girl15

Feminist" businesses can also have considerable financial clout. Very little of the money goes into the women's movement, because they both draw from the same pool of money, and most of the money made stays within the business. "Feminist" businesses also provide similar services as, and divert women from, political organizations. The financial viability of the business can crowd out political organizations with much less money, by sidetracking money from political groups to the business. And whatever money a particular business decides to put into the women's movement is dependent purely on the good graces of those running that business. They decide the amount of money to give, and to whom and where it goes. A major defense of "feminist" businesses is that their ability to pay their workers frees many women, who could otherwise not afford it, for participation in the movement. But many "feminist" businesses run on the energies of volunteer staffs. Further, many "feminist" businesses have wage inequities among their workers, so the degree of financial freedom enjoyed by the lesser-paid is at best questionable. With that given, there is no guarantee that women, especially low-paid women, working in "feminist" businesses will put money or energy into the movement, or will be able to. In fact, since "feminist" businesses offer the delusion of participation in the women's movement just by working in them, they militate against women participating in the women's (political) movement. We maintain that the solution to the money problem in the movement is not to be found in starting separate businesses, but in political organization. Some women, (for instance, Coletta Reid, "Taking Care of Business," Quest, vol. I, no. 2, fall 1974,) see political organizations as "feminist" businesses. Since the goals of the two are different, this only confuses the issue and provides a spurious pro-business argument. The problem of financing a political movement, and especially the payment of political workers, is, however, a real issue, which we will examine here briefly.What is the political role of alternate institutions? Alternate institutions can be used as a power base if they are: 1) linked to a strong mass movement, 2) governmental in nature, and 3) providing basic necessities to the population. It is also necessary for the regular institutions to have broken down and/or be insufficient for meeting the needs of the populace. Most importantly, however, these alternate institutions are conceived of not as alternates or substitutes for existing institutions, but as vehicles for taking power. If the alternate institutions do not meet all these criteria (and "feminist" businesses do not), "alternates" serve to sidetrack people from the main goal of taking control of major institutions (and changing some and abolishing others). The very name -- alternate institutions -- defines them as something parasitical to the ruling system. An additional result, in the case of "feminist" businesses, is the myth of the "individual solution" to political problems."Feminist" businesses may give those few women who work in them the chance to gain economic independence, do work they like, possibly learn new skills, and become involved in an "alternate lifestyle" (another one of those "alternates"!). With these side effects, an illusion is created that the "feminist" business is a new type of operation, liberating to women. A false sense of security -- and of movement strength -- is fostered both for the operators of "feminist" businesses and for their customers. Individuals involved at either end of the "feminist" business are under the impression that they are doing their bit for the women's movement by being so involved. In fact, working in a "feminist" business becomes pseudo-movement busywork, and energy which could be devoted to political action is sidetracked into the work of owning, operating and keeping afloat an economic enterprise. These individual solutions are being mistakenly construed as solutions for all women, but are really a way of running away from the political realities of women's oppression. "Feminist" business becomes an ivory tower -- a way to avoid the grim realities of life. It is ironic that cultural feminists, who claim to be anti-capitalist, are using capitalist strategies as a road to liberation. But despite their radical claims, cultural feminists and "feminist" businesses, with their emphasis on upward mobility and personal liberation, basically constitute a liberal ideology, and liberalism, of course, is the ideology of capitalism.