Liberalism vs. Feminism: A Comparative Analysis

Introduction: Two Broad and Contested Ideologies

Perhaps the most fundamental similarity between liberalism and feminism is that both are wide-ranging, inclusive ideologies that are often difficult to define, although the personas of both liberals and feminists have stirred up ire as well as affection in public discourse. A politician of a centrist bent may be called a liberal if he or she supports the legal right of same-sex couples to marry. A woman who runs her own business may be called a feminist. However, these individuals' real political convictions may bear little resemblance to those of great liberal thinkers such as John Rawls and John Stuart Mill, or to self-identified feminists such as Naomi Wolf and Luce Irigaray.

Rawls and Mill, Wolf and Irigaray themselves span quite different areas of the political spectrum — not merely in terms of the familiar liberal-versus-conservative continuum, but in a more fundamental sense. Irigaray, for instance, might argue that the very construction of such a continuum (liberal vs. conservative, feminist vs. anti-feminist) is itself a male creation, part of the polarizing, dualistic discourse of patriarchy.

Defining Liberalism and Its National Variations

Since the term "liberalism" originated before feminism, it is useful to examine its definition first. According to self-identified liberal political philosopher Gerald Gaus, "as a political tradition liberalism has varied in different countries. In England — in many ways the birthplace of liberalism" — because of philosophers such as Mill and advocates of the free market such as Adam Smith — "the liberal tradition in politics has centred on religious toleration, government by consent, personal and, especially, economic freedom." In France, liberalism has been more closely associated with secularism and democracy. In the United States, liberals often combine a devotion to personal liberty with an antipathy to capitalism, while Australian liberalism tends to be more sympathetic to capitalism but often less enthusiastic about civil liberties.

To understand this diversity in political traditions, Gaus argues, "we need to examine liberalism as a political theory and as a general philosophy," for it is both a rights-based discourse advocating guarantees for individuals to move and act as they freely choose, and a discourse of limitations on government's ability to impinge upon the self (Gaus, 2003).

Feminism as a Liberal and Post-Liberal Tradition

Similarly, feminism has varied across England and America — stressing the need for a rights-based system of values that enables women to enjoy full political freedoms — while in France it has become more influenced by political and social theories of language and the need to rehabilitate what is construed as "the feminine" from patriarchal discourse. Feminist philosophy emerged early in America and England in a rights-based capacity through the suffrage movement. Yet feminism as a liberal philosophy of social rights only truly emerged in the United States in the 1970s, a decade behind the rise of the American women's movement in the 1960s.

"Although Simone de Beauvoir published her now highly influential The Second Sex in 1953, it would take at least a decade for women in the U.S. to begin to organize around the injustices Beauvoir identified, and even longer for feminist philosophers in the U.S. to turn to her work for inspiration" (Tuana, 2004).

Feminism and liberalism have often been epistemologically intertwined. Is it not the Fundamental Liberal Principle that restrictions on liberty must be justified, and that justified limitations on liberty must be fairly modest? Feminists of the past have argued that women should be similarly free — legally and socially — of constraints. In such a liberal view, women should be allowed to exercise basic freedoms such as the right to vote, since only a limited government can be justified. Indeed, "the basic task of government" in a liberal view "is to protect the equal liberty of citizens and each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system for all" (Gaus, 2003).

Liberty: Positive and Negative Conceptions

Liberals and feminists disagree, however — among and between themselves — about the concept of liberty. Some liberals favor a negative conception of liberty over a positive one. In the negative conception, the heart of liberty is the absence of coercion by others; thus the state should not prohibit a man's right to choose his profession, nor should it limit a woman's right to choose the same. This principle applies equally under categories of both liberalism and feminism.

Rousseau seemed to advocate a positive conception of liberty, "according to which one was free when one acted according to one's true will as opposed to the general will." The positive conception of liberty is thus more popular among feminists who stress the need to rethink notions of masculinity, femininity, and gender in a non-dichotomous fashion, while still engaging the political marketplace of ideas. This approach attempts to balance the masculine construction of authority with a more feminine ethos, and to incorporate feminist ethics into current political structures (Gaus, 2003).

Conclusion: Philosophy, Gender, and Human Flourishing

Liberal feminist Anne Garry believes that while gender is only one facet of human experience, it is nevertheless an important one with a wide variety of implications for the way we should do philosophy. As feminists continue to critique other philosophers and reconstruct philosophy that is not male-biased, "most share some points in common." In other words, gender is not the be-all and end-all, but ultimately, "philosophy that reflects a feminist sensibility would promote the flourishing of every person" (Garry, 2004).

In sum, there are many feminisms and many liberalisms. Both traditions share a commitment to human liberty and flourishing, yet feminism — particularly in its poststructuralist and deconstructionist forms — challenges liberalism at its very foundations, questioning whether a political tradition built upon a masculine construction of the self, reason, and rights can ever fully serve the interests of all people. This ongoing dialogue between the two traditions remains one of the most productive and unresolved tensions in contemporary political philosophy.

Works Cited

Garry, Ann. "Analytic Feminism." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2004 Edition). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2004/entries/femapproach-analytic/.

Gaus, Gerald, and Shane D. Courtland. "Liberalism." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2003 Edition). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2003/entries/liberalism/.

Meyers, Diana. "Feminist Perspectives on the Self." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2004 Edition). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2004/entries/feminism-self/.

Saul, Jennifer. "Feminist Philosophy of Language." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2004 Edition). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2004/entries/feminism-language/.

Tuana, Nancy. "Approaches to Feminism." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2004 Edition). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2004/entries/feminism-approaches/.