Download Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice and more Study notes Social Theory in PDF only on Docsity!
In Changing Their World: Concepts and Practices of Women’s Movements, Srilatha Batliwala (2008) describes feminism as both an ideology and an analytical framework…. The past three decades of activism, advocacy and research, and changing global geopolitical context, have generated powerful insights and experience about our gains, setbacks, and the challenges of the future…. We now stand not only for gender equal- ity, but for the transformation of all social relations of power that oppress, exploit, or marginalize any set of people, women and men, on the basis of their gender, age, sexual orientation, ability, race, religion, nationality, location, class, caste, or ethnicity. (p. 11) It is an exciting time to be a feminist social worker. “Rising feminist advocacy for human rights, social justice and gender equality” is noted in the Canadian Association of Social Workers’ (CASW, 2008) Social Work Scope of Practice (p. 1). The advent of the Internet, the ubiquity of smartphones and tablets, the ease and cost of international communication via text, Skype, and blogs, and access to solar technologies and wireless communication in places without widespread electrical grids have enabled feminists to communicate worldwide. Classrooms can be created anywhere through distance delivery. Social movements are cre- ated now, not at a kitchen table or workplace, but via tweets with hashtags. #SayHerName is informing and mobilizing against violence. #BringBackOurGirls demands the return of 273 Nigerian kidnapped schoolgirls. #AmINext raises awareness about murdered and miss- ing Aboriginal women. Feminist journal- ists can create their own followers through e-zines, blogs and web publishing. Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Whatsapp, Tumblr, etc.,
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice
Eveline Milliken
192 Social Work Treatment enable the global distribution of stories not deemed important enough to be covered in mainstream media: The fact that we can send messages via Twitter and Whatsapp to each other and a global response occurs around our issues whether it be rape, or sexual vio- lence, or violation of the our human rights, proves that the notion of sisterhood is one that has existed for centuries and continues to be a strong part of this movement. (Moiyattu, 2015) Activism has been rejuvenated. SlutWalks and Take Back the Night marches, which became anemic in the 2000s, were rejuvenated and joined by immigrant and indigenous women’s groups. While in the 80’s and 90’s activists may have walked from “the campus” to “the capital,” they are now more likely to meet in impoverished neighborhoods like “Murderpeg” (Macdonald,
- or the Highway of Tears (Carrier Sekani, n.d.), to bring attention to marginalized and exploited women. Pan-Canadian feminist gath- erings, such as the 2011 Rebelles Conference in Winnipeg, Manitoba, attract hundreds of young feminists. Pussy Riot, a feminist, punk- rock protest-band in Russia, challenged both church and state in 2012, and gained worldwide recognition and support through mass media. National Equal Pay Day, started in 1996 by the National Committee on Pay Equity (2015), con- tinues to highlight that, still, on average, women who work full-time earn only 78 cents for every dollar a man makes. Consequently, feminism has developed a global reach. Activist movements are made vis- ible worldwide through their websites, allowing for global networking: There is a burgeoning women’s rights movement in Muslim-majority societies today. From Pakistan to North Africa, each country has a network of activ- ists, writers and academics struggling to bring wom- en’s rights to their countries and overthrow centuries of patriarchal oppression. Networking on the inter- net and on social media enables them to … [be] a transnational one. (Friedland, 2014) Many feminists were at the forefront of the Arab Spring, and have used that impetus to con- tinue their campaigns (Clarion Project, 2015). African feminism has become a phenomenon to celebrate (Banya, 2015). Movements in British Commonwealth countries, like UK Feminista (UK Feminista, 2015), and the Australian Women Against Violence Alliance (AWAVA,
- share this community. The Feminist Majority Foundation (Feminist, 2015) identifies that collective action can bring change. In 2015, feminist messages reached huge audiences through the confluence of fame, technology, and global reach. A Kenyan poet- activist, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (2014), is widely known, through her TedTalk, as “a happy feminist.” A teenage girl from Pakistan, Malala Yousafzai, advocating for education, earned a bullet to the head, then a Nobel Peace Prize. British actor Emma Watson (“Hermione Granger” in the Harry Potter movie series), launched the HeForShe campaign at the United Nations in 2014, and reminded the audience that no country in the world can yet say they have achieved gender equality. Pop singer Beyoncé’s performance at the 2014 MTV Video Music Awards in front of the huge word “Feminist” brought attention to feminism to millions glob- ally, and the “Beyoncification of feminism” entered the popular lexicon. Yet, since its inception, there has been no shortage of those who wish to dismiss feminism as dead, irrelevant, or failed. Valentich (2011a) observed, “the media often questioned whether feminism was dead” (p. 207). Surprisingly, within the last few years, some feminist social work authors also have appeared to express wea- riness. Iconic feminist Phyllis Chesler, whose Women and Madness in 1972 revolutionized psychiatry for women, more recently (2005) wrote The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom? Irish social work theorist Garrett in 2013 considered again the question of the “death” of feminism and the “post-feminist era” (p. 10). My own expe- rience, teaching both feminist perspectives on social welfare policy and social work practice, is that despite this vast feminist conversation and influence, students are generally unaware of the policy implications, practice skills, and theo- retical underpinnings of feminist social work theory. The disconnection with feminism extends to those in practice. Students in my “Feminist Perspectives” course interview staff in agencies originating in feminist social work fields such as reproductive health, family resource centers,
194 Social Work Treatment understand problems within the context of a racist system that denied African-Americans equal access to resources. (Nsonwu, Casey, Cook, & Armendariz, 2013, p. 8) Steinem has since pointed out that, contrary to the partial written record, “if you look at the numbers and the very first poll of women thinking about responding on women’s issues, African-American women were twice as likely to support feminism and feminist issues as white women” (Vagianos, 2015). For that rea- son, Tamaki (2001) rightly insists, “Feminism is two parts definition and one part struggle—a constant processing of defining, redefining and struggling against definitions (p. 2)” (cited in Mandell, 2009, p. 63). The second caveat is that the various social issues addressed by the many feminist philoso- phies were not limited to particular Waves. For example, gender violence has been a concern in varying ways through all three Waves. During the First Wave, women had no legal right to pro- tection from certain types of violence (such as rape by a spouse). Although the Second Wave succeeded in naming the issue and created rape crisis centers and women’s shelters, the problem of violence and the murder of girls and women continued into the Third Wave interval. In Canada, that there are more than 1, missing and murdered indigenous women defies understanding. Richardson (2010) notes that: Aboriginal clients experience a disproportionately high level of violence compared to European Canadians … and may encounter social and judicial responses that are primarily negative. Agencies may function with a set of assumptions that see the client as having equal access to resources and opportunities. (p. 125) Similarly, immigrant women “suffer from eco- nomic, social, linguistic and cultural marginal- ization” (Mandell, p. 179). “National surveys of ethnic minorities in UK higher education have found women of color are more than any other group to report being victim of sexual harass- ment and discrimination at work” (Mirza, p. 2). As female bodies are the site for much scrutiny, control, and oppression (Dominelli, 2002), the work of feminist social work schol- ars such as MacDonald, Carter, Hanes, Skinner, and McMurphy (2014) on feminist analysis of women and disability, is crucial. In some countries, local feminists are fighting today for rights achieved in Europe and North America in the First Wave (see, e.g., Sampson’s Equality Effects^2 , 2015). Pandya (2014) notes that “the realities of women in India are narra- tives of oppression, invisibility, and subsequent revolt” (p. 500). On International Women’s Day, Rogers (2015) commented, “Gendered issues faced in Haiti are cyclical and directly tied to women being treated as second-class citizens, extremely harsh economic situations and the lack of access to schools and good education” (n.p.). The third caveat is that tables such as Table 11.1 obscure the importance of intersec- tionality in which multiple social characteristics have a compounding effect. Crenshaw (1989), for example, explained that problems cannot be solved simply by including, say, black women within already established analytical struc- tures, because the effect of additional (inter- secting) experience is greater than the sum of racism and sexism. Theory must be rethought and public policy rewritten. With those caveats in mind, the conventions of First, Second, and Third Wave feminism may be explained. These terms primarily help to locate various stages of feminist development on a timeline. The metaphor of waves signals that, like life-supporting water, feminist theory has fluidity, rhythms, movement, and is some- times tumultuous in order to remain healthy and not stagnant. The Waves do not neces- sarily signify differences of social issue focus, but rather the stages of evolution of feminist thought. Next, it is useful to comment on labels attached to various forms of feminism. While “feminism can be broadly characterized by a concern with the systematic disadvantage of women and the means by which equitable out- comes can be achieved, it has never had one dis- tinct set of beliefs or a unified position” (Gray & Boddy, 2010, p. 368) and “recognition of dif- ference features prominently in all forms of feminism” (p. 380). Terms like “liberal,” “social- ist,” and “radical feminism” point toward the various foci feminist philosophies and feminist social work theorists were pursuing. “Maternal feminists” believed that women are biologi- cally different from men, and consequently the
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice 195 biological quality of mothering suggests that women be “social housekeepers” in society. Guided by this view, women’s experiences and voices need to be valued more fully. “Equal rights feminists,” as represented by suffragettes around the world, sought access to voting privileges. Equal rights feminism of the First Wave became “liberal feminism” in the Second Wave, which continued to pursue jus- tice for each person regardless of sex or social class. Essential to this perspective is the belief that changing laws and policies is the catalyst needed to eliminate discrimination. From the perspective of liberal feminism, it was thought, sexism could be eliminated by enabling women to have legal access to divorce, to birth control and abortion, to owning property, to having custody of children, and so forth. “Marxist feminism’s” focus on class and gender rights related to how work was valued differently according to gender, and gave rise to “socialist feminism.” Socialist feminism argued that structures of the economy are at the root of inequality, and that changing a few laws was insufficient to address this underlying bias. A connection is drawn between a capital- ist economic system and oppression, as women owned neither the means of production nor the products of labor. Work at home is not accorded value; women around the world are primary producers of goods and services for which they are not paid (Waring, 1988). “Radical feminism” is an evolutionary descendent of maternal feminism. Male per- spectives have created patriarchy, the root cause of all oppressions: Patriarchy is a political-social system that insists that males are inherently dominating, superior to everything and everyone deemed weak, especially females, and endowed with the right to dominate and rule over the weak and to maintain that domi- nance through various forms of psychological ter- rorism and violence. (hooks, n.d.) Radical feminism therefore argues for opposing the very structures of society created by patri- archy, and the creation of healthier relation- ships and associations by women. Women-only spaces were seen as crucial to emancipation. “Cultural feminism” extends radical femi- nism’s view of inherent differences of women and looks to build a women’s culture. “Lesbian feminism” challenges heteronormativity in policies and practice (including language that restricts definitions of family, and myths about “the nuclear family”); confronts homophobic assumptions and practices (such as discrimina- tion in foster parenting policies), and advocates for legal recognition and human rights. “Eco- feminists” see a connection between how the earth (including the environment, animals, and resources) is mistreated, and mistreatment of people, especially the exploitation and abuse of females. With the caveats, waves, and types of femi- nism in mind, it is possible to get a sense of the history of the development of feminist theory that underpins feminist social work theory. During the First Wave, feminism as a theory was in the process of being articulated. As the movie Suffragettes (Owen & Ward, 2015) shows, activism, rather than the development of a clearly expressed philosophy, was the goal of the early women’s rights movement. From the mid– 19th century to the end of World War II (1945), women fought for the vote, personhood, basic legal rights to own property, and the ability to have custody of their own children. Jennissen and Lundy’s (2011) book One Hundred Years of Social Work describes the link between the stories of countless women and the development of the profession of social work. Using their own (and their “sisters’ ”) experi- ences and capacities to reflect and comment, social workers began to build the foundations of feminist social work theory upon the work of their activist feminist foremothers. Wahab (2015) points out that the social work theory concepts of collective action, analysis, and justice, were built upon Jane Addams’s (1902,
- dedication to building community, Mary Richmond’s (1917) attention to documentation and objective analysis, and Bertha Reynolds’s (1935, 1942) commitment to a socialist drive for equality and fairness for all. It was during the First Wave that the first schools of social work were developed in the late 1890s in Britain and Europe, 1898 in the United States (Columbia University in New York), and 1914 at the University of Toronto in Canada. Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique (1963) is widely recognized as starting the Second
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice 197 is the result of this legal legacy [colonization]—a leg- acy that is characterized by laws that are often sexist in their roots, and disadvantage women. In Canada, the impact of this legacy is especially significant for Aboriginal women (n.p.). The publications of indigenous voices like Maracle (1996), Waters, (2003), Corbiere Lavell & Lavell-Harvard (2006), Green (2007), Sinclair (2007), Pompana et al. (2008), Absolon (2009), Monture-Angus and McGuire (2009), Anderson (2011), Baskin (2011), Milliken, Campbell, DiUbaldo, and Pelletier (2012), and Carriere and Richardson (2013) enrich the growing post- colonial feminist literature in Canada. Informed by post-colonial and postmodern philosophies, the Third Wave continues today, an expanding movement to include those pre- viously not expressed in written work. Third Wave feminists continue to give wider voice to issues of gender violence, race, heteronor- mativity, class, ableism and ageism, global care, immigrants, constructions of families, and the amplifying effects of intersectionality (Crenshaw, 1989; Heywood & Drake, 1997). For Sands and Nuccio (1992), “postmodern feminist theory” is: highly compatible with social work. … [Postmodern- ism’s] emphasis on differences … recognizes the diverse constitution of client populations and their unique needs. Furthermore the focus on context is in keeping with person-in-situation perspective. … The use of deconstruction uncovers the suppressed voices of marginalized populations. (p. 493) They noted that words and experiences are his- torically and culturally bound, thus recognizing that issues have many faces and speak in multi- ple voices, depending on the context. Meanings cannot be considered absolute and universally real in themselves, but rather are constructed (p. 491). This compatibility between feminist theory and social work practice has been cor- roborated by many writers (e.g., Collins, 1986; Gould, 1987; Nes & Iadicola, 1989; Van Den Berg & Cooper, 1986). “Feminist principles are closely aligned with social work values and eth- ics (Bricker-Jenkins & Hooyman, 1986; Van Den Bergh & Cooper, 1986), and some would say that social work is inherently feminist (Collins, 1986)” (cited in Lazzari, Colarossi, & Collins, 2009, p. 348). Feminism is not only of academic inter- est to social work theory. It is also a method of social work practice. Feminist social work not only shares the tenets and values of feminism, but also adapts and merges them with existing social work values, and puts them to work: Feminism and social work share a commitment to the unique nature and essential dignity of all peo- ple…. Furthermore, social work’s emphasis on the person-in-environment is congruent with the central methodological theme of feminism—the personal is the political—and the feminist value of personal empowerment is a key underlying theme of social work intervention. (Collins, 1986) Land (1995), in particular, identified the basic skills feminist social workers employ:
- Validating the social context; revaluing posi- tions enacted by women;
- Recognizing difference in male and female experience;
- Re-balancing perceptions of normality and deviance;
- Adopting an inclusive stance;
- Attending to power dynamics in the thera- peutic relationship;
- Recognizing how the personal is political;
- Emphasizing a de-constructive perspective, a partnering stance and inclusive scholarship;
- Challenging reductionist models;
- Employing empowerment practices;
- And challenging the myth of value-free psy- chotherapy (pp. 6– 11). These practices help social workers function in an explicitly feminist way to make visible and conscious the negative effects of patriarchy and to develop alternative narratives in individu- als and communities, to provide for alterna- tive (just and egalitarian) expressions of social relationships. The value of feminist social work practice has been demonstrated empirically. Noting that “empirical evaluations of feminist social work interventions are generally underrepresented in the profession’s peer reviewed literature,” Gorey, Daly, Richter, Gleason, and McCallum (2002) compared 35 independent studies of feminist interventions with 44 independent studies of social work practice that were based on other theoretical orientations. For this study, Gorey
198 Social Work Treatment et al. identified the general attributes of feminist interventions as the following: The importance of gender is explicitly addressed, including addressing inegalitarian resource development and oppression; efforts are made to eliminate false dichotomies; power is reconceptualized; and a strengths perspective is emphasized (p. 40). Finding that “nine out of every ten femi- nist social work participants do better than the average non-feminist participant” (p. 37), they declare that when “methods have been so vali- dated, it appears that (feminist social work) may be among the profession’s most effective strate- gies” (p. 50). Given the broad range of theoreti- cal applications in feminist social work, ongoing evaluation is needed to address concerns that the volume of research in feminist social work literature is declining. When social work values are so aligned with feminist values and when praxis is deemed so effective, why, then, is it still necessary to have to justify and fight for the legitimacy of femi- nist social work? Many challenges remain in the movement toward the equality of all, the end to which feminist social work theory aspires. These challenges may be external or internal to the movement, but at root, they are expressions of a presumption (patriarchy) that is familiar to theorists and activists of the three Waves. As Lazzari et al. (2009) declare: “Patriarchal struc- tures are alive and well” (p. 353). While contem- porary expressions of this harmful viewpoint take on new shapes with new technologies, the dynamics remain similar. Patriarchy continues to seek to objectify in order to demean, humili- ate, or control by violence. Its institutions con- tinue to undervalue the work of women. Its minions work to exert controls that prevent human rights. Objectification is a key dynamic of patri- archy that leads to violence. Second Wave femi- nists had been hopeful that research (hooks, 1997; Kilbourne, 2010) and activism (Jhally,
- to expose the misogyny of media objecti- fication of women would lead to a reduction in violence against women and vulnerable others. They could not have predicted the development and popularity of misogynistic software like Grand Theft Auto V (Rockstar, 2013) that liter- ally make it a game to link sexual arousal and violence and “win” points for horrific violence against women. Nor could they have predicted the worldwide distribution of violent sexual exploitation of females through webcam RATS (remote admission tool software); cellphone cameras used, covertly or predatorily, to film females in sexual acts, leading to extortion and suicide, and those pornographic images circu- lating perpetually within the worldwide web. Controlling women is a central dynamic of patriarchal structures. The “body politics” literature, identifying female bodies as a “bat- tleground” for control, is abundant: from de Beauvoir (1949), Firestone (1972), and Butler’s (1993) earlier feminist interrogations of women as body, through to the current burgeoning lit- erature on this topic. “The powers at play in body politics include institutional power expressed in government and laws, disciplinary power exacted in economic production, discretion- ary power exercised in consumption, and per- sonal power negotiated in intimate relations” (Body Politics, n.d.). Sjoberg and Peet (2011) observe that “both in domestic and interna- tional policy, and in actual conflicts, functions of gender hierarchy in the theory and practice of both state and global politics mean that wars are … fought on the bodies and lives of ‘their’ women” (p. 176). Valentich (2011b) catalogued other recurring issues such as intimate part- ner violence, sexual assault, survival sex work, human trafficking, and homelessness, and stated the obvious, that social workers “would agree that there is still much work to be done, locally, nationally, and internationally, by those committed to feminisms” (p. 22). Undervaluing women’s contribution is a major result of objec- tification and patriarchy. Globalization (the closer integration of eco- nomic, social, political, environmental, and legal policies across nations) has the poten- tial to promote social justice agendas; uniting of nations, eradicating inequality, ensuring mutual sustainability and peace. However, we are seeing much of the opposite: policies that exploit, increased poverty, environmental deg- radation, political and economic insecurity, amassing wealth for corporations and investors. The rise of the global market has put pressure on local and national social agendas, impeding some feminist accomplishments and eroding others. The economic bottom line is held up as
200 Social Work Treatment bureaucratic, organizational contexts and increasingly fewer can claim to control their own work or knowledge” (p. 69). Baines in 2011 asked: “How do managerialism and standard- ization restrict social workers’ opportunities for social-justice oriented practice? Have 20 years of restructuring reduced or removed social workers commitment to, and capacity for social justice practice?” (p. 25). She goes on to remind us that the “source of social work’s intellectual integrity … is connection to people’s every day struggles for dignity and well-being, its ability to alleviate their pain and to address deep roots of inequality and injustice that generates dis- tress” (p. 25). This constant controlling supervision is tir- ing. Referring to feminist social work theory, Valentich (2005, p. 148) notes that “its further development remains in the hands of increas- ingly overburdened and politically constrained social workers and social work educators” (cited in Valentich, 2011a, p. 205). The Gray and Boddy warn that notions of “post-feminism” fuel neo- liberal consumerist inequality, thus “intensify- ing the need for feminist social work critique, scholarship, and activism” (Gray & Boddy, p. 368). Overall, there is a reduction of ability to use critical theory in decision making. Diminishing the visibility of women’s work and value is not only a result of patriarchy for individual women—it also affects women col- lectively. A neoconservative climate affects the academy (research and education) and feminist social work practice. A challenge that seems to be both external and internal is the invisibility of feminist social work achievement. The work of feminists, like the work of women, is made invisible. The tiredness of overloaded social workers and instructors, and the lack of sup- port available, contribute to a decline in femi- nist social work research and a decline in the visibility of feminist social work principles and action in the public arena. Observing a lack of contemporary feminist scholarship in social work practice, Gray and Boddy (2010) note that: Social workers deliver innovative services in their daily work and are uniquely positioned to dissem- inate valuable practice experience, but this exper- tise is seldom disseminated publicly. They would do well to engage in more practice-based research that examines effective feminist approaches to social work practice. (p. 384) Feminists do not get credit for the gains they have achieved for others. Taylor and Daly (1995) suggest that social work’s roots as a profession of women for women resulted in patriarchal devaluing of women’s work to “social house- keeping,” and that this laid the foundation for “an underestimation and misrepresentation of the analytical, organizational, and management skills that women in the profession employ to effect radical changes in society” (p. 11) that continue. Schiebinger (1999) observes the same invisibility when she notes: “It is a curious phe- nomenon that when feminist practices or points of view become widely accepted in science, medicine, engineering, or the culture more gen- erally, they are no longer considered ‘feminist,’ but simply ‘just’ or ‘true’ ” (n.p.). To the extent that this integration is so thorough, the credit due feminism is quickly lost, and the rights so gained are assumed to have always been pres- ent. That women are legal persons, that they can vote, hold jobs, obtain credit, receive parental benefits and custody of children, may well be seen as natural rights, not the legacy of hard- won feminist social work advocacy. The invis- ibility of women’s work has now shifted to be the invisibility of feminist social worker’s work. Feminist thought and feminist social work theory are diminished in academia when these perspectives are subsumed under larger, “more inclusive” categories, such as gender studies, human rights courses, or anti-oppressive prac- tice. Brown and Strega (2005) decry the con- tinuing dismissiveness: “Despite the emergence of critical, feminist and Indigenous approaches to research, anti-oppressive and critical research methodologies still rate little more than a men- tion in most research methods” (p. 4). Though feminist theorists (e.g., hooks, 1994; Mehrotra,
- identified the concept of intersectionality, anti-oppressive practice writers such as Brown and Strega (2005), and Baines (2011), while declaring themselves to be feminists, neverthe- less appear to reduce the centrality of the femi- nist contribution by suggesting, for example, it is an “older theor[y]” (Baines, p. 10), one of sev- eral interchangeable theories that (mis)articu- late the same larger problem. This seems to be
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice 201 another way of avoiding association with the feminine in feminist theory. It is feminist social work theory that continues to point out the gen- der bias of these larger categories. Obscuring violence serves to perpetuate it, to excuse it, and to discourage perpetrators from being held accountable for it (Richardson, 2010, p. 138). Hence, striving to remain visible is a key challenge and priority for feminist social work. Identifying that the world we know as racist, sexist, heterosexist, classist, neglect- ful, colonizing, occupying, and violent is the problem (Brown, 2006, p. 22), we social workers can create culturally competent practices that support equity and social justice only by understanding the ways in which we are not meeting these goals. (Gentlewarrior, Martin- Jearld, Skok, & Sweetser, 2008, p. 2) Social workers are committed to advocating for others but are not as effective at educating the public and other professions about our successes and contributions. Our invisibility lets others define and disparage the profession and that ultimately hurts not only us but those we serve. For that reason, feminist social work research is crucial (Gottlieb & Bombyk, 1987; Gringeri, 2010). In considering what social work will look like in 2044, Howard and Garland (2015) urge a commitment to social workers as public intellectuals … there is little or no social work presence in public venues such as speaking tours, radio talk shows, television news shows, popular magazines, newspaper editorials, op- ed pages, or other mechanisms that inform the pub- lic about welfare and public policy issues. (p. 200) Wahab, Anderson-Nathe, and Gringeri (2015) urged feminist theorists to take up the chal- lenge of research in social work, when they wrote Feminisms in Social Work Research: Showcasing the breadth and depth of exemplary social work feminist research, the editors argue that social work’s unique focus on praxis, daily proximi- ties to privilege and oppression, concern with social change and engagement with participatory forms of inquiry place social workers in a unique position to both learn from and contribute to broader social sci- ence and humanities discourse associated with fem- inist research. (Publisher notes) The importance of feminist thought in their theoretical constructions is visible as the cornerstone of other theories. In 1997, Wachholz and Mullaly affirmed that “feminist research literature … offers the most well-articulated body of knowledge that is congruent with struc- tural social work values, beliefs and principles” (p. 25). A challenge to face, therefore, is the advancement of feminist social work research. By finding their voice, Third Wave feminists can create a new reality, for language has always had power; “words make worlds” (Hartman, 1991). Education is one of the challenges facing feminist social work today. The purpose of university education is debated, but it seems to me that we are committed to transforma- tion through developing intellect, broadening awareness, encouraging questions that unsettle and transform, and pursuing holistic develop- ment that attends to students’ emotional, psy- chological, and spiritual wellness. Faculties of social work prepare students for a range of possibilities, offering opportunities to conduct ground-breaking research, collaborative com- munity engagement, insightful policy analysis, beneficial program evaluation, compassionate leadership, and skilled clinical practice. As the “key ingredient of a feminist classroom is help- ing students find their voice … [to] help build confidence to take action” (Curry-Stevens et. al., 2008, p. 297), feminist social work education guides that excitement and potential, and with bell hooks (2000), asks us all to “Imagine liv- ing in a world where there is no domination … where a vision of mutuality is the ethos shap- ing our interactions. Imagine living in a world where we can all be who we are, a world of peace and possibility” (p. x). Exciting opportunities abound in feminist social work education to continue to blend our values and commitments to self-reflection leading to social action. Assignments I employ invite engagement through creative expression. For example, students create manifestos that capture their passion for social action toward an issue of personal significance for them, expressed through described visual art, song/ drumming, poetry, rap, or other public per- formance. To inspire, I show examples of mod- ern feminist leaders, such us Crystal Valentine (Workneh, 2015) reciting her powerful poem “Black Privilege,” and describing what she feels being black in America means today. Building
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice 203 have resolved its identity crisis, garnered stable funding, grown the number of researchers it produces, and achieved greater recognition for having tackled some of society’s toughest prob- lems with notably positive results” (n.p.). A second sign of hope is that feminist social workers of all ages, experiences, languages, and cultures continue to collaborate. As our history illustrates, the strengths of social work and roots of feminism are in collaboration, blending grass- roots, the academy, and the front line. There are considerable resources in the communities we belong to and those with whom we engage, the academy, and practice sites; hence, it is impor- tant to rededicate ourselves to revitalizing those links. The shared interest in challenges to profes- sionalism affect both the Canadian Association of Social Workers/Association Canadienne des Travailleuses et Travailleuses Sociaux (CASW/ ACTS) and the Canadian Association for Social Work Education—l’Association Canadienne pour la Formation en Travail Social (CASWE- ACFTS), so working together benefits us all. In 1995, women’s rights were finally recognized as a global human right by the United Nations: A global feminism has evolved [Bunch, 1993] and events around the world from femicide [Caputi and Russell, 1993] to rape [Valentich, 1994] and genital mutilation [Berg, 1995] have captured the attention and engaged the energies of feminist practitioners who none the less, may be working in one domain of feminist practice. (Valentich, 1996, p. 284) Wetzel (1995) encouraged feminist social work- ers to keep to their original purpose, to con- tinue to work collectively, sharing experience, not in retreating into isolation, but in keeping connected with others: Women’s concerns are the concerns of the world. Their well-being is directly linked to the well-being of families, communities and nations. To practice effectively in the 21st century, therefore, social work- ers must view women as a priority…. If economic, political or social conditions, ranging from health care to education are to improve, the advancement of women from a human rights perspective must be embraced as a concept, indeed as a mission. To do so is to advance not only women, but men and children alike—in short, the people of the world. (p. 190) Yet another sign of hope is that feminist social work theorists continue to publish. For 30 years, Affilia has been and continues to be a source for feminist social work writing, provid- ing access to feminist social work voices from around the globe. For example: Pandya (2014) wrote, “Feminist social work has praxis as its core … women’s realities are not universal and essential, but differential; intertwined with cat- egories of caste, class, ethnicity, and faith which create layers of intersections of power domina- tion and hierarchy that need to be countered” (p. 500). Herizons: Women’s News and Feminist Views is a Canadian feminist magazine that has been publishing since 1979. A host of contem- porary feminists theorists continue to write about contemporary issues in North America (c.f. Baumgardner & Richards, 2010 [(Gen X women]; Valenti, 2014 [full frontal feminism]; Hernandez & Rehman, 2002 [postcolonial feminism]; Nam, 2001 [Asian American femi- nism]). In his introduction to a new book on social work theories, Garrett (2013) acknowl- edges the significance of feminism and affirms that the book is informed by feminist analysis (p. 11). The developing literature on cultural safety (Milliken, 2013, 2012; Gentlewarrior et al., 2008) is part of that hope, articulating as it does an approach to inter-cultural coopera- tion that intentionally reduces the latent power inequalities that favor those in dominant cul- tures, whether they are racial or gender-based. What, then, shall we conclude? Gloria Steinem (1995) once said feminism is the only major social movement that has to reinvent itself every generation. Gray and Boddy (2010) affirm: Feminism is far from a finished project. Women worldwide are oppressed, marginalized, abused, and disadvantaged because of their gender. Neoconservative values have undermined feminism. If we are to offset antifeminist movements, we must keep social work critique, scholarship, and activism alive. (p. 27) Though the challenges are significant, Dominelli (2002) retains an optimism, “as feminists con- tinue to envision a world in which people and the environment they live in matter” (p. 2). Finn and Sadye (2011) speak for many when they conclude that social workers care deeply about feminism and its relevance for the transformative practice of social work. … Inspiration
204 Social Work Treatment in new languages and practices of feminism and power in creating spaces for dialogue and reflection … appreciation of the complexity of feminisms; the rich and vibrant directions in which feminist practice is being pursued; the possibilities for bold and coura- geous action in teaching, research, and practice; and the need for communities of connection and support … commitments to feminist research, teaching, and practice … a collective desire to build community and translate our inspiration into action. (p. 348) In 2014, Shulamith Koenig, recipient of the 2003 UN Prize in the Field of Human Rights, noted the direct relation between the atrocities experi- enced by females around the world and the lack of human rights: “Human rights equal peace. Human rights are all about equality; equality is dignity. Patriarchy has put women down. To survive women should not have to exchange equality” (Koenig, 2013). It is necessarily a struggle to eradicate the ideology of domination that permeates cultures on various levels and in varying ways, as well as a commitment to reorganizing society so that the self-development of people can take precedence over imperialism, economic expansion, and material desires. (hooks, 2000, p. 26) It may be tiring, frustrating, disappoint- ing, discouraging, and even dangerous work. Abramovitz’s encouragement remains valid: “Take time to envision feminist solutions to the country’s woes and convert them to fair and humane social policies … we must organize for the long haul … without struggle there can be no change” (Abramovitz, 1996, p. 256).
References
Abramovitz, M. (1996). Women: Get ready for the long haul. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 11(3), 253–256. Absolon, K. (Minogiizhigokwe). (2009). Navigating the landscape of practice: Dbaagmowin of a helper. In G. Bruyere, A. Hart, & R. Sinclair (Eds.). (2009). Wicihitowin: Aboriginal social work in Canada (pp. 172–199). Black Point, NS, Canada: Fernwood Publishing. Addams, J. (1902). Democracy and social ethics. New York: Macmillan. Addams, J. (1916). The long road of woman’s memory. New York: Macmillan. Adichi, C. (2014). We should all be feminists. London: Fourth Estate. Anderson, K. (2011). Life stages and native women: Memory, teachings, and story medicine. Winnipeg, MB, Canada: University of Manitoba Press. Australian Women Against Violence Alliance. (2015). Retrieved June 9, 2015, from http:// awava.org.au/. Baines, D. (2011). An overview of anti-oppressive social work practice: Neo- liberalism, inequality and change. In D. Baines (Ed.), Doing anti-oppressive practice: Social justice social work (pp. 25–47). Halifax, NS, Canada: Fernwood Publishing. Baines, D. (Ed.). (2011). Doing anti-oppressive prac- tice: Social justice social work. Halifax, NS, Canada: Fernwood Publishing. Baines, D., Evans, P., & Neysmith, S. (Eds.). (1991). Women’s caring: Feminist perspectives on social welfare (2nd ed.). Toronto, ON, Canada: Oxford University Press. Banya, M. (2015, May 4). 18 Phenomenal African feminists to know and celebrate. Blog post at African Feminism Forum. Retrieved June 9, 2015, from http://www.africanfeministforum.com/18- phenomenal- african- feminists- to- know- and- celebrate/ Baskin, C. (2011). Strong helpers’ teachings: The value of indigenous knowledges in the helping professions. Toronto, ON, Canada: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Batliwala, S. (2008). Changing their world: Concepts and practices of women’s movements. Association of Women’s Rights in Development (AWID). Retrieved June 1, 2015, from http://www.wluml. org/ sites/ wluml.org/ files/ feminist- movement- builders-dictionary-jass.pdf. Baumgardner, J., & Richards, A. (2010). Manifesta: Young women, feminism and the future (10th ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The devel- opment of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books. Berlin, S., & Kravetz, D. (1981). Women as victims: A feminist social work perspective. Social Work, 26 (6), 447– 449. Body Politics. (n.d.). Encyclopedia [online ed.]. Retrieved from http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/articles/ pages/6016/Body-Politics.html#ixzz3i LGcq17X. Bricker-Jenkins, M., & Hooyman, N. (Eds.). (1986). Not for women only: Social work practice for a feminist future. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of Social Workers. Brown, L. (2006). Still subversive after all these years: The relevance of feminist therapy in the age of evidence based practice. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30, 15– 24. Brown, L., & Strega, S. (Eds.). (2005). Research as resistance: Critical, indigenous, and anti- oppressive
206 Social Work Treatment Green, Joyce. (2007). Making space for indigenous feminism. Halifax, NS, Canada: Fernwood Publishing. Greenspan, M. (1983). A new approach to women and therapy. New York: McGraw- Hill. Gringeri, C. (2010). What makes it feminist? Mapping the landscape of feminist social work research. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 25(4), 390– 405. Grove, J. (2014). “Black Scholars Still Experience Racism on Campus.” Times Higher Education, March 20. http:// www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/ news/ black- scholars- still- experience- racismon- campus/ 2012154.article. Hanmer, J., & Statham, D. (1989). Women and social work: Towards a woman-centered practice. Chicago: Lyceum Books. Hartman, A. (1991). Words create worlds. Social Work, 36(6), 275–276. Hernandez, D., & Rehman, B. (Eds.). (2002). Colonize this! Young women of color on today’s feminism. Berkeley, CA: Seal Press. Heywood, L., & Drake, J. (1997). Third wave agenda: Being feminist, doing feminism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Retrieved June 13, 2015, from http://www.researchgate.net/ publication/ 37705246_ Third_ Wave_ Agenda_ Being_ Feminist_ DoingFeminism. Home, A. (2004). The work that never ends: Employed mothers of children with disabilities. Journal of the Association for Research on Mothering, 6(2), 37– 47. Retrieved June 6, 2015, from http:// jarm.journals. yorku.ca/ index.php/ jarm/ article/ viewFile/ 4920/
Home, A. (2002). Challenging hidden oppression: Mothers caring for children with disabilities. Critical Social Work, 3(1), 88–103. Retrieved June 6, 2015, from http://www1.uwindsor.ca/criticalsocialwork/ challenging- hidden- oppression- mothers- caring- for-children-with-disabilities. hooks, b. (1994). Outlaw culture: Resisting represen- tations. New York: Routledge. hooks, b. (1997). Cultural criticism and transfor- mation. Retrieved May 24, 2015, from http:// w w w.mediaed.org/ cgi- bin/ commerce.cgi? preadd=action&key=402. hooks, b. (2000). Feminism is for everybody: Passionate politics. Cambridge, MA: South End Press. hooks, b. (n.d.). Understanding patriarchy. Electronic newsletter of Louisville Anarchist Federation Federation, (LAFF). Retrieved June 23, 2015, from http://imaginenoborders.org/pdf/zines/ UnderstandingPatriarchy.pdf Howard, M., & Garland, E. (2015, Summer). Social work research: 2044. Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research, 6(2), 173–200. [Online ed.]. Retrieved June 9, 2015, from http://www.jstor. org/stable/10.1086/ 681099. Jennissen, T., & Lundy, C. (2011). One hundred years of social work: A history of the profession in English 1900– 2000. Waterloo, ON, Canada: Wilfred Laurier University Press. Jhally, S. (2007). Dreamworlds 3: Desire, sex and power in music video. Video. Media Education Foundation. Retrieved June 6, 2015, from http:// www.sutjhally.com/ meffilms/ dreamworldsdesires/. Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., & Parmar, R. (1993). Defining postmodernism. The Electronic Labyrinth. Retrieved May 29, 2016, from http:// www2.iath.virginia.edu/elab/hfl0242.html. Kilbourne, J. (2010). Killing us softly 4: Advertising’s image of women. Video. Media Education Foundation. Retrieved June 6, 2015, from http:// www.stereotypethreat.org/ index.php/ videos/ 255-killing-us-softly-images-of-women. Koenig, S. (2013, March 7). Feminae-Shulamith Koenig on woman and human rights. Video retrieved May 18, 2015, from https://www.you- tube.com/watch?v=JAah7kqVlfE. Laird, J. (1995). Family-centered practice: Feminist, constructionist, and cultural perspective. In N. Van Den Berg (Ed.), Feminist practice in the 21st century (pp. 30– 39 ). Washington, DC: NASW Press. Land, H. (1995). Feminist social work in the 21st century. In N. Van Den Berg (Ed.), Feminist prac- tice in the 21st century (pp. 3–19). Washington, DC: NASW Press. Lazzari, M., Colarossi, L., & Collins, K. (2009, November). Feminists in social work: Where have all the leaders gone? Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 24(4), 348–359. Levine, H. (1976). Feminist counselling: A look at new possibilities. Special Issue of The Social Worker, 12–15. Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider. Freedom, CA: The Crossing Press. MacDonald, J., Carter, I., Hanes, R., Skinner, S., & McMurphy, S. (2014). Disability and social work education in the United Kingdom. Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, 3(3), 53– 82. Macdonald, N. (2015, January 22). Welcome to Winnipeg where Canada’s racism problem is at its worst. MacLean’s Magazine. Retrieved May 23, 2015, from http://www.macleans.ca/ news/ canada/ welcome- to- winnipeg- where- canadas- racism-problem-is-at-its-worst/. Mandell, N. (Ed.). (2009). Feminist issues: Race, class and sexuality (5th ed.). Toronto, ON, Canada: Pearson.
Feminist Theory and Social Work Practice 207 Manning, R. (1992). Speaking from the heart: A femi- nist perspective on ethics. Lanham, MD: Roman & Littlefield. Maracle, L. (1996). I am woman: A native perspec- tive on sociology and feminism. Vancouver, BC, Canada: Press Gang. Mehrotra, G. (2010). Toward a continuum of inter- sectionality; Theorizing for feminist social work scholarship. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 24(4), 417– 430. Meyers-Avis, J. (1985). The politics of functional family therapy: A feminist critique.Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 127–138. Miller, J. (1976). Toward a new psychology of women. Boston: Beacon Press. Milliken, E. (2012). Cultural safety and child wel- fare systems. In D. Fuchs, S. McKay, & I. Brown (Eds.), Awakening the spirit: Moving child welfare forward. Regina, SK, Canada: Canadian Plains Research Centre Press. Milliken, E. (2013). You have the right to remain silent … But I’m your lawyer! You are supposed to talk to me! Working towards creating culturally safe working relationships. Manitoba Law Journal, 37 (1), 403– 413. Milliken, E., Campbell, M., DiUbaldo, D., Pelletier, J. (2012, October 20). Working appropriately with Aboriginal Elders in educational settings. Raising the Bar: Innovative and Best Practices in Clinical Legal Education. Association for Canadian Clinical Legal Education Conference, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. Mirza, H. (2014). Decolonizing higher education: Black feminism and the intersectionality of reach and gender. Journal of Feminist Scholarship, 7(8), 1–12. [online ed.]. Retrieved April 24, 2015, from http://www.jfsonline.org/issue7-8/articles/Mirza. Mirza, H. (Ed.). (2007). Black British femi- nism: A reader. London: Routledge. Moiyattu, B. (2015, April 14). Sisterhood is my politi- cal weapon and feminist tool. Blog post at African Feminist Forum. Retrieved April 28, 2015, from http:// www. africanfeministforum.com/ sisterhood- is- my- political- weapon- and- feminist- tool/. Monture-Angus, P., & McGuire, P. (Eds.). (2009). First voices: An Aboriginal women’s reader. Toronto, ON, Canada: Inanna Press. Nam, V. (Ed.). (2001). Yell-OH girls! Emerging voices explore culture, identity, and growing up Asian- American. New York: Harper Perennial. National Committee on Equal Pay. (2015). Retrieved May 5, 2015, from http://www.pay-equity.org/day. html. Nes, J., & Iadicola, P. (1989). Toward a defini- tion of feminist social work: A comparison of liberal, radical and socialist models. Social Work, 34 (1), 12– 21. Norman, E., & Mancuso, A. (Eds.). (1980). Women’s issues and social work practice. Itasca, IL: Peacock Publishers. Nsonwu, M., Casey, K., Cook, S., Armendariz, N. (2013, July-September). Embodying social work as a profession: A pedagogy for practice [Electronic version]. SAGE Open, 1-8. Retrieved May 18, 2015, from http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/spsgo/3/3/ 2158244013503835.full.pdf O’Reilly, A. (2008). That is what feminism is: The acting and living, not just the told: Modeling and mentoring feminism. In A. O’Reilly (Ed.), Feminist mothering (pp. 191–202). Albany, NY: SUNY Press. O’Reilly, A. (Ed.). (2008). Feminist mothering. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. Owen, A., Ward, F. (Producers), & Gavron, S. (Director). (2015). Suffragette [Motion picture]. USA: Ruby Films, Pathé, Film4 Productions. Pandya, S. (2014). Feminist social work: An Indian lens. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 29 (4), 499–511. Penfold, S., & Walker, G. (1986). The psychiatric par- adox and women. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 5(2), 9– 15. Pennell, J., Milliken, E., Flaherty, M., Gravel, N., & Neuman, M. (1993). Feminist social work educa- tion in mainstream and non-mainstream class- rooms. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 1993 (8), 317–338. Pompana, Y., Gaywish, R., Manitowabi, E., Davis, L., Douglas, V., Hoffman, R., … Williams, S. (2008). Creating indigenous spaces in the academy: Fulfilling our responsibility to future genera- tions. Retrieved June 10, 2015, from http://www. alternative.ac.nz/author/yvonne-pompana. Reynolds, B. (1935). Rethinking social case work. Family, 16, 230–237. Reynolds, B. (1942). Learning and teaching in the practice of social work. New York: Rhinehart. Richardson, C. (2010). A word is worth a thou- sand pictures: Counselling with Metis and First Nation’s women. In L. Ross (Ed.), Feminist coun- selling: Theories, issues and practice (pp. 122– 148). Toronto, ON, Canada: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Richmond, M. (1917). Social diagnosis. Philadelphia, PA: Russell Sage. Rockstar Games. (2013). Grand theft auto V. Rogers, T. (2015). Meet the young feminists who make it happen in Latin America and the Caribbean. Blogpost retrieved June 23, 2015, from http:// fusion.net/story/56314/this-is-what-it-means-to- be-a-young-feminist-in-a-machista-society/.
