3rd richest woman

The people you are referring to are petite-bourgeois feminists.

Attached: MARX IS ANTIFEMINIST GANG.png (815x1462, 1.29M)

Karl and Engles where whipped. Its there one major flaw. I don't take anything those two have to say about women seriously.

Woodhull's feminism included advocacy of "free love" and other fringe positions, and she absolutely did try to place this above working-class struggles. Hence why she was opposed.

Also, to quote myself in an earlier post:

In other words, equating Woodhull with all feminists everywhere, including various feminists in the 20th century who were influenced by Marxism, is silly.

Feminism doesn't get to have a monopoly on analyzing gender roles or solving related problems. This is evidenced by the fact that feminism didn't exist when Marx said that. I also happen to disagree with the statement, considering that the societies where women have the highest relative position include hunter gather tribes. Quotes like that are an example of trying to score good boy points. The better version is to simply state that you judge a society by how it treats its lowest people. I challenge you to present any society in the history of the world where the most "oppressed" group was the fairer sex.


Richard Wolff is married to someone who has this take and calls herself a Marxist feminist. When I have asked self-described Marxist feminists about their take and this is the description I got. If you have some counter examples I'd love to read them.


That's not exactly fringe for feminism. If you want examples why she sucks that aren't related to feminism, see pic 2.

Attached: victoria woodhull.png (367x381 195.17 KB, 5.48K)

I should correct myself - this is a sentiment older than Marx, and it predates feminism. I missed this when proofreading.

It clearly isn't inherent in feminism though, and by the standards of the 1860s-70s "free love" was absolutely scandalous in American society, which is why Marxists in the First International's American sections were so annoyed by Woodhull's open espousal of it and other doctrines, which (as I said) she was placing above the working-class movement.

The feminism which is promoted by 99% of feminists isn't real feminism?

Feminism is an amorphous blob of an ideology, so people like Woodhull will always be inherent to it as long as it remains that.