kings to rule, challenged the "natural" order of patriarchy by which society controlled women's lives, reducing them to specific gender roles. It's a highly readable historical account that summarises the struggles of centuries, from the times of Mary Wollstonecraft through to Simone de Beauvoir and to the early 20th century suffragists, till we reach contemporary times when the internationalisation of the idea of feminism has produced many different strains of thoughts and variegated feminist movements, with their own goals and priorities.

Come modern times and we wade into murky waters. We are well aware of the questions that some feminists (and others) began asking in the wake of the Second-wave feminism of the late 20th century, about the efficacy of Western feminist practice for women belonging to the (still) developing world (or Third World as it's labelled insultingly and unthinkingly), who neither share racial background nor religio-cultural value systems, nor social or economic statuses, nor the expectations and desires that compel different women groups to prioritise issues in a different manner and language than that preferred by mainstream Western feminism. Discussing the ideas of Bell Hooks, the author of the seminal Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center, Margaret Walters writes:

"Current feminism, she insists, is racist, and has left many women bitterly disillusioned. Movement women have consistently ignored the deeply intertwined issues of race and class; the emphasis on common 'oppression' of women has in fact ignored terribly real inequalities within American society."

This is further explicated in the last chapter "Feminists Across the World", which briefly discusses many leading feminist movements in the developing world that do not want agendas dictated to them by the Western feminism, and want to prioritise their struggles on issues in consonance with the local needs. As it often happens, foreign interference hinders rather than helps when women are expected to follow prescriptive feminism of the Western world. It then becomes difficult for local progressives to argue for change when they are seen as Western stooges running on Western charity money speaking in the language of their foreign funders. In 1994 a conference on population and development was held in Cairo where...

"Third World women complained that the agenda had been hijacked by European and American women who were only interested in contraception and abortion; and that when they did tackle "Third World" issues, they sounded both patronising and racist. Even at Beijing in 1995, there were complaints that endless discussions by Westerners of reproductive rights and sexual orientation meant that the urgent concerns of women from less developed nations were ignored."

As Australian-Chinese feminist Ien Ang said, it would help international feminist sorority to move towards a "modest feminism, one which is predicated on the fundamental limits to the very idea of sisterhood" rather than succumbing to the temptation of "idealised unity." [emphasis hers]

May 2015

[فؤاد · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب خوبی نبود.
اول به خاطر این که خیلی کم در مورد نظریه‌های فمینیستی صحبت کرد (بر خلاف دو کتاب قبلی که خوندم) و بیشتر گزارشی بود از فعالیت‌های انجمن‌های فمینیستی از قرن ۱۵ و ۱۶ به بعد. به عبارت دیگه تاریخچۀ جنبش فمینیسم بود و نه شرح نظریات فمینیستی.
بعد هم به خاطر این که همین گزارش هم تمرکزش روی فمینیست‌های انگلستان بود و خیلی کم در مورد جاهای دیگه صحبت می‌کرد. فقط فصل آخر خیلی سریع به جنبش‌های فمینیستی آفریقا، هند، چین، آمریکای لاتین، کشورهای مسلمان، ایران و شوروی پرداخت.

[Amirography · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good and general book. Though I was more interested in more about intersectional feminism, yet it was a good read and helpful.

[armin · Rating 1 out of 5]

Bad... really bad and basic... a series of meaningless biographies about some prominent British feminist figures and who said what about whom as if rappers are dissing one another! I get it, it’s mentioned in the introduction but you only find it out after you pay some 10 bucks over it! The writer is doubtful over feminism and she doesn’t know where she belongs. Anyway, the biographies are really brief and pointless with some of the most out-of-context extracts I have ever seen in any book. Then there are some marginal notes about some non-British feminists which would have been better left out! I mean half a page about the Seneca Falls Convention? Come on! Don’t read this crap... just don’t... Read “the Feminism Reader” from “Modern Clasics Library.”

[Gerhard · Rating 3 out of 5]

'In the 20th century, ‘first-wave’ feminists had demanded civil and political equality. In the 1970s, ‘second-wave’ feminism concentrated on, and gave great prominence to, sexual and family rights for women. It is these demands, now, that have become the main target of reaction. ‘The personal is the political’ was a popular 1970s slogan that some contemporary feminists seem to want to reverse. The political is reduced to the merely personal, to questions of sexuality and family life – which, of course, also have political implications which still, and urgently, need to be considered.'

Rudimentary, but effective, history of feminism in England specifically, with vignettes of thinkers and events in the US and Europe. Rounded off with a good Chapter 10 about 'Feminists across the world'.

[Siddharth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Perhaps A Very Short History of Feminism in England is a more appropriate title for this book. Margaret Walters produces an engaging narrative of feminism in the British Isles - one that includes inspired prophetesses in the aftermath of the English Civil War and militant suffragettes in the early 20th Century – but for a book that seeks to be an Introduction to Feminism, it is hard not to think that both the predominant focus on England and the approach of a linear narrative prove to be limiting factors. Walters includes a couple of short chapters at the end titled Second Wave Feminism and Feminists across the World. She also touches on Intersectionality and Third Wave Feminism. However, this book represents a lost opportunity overall.

On the other hand, her approach does allow one to see the development of feminism and feminist thought in a particular place (England) over a particular period of time (17th-early 20th Century). From Mary Astell’s recognition in 1700 that a wife is all too often simply ‘a man’s Upper Servant’, we progress to Catherine Macaulay’s anger in 1790 at the notion that women were ‘the mere property of the men’. The primary concerns of feminists broadly shift from education, to legal and property rights, to the vote.

One also meets a vast array of extraordinarily brave feminists, who, despite anticipating and being subject to scorn, ridicule and dismissal – even from educated fellow women – strive to improve the lot of their sex throughout their lifetimes. Below, a sample of their prodigious and perceptive penmanship.

Margaret Cavendish (17th Century)
We are kept like birds in cages to hop up and down in our houses, not suffered to fly abroad … we are shut out of all power and authority, by reason we are never employed either in civil or martial affairs, our counsels are despised and laughed at, the best of our actions are trodden down with scorn, by the overweening conceit men have of themselves and through despisement of us.

Mary Astell (late 17th-early 18th Century)
We value them [men] too much and our selves too little, if we place any part of our desert in their Opinion, and don’t think our selves capable of Nobler Things than the pitiful Conquest of some worthless Heart.

Mary Wollstonecraft (18th Century)
If the abstract rights of man will bear discussion and explanation, those of women, by a parity of reasoning, will not shrink from the same test … Who made man the exclusive judge, if women partake with him of the gift of reason?
…
Taught from their infancy that beauty is a woman’s sceptre, the mind shapes itself to the body and roaming round its gilt cage, only seeks to adore its prison.

Marion Reid (early 19th Century)
Margaret Walters: ‘Womanly’ behaviour, in practice, means ‘good humour and attention to her husband, keeping her children neat and clean, and attending to domestic arrangements’. But Reid insists, more forcibly than anyone else in the period, that this apparently noble and virtuous ‘self-renunciation’ in practice usually involves ‘a most criminal self-extinction’.

Emily Davies (late 19th Century)
(She described) the weight of discouragement produced by being told, that as women, nothing much is ever to be expected of them … that whatever they do they must not interest themselves, except in a second-hand and shallow way, in the pursuits of men, for in such pursuits they must always expect to fail…(this kind of attitude) stifles and chills; how hard it is to work courageously through it’.

Rebecca West (early 20th Century)
I am an old fashioned feminist, … when those of our army whose voices are inclined to coolly tell us that the day of sex-antagonism is over and henceforth we have only to advance hand in hand with the male, I do not believe it.
…
I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is. I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute.

[Sarah Shaheen · Rating 2 out of 5]

Limiting the supposedly concise and generic introduction to the history of the movement in England was a shortcoming.

[Johnny · Rating 3 out of 5]

Recently, I was asked the question, “What is feminism?” I started to offer an immediate answer, but immediately realized that the answer to that question was relative. As a male, I had a lot of data points on that answer, but didn’t have any real perspective. So, before I answered the question, I promised to do a modicum of homework. I found Feminism—A Very Short Introduction from the Oxford series of Very Short Introductions. Although the book focuses primarily on the idea of “feminism” from the English perspective, I found it to be a helpful starting place in my study.

According to this source, technically, “feminism” simply refers to the idea of championing rights of women. In its rare use in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was primarily a pejorative term and often substituted with “womanism” and “suffrage.” Early efforts focused on the right to vote and the right to work. However, as these goals were achieved, ideas of dignity and equality took preeminence. Much of “feminist” thought today deals with opposition to the patriarchal structure of society. As the novelist, Virginia Woolf, wrote in 1938: “Those nineteenth century women were in fact the advance guard of your own movement. They were fighting the tyranny of the patriarchal state as you are fighting the tyranny of the Fascist state.” (p. 2) In fact, up until the 1960s, “feminist” or “feminism” was considered a pejorative term. In that era, the movement co-opted the idea of “liberation” from black, student, and third world revolutionary terminology (p. 3) My experience has been that there are many young women today who espouse the ideals of “feminism” in terms of dignity and equality, but would resent being called a “feminist.” Maybe this is partially because of neo-Conservatives on talk radio calling them “FemiNazis.”

The author began her study with a note about the roots of the movement in religion. She pointed out how living in a convent could have been liberating for young women who were not permitted to explore their own identities or organize their lives and households. Even with that positive note, however, she noted that the famous Hildegard of Bingen wrote to Bernard of Clairvaux as to whether she should consider her “unfeminine” pursuits of writing and composing. (p. 6)

Theologically, the most significant moves may have come in the 15th and 16th centuries, respectively. In the former, Englishwoman Julian of Norwich jumped gender boundaries when she made the comparison: “the kind, loving mother who knows and recognizes the need of her child, and carefully watches over it. The mother can give her child milk to suck, but our dear mother Jesus can feed us with himself, and he does so most generously and most tenderly . . .” (pp. 7-8). Then, in 1589, a woman named Jane Anger insisted that Eve was superior to Adam because Adam was made from dirt and filth while Eve was made of Adam’s flesh (p. 9).

Most people think of the Bible as being so patriarchal that they can only think of the negative scriptural images of women: Delilah, Jezebel, Eve, Herodias/Salome. (p. 9) To which, I believe, we should probably consider the positive aspects of Miriam, Deborah, Ruth, Esther.

In this, I go against my Protestant predecessor, John Bunyan of The Pilgrim’s Progress fame who “referred to women as ‘that simple and weak sex’. Citing the first epistle to the Corinthians, he argued that women are ‘not the image and glory of God as the men are. They are placed beneath.’ He disapproved of separate women’s meetings, which did nothing but encourage ‘unruliness’. ‘I do not believe they [women] should minister to God in prayer before thewhole church,’ he insisted, adding sarcastically, ‘for then I should be a Ranter or a Quaker.’ In any public gathering, ‘her part is to hold her tongue, to learn in silence’. (p. 11)

In 17th century England, Anabaptist women called themselves Levellers and advocated for peace. As a result, “The crowds of women who petitioned for peace in 1642 and 1643 were dismissed contemptuously as ‘Whores, Bawds, Oyster women, Kitchen maids’. (p. 15)

The summary goes on to discuss the idea of “secular” feminism. Secular self-assertion, perhaps inevitably, developed more slowly; it was one thing to act in ‘unfeminine’ ways if divinely inspired, not quite so easy to act unconventionally out of personal ambition. Speaking in public, or writing, was all very well when it was in the Lord’s cause, and could be claimed as the product of divine inspiration…” (p. 17) Bathsua Makin, a former governess to one of Charles I’s daughters, started a school in the 17th century where women could study the classics, But she reassured her readers by making it clear that she would not ‘hinder good housewifery, neither have I called any from their necessary labour to the book’.
And, with a hint of anxiety, she insists that ‘my intention is not to equalize women to men, much less to make them superior. They are the weaker sex.’ (p. 18)

I particularly liked what Margaret Cavendish, Duchess of Newcastle, wrote in the 17th century: “we are kept like birds in cages to hop up and down in our houses, not suffered to fly abroad . . . we are shut out of all power and authority, by reason we are never employed either in civil or martial affairs, our counsels are despised and laughed at, the best of our actions are trodden down with scorn, by the overweening conceit men have of themselves and through despisement of us.” (p. 21) In turn, she was condemned as a “mad, conceited, ridiculous woman.” (p. 22)

By the 19th century, one could really describe a married woman – living in a ‘shackled condition’ – has no rights over her own property; even the produce of her own labour is at the disposal of her husband, who can, if he chooses, take and ‘waste it in dissipation and excess’. Moreover, ‘her children, as well as her fortune, are the property of her husband’. (pp. 42-43) The suffrage movement started in this century (p. 44) in both England and the U.S. , but in US, it started largely with the abolitionist movement and wasn’t complete until 1920.

I was intrigued by the fact that when John Stuart Mill married Harriet Taylor, “… he remarked that he felt it his duty to make ‘a formal protest against the existing law of marriage’ on the grounds that it gave the man ‘legal power over the person, property and freedom of action of the other party, independent of her own wishes and will’.” (p. 45) I was very much aware of the problems faced by Florence Nightingale resented by doctors for her suggestions after the Crimean War (p. 50)

I was intrigued by how Beatrix Potter attributed her own ‘anti-feminism’ to ‘the fact that I had never myself suffered the disabilities assumed to arise from my sex’. The Liberal Violet Markham came up with an evasive paradox: many women are clearly ‘superior to men, and therefore I don’t like to see them trying to become man’s equals’. (p. 71)

From early 20th century, All through this period, the popular press, whether nervously or sarcastically, tended to portray the feminist as a frustrated spinster or a harridan; one journalist remarked that, because of war, many young women ‘have become so de-sexed and masculinised, indeed, and the neuter states so patent in them, that the individual is described (unkindly) no longer as ‘‘she’’ but ‘‘it.’’ (p. 90). Of course, by the early 20th century, contraception became an important subject in the debate because one couldn’t be free if a male could subjugate one’s body.

Mid-20th century brought Simone de Beauvoir, Betty Friedan, and Kate Millett’s 1970 Sexual Politics which set out to analyse ‘patriarchy as a political institution’. Politics, she insists, refers to all ‘power structured relationships’, and the one between the sexes is a ‘relationship of dominance and subordinance’ which has been largely unexamined. Women are simultaneously idolized and patronized.“ (p. 105). As a result, there was, in the minds of many feminists, no real distinction between rape and sexual intercourse, (p. 115).

I do not believe the last assertion to be true. However, this was an insightful survey of the movement. Although largely U.K.-centric, some of the anecdotes and summaries were very relevant to my understanding of the U.S. scene. The book is written well enough that I will certainly check out some other titles in the series. Next time, though, I may choose a subject that I know something about and see if it holds up as well as this one seemed to about a subject that I know little about. I didn’t become an expert from this volume, but I learned a lot that I needed to know.

[Sheida · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book does exactly what it says it will do: it provides you with a very short introduction to feminism (well, the history of feminism). Yes, as you can imagine, the majority of the history discussed in this book belongs to either the UK or the US but that doesn't make it any less interesting or informative. I wasn't aware of a lot of the things that were discussed here and I really appreciated having this concise overview of the matter. It's definitely provided me with a lot more reading material going forward so I'd say that, as a starting point, it's a pretty great one to be honest. It does venture into feminism across the world in its final chapter so there's a very small glimpse into that as well but it's definitely not enough in that regard.

[Furqan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This pocket-size book is brilliant for someone interested in the history of feminism and its ideas. The book is heavily focused on history of English feminism (much to the chagrin of American reviewers on Amazon), so I was already familiar with some of the content. Walters writes in very engaging and jargon-free style, briefly outlining her critiques of the ideas of most important feminist figures, including Mary Astell, Mary Wollstonecraft, John Stuart Mill, The Pankhursts and the more obscure figures such as Barbara Bodichon and William Thompson. The second last chapter which I found the most intriguing deals with the feminist movements across the world, from Latin America to Middle-east, where Walters points out the communication barriers between Western feminists and the feminists of the "Third World", suggesting the need for women of different cultures to re-invent their own kind of feminism.

Overall, a very informative guide and would recommend it to anyone interested in gender and the role of feminism in shaping Western culture.

[Una · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ne grama teorijas attiecībā uz literatūrzinātni, toties daudz jancīgu un pat pārsteidzošu faktu par dzimumu nevienlīdzību un cīnītājiem sieviešu jautājuma (-u) frontē no vēlajiem viduslaikiem līdz mūsdienām. (Starp tiem arī daži vīrieši: piemēram, man nebija ne jausmas, ka Dž. S. Milla taisnīguma izpratne sniegusies tik tālu, lai, esot iekšā sistēmā, pamanītu, ka precētām sievietēm nav juridisku tiesību. Forši, Džon!) Mīnuss: koncentrējas uz Lielbritānijas piemēriem (kaut gan pēdējā nodaļā ir vērtīgs Rietumu pieredzes salīdzinājums ar Latīņameriku un islāma valstīm). Un manai gaumei šķiet, ka vispārīgā informācija un izpratne, ko no šīs grāmatas i>var iegūt, lielākoties noslīkst kuriozo piemēru varenajā straumē.
Ir vērts tur ieskatīties, lai uzdurtos tādām mūsdienās grūti noticamām lietām kā "Piemēram, Šarlote Brontē (Charlotte Brontë), kura apprecējās neilgi pirms nāves, atklāja, ka vīram pieder autortiesības uz viņas romāniem, kā arī viss, ko viņa nopelnīja." Opā!

[Simone · Rating 4 out of 5]

Technically it's the first book i've ever read about feminism!
Four stars because it is a short feminism introduction. But i've know a little bit of feminism history and understand what exactly is feminism now. So it's very helpful!
Feminism isn't a simple issue at all,someone may say it's post-feminism era now,but it's not true . Just like communism ,there're a lot of things to do to achieve that.

[Aurélien Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Here's a romp through the history of feminism in Britain. The topic is vast, and so one has to give credit to the author for her straightforward approach, focusing on key thinkers and campaigners and their works. Such approach is great because it's quite linear to follow, and so makes for a simple read. It's great too because it allows, by focusing on such works, to get a thorough idea of the major books written by such women and which have enriched a movement at times contradictory and divided! (For bookworm like me wanting to remedy to gaps in my knowledge on the topic, such 'book list' hinted at while reading was truly helpful...).

Again, it's mostly focused on Britain (two chapters alone are dedicated to the suffragists and suffragettes). It can be a weakness for those not British and wanting a wider perspective; or, on the contrary, it can be a strength, since British feminism has had a major impact upon Western feminism, itself having created reaction (pro or against or mixed) among these women not living in the Western world, and whose ordeals, even today, are widely different than that experienced by Westerners. The author, in fact, ends the book by a chapter dedicated to such international experiences (too short and too broad to be truly arresting, but nevertheless making a point when challenging the ethnocentrism of Westerners, and the dubious notion of a so-called 'sisterhood').

I felt particularly welcome (especially in these times when the radfems seem to have hijacked public debates!) the critical stance of the author against these trends which emerged from the far-left, as well as against these academics seeming to live in la la land (Catherine McKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, for instance, are being dismissed as 'melodrama masquerading as feminism'...). Her liberalism felt like a breeze...

Ideology aside (if you're a radfem, don't be put off) here's a great introduction.

[Raluca · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really well presented one. I enjoyed it a lot.

[māris šteinbergs · Rating 2 out of 5]

virkne bezjēdzīgu biogrāfiju par britu feministēm, kas ko par ko teicis! Savukārt biogrāfijas ir patiešām bezjēdzīgas. Tad ir dažas marginālas piezīmes par dažām ne-britu feministēm.

[Marta Roķe · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bija ievads, bija gana saistoši.

[Amene · Rating 3 out of 5]

کتاب رویکردی توصیفی برمبنای توالی تاریخی و زمانی دارد.
زبان و لحن نوشته بسیار ساده و روان است. چنانچه از عنوان مجموعه بر می‌آید درآمدی کوتاه است بر مقوله و به همین دلیل تحلیل چندانی ندارد تنها به روایت تاریخ جنبش فمینیسم اکتفا می‌کند.
به نظرم برای شروع و آشنایی با این موضوع خصوصا در صورت ناآشنایی کامل با مقوله،بسیار مفید است.

[Mostafa · Rating 3 out of 5]

تعريف عام بأهم مفكّرات النسوية وأفكارهن وردة أفعال الناس تجاهها، بتسلسل تاريخي.

[Наталія · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'll make a blog post with a review after I think it over, but here are some thoughts, briefly.
This book is definitely a must-read.
It does outline the history of feminism briefly, efficiently, in chapters that are short, easy to remember and at the same time are lively and include enough quotes and illustrations, which make reading all the more exciting.
The main reason why I like this book is the feeling of hope that it gives. Reading how recent all the major changes in women's rights are, really, in the scope of history overall, brings a great hope for changes for the better in our society and, I dare say, gives some food for thought as to what these changes may entail.
Another bonus: further reading list. I'm excited about it.
There are two reasons, though, which make me give this book four stars instead of five (it's really four and a half, I'd say, but I felt like making a point with my rating).
Firstly, the book does focus on the British feminism mainly, addressing at some points the history of the American feminist movement. There was a chapter about feminism in other countries, but it felt random at best, with only a few countries chosen to represent certain regions. I do understand it's impossible to include an overview of every country out of the about two hundred countries that currenly exist, but I feel it could be more balanced. And the book itself should've rather been called "Feminism in Britain," to be honest. My other issue with the book was that it was too opinionated at times, which is unusual and somewhat baffling in an overview like this: sometimes, the author would add her commentary about the opinions of this or that feminist activist instead of letting the reader make those (or different) conclusions by herself.
Overall, a solid 4/5, and even more than that, really. Definitely do recommend.

[Farnz · Rating 3 out of 5]

Feminism: a very short intro by Margaret Walters; Allyson Johnson (Narrator)- 3.5⭐️

4 hours & 31 min long audiobook. Covers the Uk based history of feminism. Jane Austen & her book northanger abbey specifically mentioned! Chapter 10 mentions Iran! I liked that it touches on the selfishness of women being antifeminist because they have never suffered. Like good for you but what about all the other woman suffering around the world? Why do you have to be affected by something directly until you care about others? This applies to more than feminism by the way. She asks at the end whether feminism is still needed now & in the future? Like her, I think there’s way more to do. Considering how Roe v Wade was overturned, Iran having the women, life, freedom protests & there still being mail order & child brides in the world ... I think we will always need feminism. “No true justice has been achieved until everyone is free”. Bringing about change & justice will always make some people uncomfortable, that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen. If you’re interested in feminism, especially relating to the UK, I would recommend this. It’s good intro

[Tabarek Raad]

The book is basically focused on feminism in England and the author only sheds light on feminism in other countries in the last chapter. the problem is that though the issues women suffer from overlap to a certain extent. The gap between the east and west was not easily captured in the book. However, if we gloss over these differences and focus on the broader context it is easy to see that the machine of patriarchy has piloted the brutalization and materialization of women to its hideous peak. They have led women into a period of uncertainty, frozen between fear of being denied basic rights or worse yet a return to the chaos of primeval era. Long muzzled under the tyranny of politics, religion and the social institution, such writing are really important in drawing the attention of the world to the basic fact that women are not a 'hindrance' to development but a partner in a long struggle towards social justice and equal right.

[Sandy Maguire · Rating 1 out of 5]

Maybe it's the format of Very Short Introductions, but I found myself not trusting the author in the least. It ruined the book for me. Walters presents the book in an academic, disinterested tone, but spends the entirety of it making value judgments. "So-and-so's writing is clear and poignant, and despite being written 500 years ago, still resonates strongly with women today." In fact, the whole book seems to read like a "how not to write on Wikipedia" article; it's chocked full of weasel words, and often makes references to "a recent scholar" who has "convincingly argued" something --- but doesn't tell us who that scholar was, or what their convincing argument looks like! And if you wanted footnotes to do any research for yourself, well, you're out of luck! None of this is to say that one mustn't make value judgments. If Walters had put herself into the book, saying that /she/ found so-and-so's writing clear and poignant, I'd be all for it.

[Damaskcat · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a useful overview of the history of feminism. It doesn’t go into the rights and wrongs of feminism at any point in history it simply relates information about people who wrote on the subject or were involved in the various groups set up to change the way women were treated and perceived.

The book mainly looks at Britain with some digressions to the US and to Europe and brief information about feminism in the Third World. I found the pre-nineteenth century chapters of great interest as I was not familiar with many of the names mentioned.

The book is written in a low-key style with plenty of quotations form sources as well as notes on chapters and a reading list and index. If you’re looking for a simple overview of the subject you could do worse than read this as it can act as a starting off point for further reading.

[Katerina Tzima · Rating 2 out of 5]

1 1/2 star from me. Despite the interesting topic and my love for the Very Short Introductions series, I was disappointed in this book starting with the inaccurate title which fails to mention that the book is only focused on England thus making it less interesting and relatable for the rest of the world. I also found a big part of the book to be incoherent, sloppy and distinctively uninspired. With the exception of the last two chapters, the book contains endless consecutive biographies of English feminist figures and at times uninteresting excerpts from their work. On a positive note, the author has attached a rich bibliography valuable for those who want to delve more into feminism.

[mkh · Rating 2 out of 5]

A little bit of a dry prose, but that's to be expected of historical books. I was expecting a more philosophical take on this introduction to feminism, but it merely covers historical events. I do think it's important to include the philosophical movement backing feminism--e.g., Simone de Beauvoir and intersectional feminism--for this to be considered a holistic introduction.

[Sumirti · Rating 4 out of 5]

.

[Dana Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was an excellent introduction into important events in the history of feminism and the important writers and activists who have influenced the movement. It definitely succeeded in its job as being a succinct and informative introduction into a large and divided movement.

I had 2 gripes that persisted throughout my reading, though they were small and I wouldn’t let them dissuade you from picking up the book! First off, Walters was occasionally and ever so subtly biased in her explanations. It isn’t too much of a problem, but when explaining a quote or line of argument by a famous feminist, Walters has a habit of saying “rightly so” or “incorrectly” and things along that line. While that’s all fine for an essay, it was kind of jarring in what I assumed was meant to be an unbiased painting of feminism. I want to be able to develop an opinion on each point she brought up myself - I don’t want to feel I’ve been influenced by the authors opinion!
My second gripe was that the book was very Western-centric, focusing mostly on English feminism until the final chapter. While Walters did explain this in her introduction and I realise that many things have to be omitted in order to keep the book concise, I had purchased it hoping to learn about more than just English feminism! Perhaps the book would be better off being called “A Very Short Introduction to Western Feminism” or something similar.

Don’t let my gripes fool you, though! Walters did an excellent jobs of compiling the pivotal essays, books, figures and moments of each wave of feminism. She effectively explained the different motives of each wave of feminism and elaborated on how different groups in each time period worked to achieve their respective feminist goals. The pictures included were a great way to see what I was learning about.

I feel prepared to move onto more essays and books about feminist theory now that I have a foundation, and Walters’ many references to essays and books written by feminists over the years are extremely helpful in choosing my next read.

Overall, I would recommend this book! Just bear in mind that it is not comprehensive (though I understand that the nature of the Very Short Introduction series doesn’t allow for that!) and very English/Western focused. The movements and historical events that are touched upon are perfectly explained, though!

[Dave · Rating 3 out of 5]

I got this book for free at 2018's Independent Bookstore Day, and I can't complain about that. I just wish that the gold seal with "2018" on the cover wasn't so much more prominent than the copyright date of 2005 hidden inside. So there's no Trumpism, no Women's March, no renewed attacks on abortion, not even a mention of Margaret Atwood. Just so you know.

Even though slightly dated, it was a generally clear summary of feminism's history, with a good explanation of the class and cultural complexity that makes the last several decades (well, before 2005) harder to read. It's main flaw is the attempt to stick to the history of British feminism, at least until the mid-20th century. Either the last two chapters should've stayed British too, or the whole book should have been global. But if you need to know the difference between suffragists and suffragettes, or need to get a reading list of key feminist authors, or just want some good sharp quotes from Rebecca West, this will work.

[Bilal Sandeela · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed the book, but I found it to be too western centric. Intersectional feminism/the idea of non western feminisms/the idea of a uniquely muslim feminism etc are treated more like afterthoughts or things mentioned in a few pages just because they have to be. I would have preferred the book introduce more intersectionality and do it the justice of treating it as something vital to feminism that does need to be critically engaged with.