The reform strand. Spec named thinker: Charlotte Perkins Gilman; Wollstonecraft and Friedan also belong here. Sees individualism as the basis of gender equality and works within liberal-democratic capitalism rather than seeking to overthrow it.
Liberal feminism is firmly equality feminism: men and women are essentially the same rational beings and apparent differences are products of socialisation, not biology. Wollstonecraft argued women have the same rational capacity as men; Friedan showed how socialised gender roles in the home suppressed women's nature.
Liberal feminists are cautious about systemic patriarchy. They see historic discrimination - women excluded from the vote, education, property and well-paid work - rather than a pervasive patriarchal system in every institution. Other strands criticise this as too narrow.
Liberal feminists treat the public sphere as the proper site of politics and are wary of treating the private sphere as primarily political. They are more cautious about the private sphere than radical or socialist feminists, focusing reform on law, the vote and the workplace.
Liberal feminists trust the state, run on liberal-democratic principles, to deliver emancipation through legal reform: anti-discrimination laws, the franchise, equal pay, funded childcare. Wollstonecraft and Friedan are both reformist - state action can secure female emancipation.
Firmly equality feminism. Men and women share the same rational nature (Wollstonecraft); biological differences should not determine social, political or economic treatment. The 2020 mark scheme frames liberal feminism as treating biological difference as insignificant.
Liberal feminism works within liberal-democratic capitalism rather than seeking to overthrow it. The cure is reform: legal and political equality, equal access to education and employment, the right to vote. It does not call for revolutionary transformation of the economy or the state.
The economic strand. Spec named thinker: Sheila Rowbotham, with Gilman's economic-dependence argument feeding in. Holds that gender inequality stems from economics and that capitalism creates patriarchy.
Socialist feminism is equality feminism and androgynous. Human nature is shaped by economic conditions; the gendered division of labour produces the apparent psychological differences between men and women. Differences are economic in origin, not biological.
Socialist feminists accept patriarchy but root it in economics: capitalism creates patriarchy (Rowbotham). The capitalist state serves capitalism first, patriarchy second. Patriarchy is real but secondary - the deeper structure is capitalism, which the split with radical feminism turns on.
The personal is political because of capitalism (Rowbotham). The family is where capitalism reproduces its labour force at no cost: it is both an instrument disciplining women and a refuge for men from alienation under capitalism. Private life is shaped by the economic system.
The capitalist state serves capitalism first, patriarchy second (Rowbotham). Reform alone cannot solve gender inequality; revolutionary transformation of the economy is needed. The state as it stands cannot deliver emancipation.
Socialist feminism takes the equality, androgyny position. The apparent psychological differences between men and women come from the gendered division of labour, not innate nature, so they can be undone by changing the economy rather than valued as essential.
Socialist feminism is Marxism with a feminist analysis: class and gender oppression are intertwined and cannot be tackled separately. Reform alone cannot solve it - the wage versus unpaid-labour split must be abolished and reproduction socialised, which requires revolutionary economic change.
The uncompromising strand - from the Latin radix, root - pulling oppression up by the roots. Spec named thinker: Kate Millett, with de Beauvoir cross-cutting and Greer in the strand. Holds that the biggest problem facing society is gender inequality.
Radical feminism treats gender as the deepest social construction, imposed and policed by patriarchy in both public and private spheres. Most radical feminists are equality feminists who hold that patriarchy distorts an authentic androgynous nature; cultural feminism within the strand is the difference exception.
Patriarchy is the central concept of radical feminism: a pervasive, systemic structure of male power, older than capitalism and independent of it. Millett treats patriarchy as systemic male power running through every institution, including the family.
The personal is political is treated as the heart of feminism: family, marriage, sex and motherhood are political institutions structured by male power. Millett argued undoing the traditional family is the key to true sexual revolution.
The state itself is patriarchal at its core; reform cannot fix the male power below it. The state must act in the private sphere too, where male power really sits. Radical feminism sees the state as part of the problem, not the route to a solution.
Radical feminism has an internal split. Most radical feminists are equality feminists (androgyny) who argue patriarchy distorts an authentic androgynous nature. Cultural feminists within the strand are difference feminists who argue real feminine traits should be valued, not erased.
Economic equality is necessary but not enough; male sexual power is the deeper structure, so patriarchy would continue even under socialism (Millett). The route to change is a sexual revolution against patriarchy itself, beyond mere economic reform.
The intersectional strand. Spec named thinker: bell hooks. Argues patriarchy manifests in different ways depending on a woman's race, class and other identities. Kimberle Crenshaw coined intersectionality in 1989; hooks brought it into mainstream feminism.
Postmodern feminism goes further than the sex-gender split: there is no single, universal female nature, and even the category woman is partly constructed. Race, class and sexuality shape the experience of being a woman as much as sex does (hooks).
Postmodern feminism accepts patriarchy but argues it manifests differently depending on a woman's race, class and other identities (hooks). The other strands are accused of describing only a white middle-class experience of patriarchy and assuming it is universal.
Postmodern feminism accepts the personal is political but adds that the experience differs by race and class (hooks). The key concept is intersectionality: race, class, gender and sexuality interact to shape each woman's specific oppression in private as well as public life.
State-level solutions are too broad. The state treats all women alike, but the lived experience of patriarchy varies by race and class, and even feminist state action has often centred white middle-class women. Broad state remedies miss the differences within the category woman.
Postmodern feminism sits awkwardly across the equality-difference axis: it rejects the idea of a single female nature that both equality and difference positions assume. There is no universal woman to make either the same as men or essentially different from them.
The route to change is to name and recognise the differences within the category of women rather than pursue one universal programme. Earlier strands focused too narrowly on white middle-class women; postmodern feminism is sometimes accused of being too theoretical to mobilise politically.