 Welcome to the latest episode of IMTV, the International Marxist Television Channel, hosted by Socialist Appeal. I'm Natasha Sorrell and I am a Socialist Appeal activist. I'm also a member of the NEU and Sheffield. And this week I'm joined by Fiona Lully, who is the President of the Serwas-Marxist Society, and Sarah Taylor, who is the Treasurer of the Manchester Marxist Society. And we're going to be discussing women's rights and the recent progress against oppression that's been happening in society. So obviously in the past 100 years we've seen huge leaks forward for women. 100 years ago this year women, some women, won the right to vote through the heroic struggle of the suffragettes, although that was limited to those who had property. And then 50 years ago, only last month, was again another very strong strike by the women of the Ford Dagenham production plant, who went on strike for ultimately equal pay, which led to the Equal Pay Act of 1970. So we've seen some progress, but obviously there's a lot of oppression in society still. We know that women still today don't actually have equal pay. And on top of that, there's many more issues. The question of domestic violence still remains, which is a huge problem that affects many, many women. Sexual harassment is still a massive problem, and the recent Me Too hashtag has been highlighting the prevalence of sexual harassment within society, in particular in the workplace. And so we've also seen the fight for the right to abortion in Ireland, in particular recently with the repeal the eighth movement. So despite these kind of sort of victories that we've seen and despite huge steps forwards, why is it that we're still having to fight for women's rights? Yeah, well, to actually completely right, there's been like a lot of steps forward for women in the last 100 years, even slightly further back than that. But the problem is that women tend to be the ones that are more affected by capitalist crisis. Obviously, we're in a situation of huge capitalist crisis at the moment. And women are really feeling the brunt of that. So women tend to rely slightly more on welfare than men, just because of the way that gender norms are created within capitalism. It means that women tend to be in the home, so rely more on welfare. The labor that women do in this society isn't paid a wage in the same way that men's laborers. So in that sense, women are very affected by austerity and cuts. And also a lot of women, when they do work, tend to work in the public sector. I know you yourself are part of the public sector, and that is something that a lot of women are a part of. I think around two thirds of people in public sector jobs are women. And this means that when these public sector jobs are cut, women are hugely, hugely affected by that, which can make a massive difference. You also mentioned, obviously, the fact that there's a lot of domestic abuse and stuff. And this seems like an issue that maybe wouldn't be tied in with austerity or anything, but it actually is very tied in with all of these cuts and with capitalist crisis. Universal credit, for example, is a really, really interesting and clear point about this, because universal credit is sent to a household rather than being sent specifically to one person who needs it, which means that men will be sent universal credit and women will lose all financial independence. If you're in a situation where you're in an abusive relationship, that becomes very, very difficult. When this was brought up to Theresa May, she said, well, women can just ask to have the money put into a separate bank account if they're in abusive relationships. And all of the women who were involved in talking about this said, we, if we do this, we will suffer under huge amounts more of abuse and violence from our partners. So it's definitely proved that domestic violence is affected very much by the crisis of capitalism, obviously, and more of a slightly abstract point. And when the crisis of capitalism is as acute as it is now, men obviously that are in the workplace have longer hours, will be more stressed. And this can also add to any domestic abuse that women were facing at home anywhere. It's kind of like you've outlined this economic trap that women are in, and domestic violence stems directly from that. So all of those kind of economic pressures that come not directly on to women, of course there are some that are directly on to women, but there's that like further additional effect that it has on women, it's quite profound. And I think maybe people don't quite think about those more abstract effects that you've just been talking about. So I suppose it's not that big a surprise that women are starting to kind of take a stand, there've been loads of movements recently, where women are starting to fight back against the oppression that they experience. I mentioned the Me Too campaign earlier already where, you know, that hashtag that started last autumn has really started to raise, I think, awareness of the prevalence of the abuse and harassment that women face on a daily basis. You know, it's millions and millions of women sharing these stories. It's not just a couple of people, it's not just a few people, you know, raising a few issues. This is widespread and completely prevalent everywhere. And of course this kind of came off the back of the Harvey Weinstein case highlighting like really severe sexual abuse in the workplaces. But it's not just that, we've also seen millions of women, not just in America but all over the world in protest movements against Trump. And again, it's not a few women that this is taking place to, it's millions of women that are getting involved and starting to kind of stand up for themselves. In Spain, most recently on International Women's Day, we saw a huge march again, you know, defending rights and standing up for women's place and society. And then again back to the abortion rights that are being fought for, not just in Ireland, but in Argentina and Poland and places like this as well. So, you know, this isn't a couple of women that are starting to stand up. This is on a mass mass scale. So why, maybe Fiona, why do you think it's these particular issues that are starting to be protested and campaigned against? I think what we're seeing is a kind of fundamental rejection of the status quo and the establishment as it exists. And that's linked with, you know, women's struggle. And I think that's taken place recently. There's a few different kind of avenues that I think it's taken place in. One, being the recent referendum result in Ireland for abortion, which is huge. And I don't think we should ignore the significance of that, because it wasn't a very long time ago, even 30 years ago, that the church really still remained a huge authority in Ireland and really controlled a lot of the politics. And yet, despite all of that and despite its authority and its kind of stronghold over things, we see this amazing referendum in which it was very much a landslide that voted to repeal the Eighth Amendment, which was for abortion in Ireland. And that was a rejection of the church. It was a rejection of this old, you know, bastion of conservatism and oppression, not only against women, but against the working class completely in Ireland. And that is one example of this rejection of the establishment. Another way that I think we've seen this is also in the courts. So the recent case in Spain, the Lamanada kind of scandal, which involved a really horrific ruling by the Spanish courts against what was a very kind of unambiguous case of a very brutal gang rape. And I think even in the court's judgment, they refused to even define it as rape. They defined it as sexual abuse. And the offenders in that case got like a very small amount of jail time. And the way that the court system works, they're probably unlikely to even see that through. And after that response from the courts, there was huge protests across Spain that came out to condemn this because they can see the kind of old, conservative nature of the courts and the states and the whole system, which is capitalism in Spain. And people came out against that. And they're really starting to, I think, tie the knots or whatever between women's problems and where they come from, which is the state and its different avenues. And another example, I think that's quite obvious, is obviously Trump, who's in the White House, who I think kind of represents the vilest aspects of capitalism and society. And he's, you know, openly a violent misogynist. And he managed to he managed to become president against a female candidate. And that really says a lot, I think, about what's going on in society. And the fact that the establishment candidate couldn't fight against that misogyny, right? And that's because women's oppression is very much linked with the establishment and capitalism in that system. And I think that that's what people are starting to see and starting, I think women are starting to see the importance of class. Well, I suppose the question of Hillary Clinton is kind of interesting because you would have thought that, you know, people would think that a female candidate is going to mean better rights for women. Obviously, she's a woman. Should she not be representing the interests of women? And like you say, you know, Hillary Clinton really does represent this kind of like status quo figure. And I find it, you know, it's very ironic to hear people like Hillary Clinton saying, oh, you know, you should vote for me as pop, you know, with sisters, you should always, you know, stand up for your sisters, no matter who they are, which is this idea that just because you're a woman, you should support every other woman on the basis of gender alone and this idea of sisterhood and things. And then Theresa May is similarly in a position where she declares herself to be a feminist. And then what do we see, you know, we've already talked about some of the economic impact in particular that her government has had on women. So we've got these figures that are being, I think in Clinton's case, definitely rejected on the basis that she doesn't do anything or doesn't represent any meaningful change for women at all. This idea of just saying you're a feminist and then not doing anything in action is being seen through. Like you're saying women are starting to make those connections with class and that kind of overrides whether or not your candidate is a woman or not. So, you know, I suppose it's kind of interesting to think if these establishment female politicians who kind of make all these proclamations of change for women or not in some cases, did they in any way stand up for the interests of ordinary women? Like is there anything in campaigns that we can see that would be progressive for women? I don't think there is. And like you said, May leads an austerity government that is attacking women constantly and working class women. And one of the things that's coming out recently that particularly is troubling Theresa May and her kind of, you know, fake feminist stance is the issue now of abortion rights for women in Northern Ireland, who obviously aren't entitled to the same rights that now could potentially exist for women in the South. And some prominent conservative MPs are calling her out on this, I think Amber Rudd being one of them saying that she now needs to move to guarantee those rights for women in Northern Ireland. But Theresa May isn't inclined to do this because of her coalition with the DUP and Arlene Foster who are against abortion rights in Northern Ireland. And the point to make here is that Theresa May will defend her class before she'll defend women. And that bourgeois women in general are not on the side of working class women or men. And that is why Theresa May is completely trying to fudge this issue of abortion rights for women in Northern Ireland. And I think what she's kind of said is that, oh, this is an issue for Stormont to deal with and that she doesn't, you know, it's not her, it's not in her remit. Completely ignoring the fact that Stormont hasn't existed as a government for over a year now, I think. And it's, and people can see through that and people can see that, you know, people, I think people are starting to connect where bourgeois women's interests lie and that it's not with other women. And another example of that is, you know, you spoke about the huge strike on International Women's Day earlier in Spain that saw millions of people on the street, millions of men and women. And right wing female politicians came out against that in Spain because the protest was explicitly anti-capitalist. And bourgeois women are capitalist women and the female politicians don't want that. They aren't anti-capitalist and they're trying to defend those interests, which is why they weren't on the side of the masses in that really phenomenal inspiring protest that happened in Spain that saw men and women together, men and women on the picket lines working together collectively fighting against women's oppression and that kind of united working class, like solidarity is definitely the way forward. And I think we're going to see more and more of that as we go forward. And also what I think is further proof of this is that in the US elections more women voted for Bernie Sanders than Hillary Clinton, even though she was, you know, kind of desperately calling for the female vote in face of such, you know, violent misogyny from Trump. But more women voted for Bernie Sanders because he actually had a left-wing platform and he had left-wing policies that can actually make a difference to women, not, you know, the kind of liberal policies that Hillary Clinton was coming out with. And I think that that's really significant. Yeah, it's like women are, you know, voting for politicians who have policies that are actually going to affect them rather than just because they're women and things. And it's not just America where we see that. Like here, a few years ago in the election for the Labour leadership again, you know, we had two women, Liz Kendall and running alongside Jeremy Corbyn, neither of whom made any real policies that would have made change for women and things. And it's like women are clearly obviously because they're not stupid choosing politicians regardless of gender, regardless of who they are, because they've got the ideas and they've got the path to change for them. And I think that's really important. These women are in positions of power supposedly, you know, to kind of bring about change for women or, you know, there's an expectation perhaps that they will do so. But obviously, we can see that that's not the case. And it's not just people who are running for the Labour leadership. There are many female politicians in the Labour Party, some of whom are elected under all female short lists who, you know, okay, it's better to have it would be better to have women in politics, but not necessarily under this guise of being put there because you're a woman. And this doesn't really address any of the problems that women face in society. What are your views on all women short lists? The thing with all women short lists is what they tend to do is they artificially push women to the top who were already involved in politics. Of course, in the past, it was true that it's very difficult, there's very difficult attitudes within politics. And sometimes that wasn't the reason that women were, sometimes that was the reason that women weren't allowed to be pushed to the top. We know, for example, with Thatcher, that she was asked to lower our voice and make herself more manly. But for the most part, the reason that women aren't involved in politics is because they genuinely can't get involved in politics because there are issues lower down because there's not enough socialised child care or there's not enough ability for them to get out the home, as I was saying before, like women tend to be pushed into a home life more than being able to have a career. And having these all women short lists, literally all it does is it takes these women who are often actually, as Fiona said, not women fighting in the interests of working women. They're often very bourgeois, petty bourgeois women who are just forced to the top of these circles and can't actually do anything, to change anything, don't want to do anything to change anything for the rest of women most of the time. What we need is we need people, we need, as I said, more creches so that women who have children can still be involved in politics. We need better socialised healthcare, all of these sort of things to make sure that women actually can be involved in politics from the bottom up would be the actual solution, not just forcing women who were literally already there to the top artificially. It doesn't make a difference. So obviously the barriers are very real. We've talked about lots of different problems that women are facing. So I think it's important that we talk about what the answer is, like how do we fight oppression? How do we fight against these barriers that are in place for women? Because in many ways we've already got quite a lot of laws in place that should safeguard the rights of women, that should put women on an equal footing to men. And yet we still have inequality. I think the equal payout that we've talked about is a really good indication of that. It's there in law that there should be equal pay between men and women and yet that doesn't happen. And that's not the only situation either, like with the rights to abortion in Ireland. Yes, you can have legal access to abortion, but with no national health service in Ireland, there's still many, many barriers facing women despite the fact that there's this kind of law that says, yes, we have got equality. So is legal equality enough? What can we do about these situations? Yeah, well, for example, the gender payout gap that you're talking about is a really, really good example. Because I mean, for all of my lifetime, there has been the equal payout, women have been technically able to pay the same. And often when women talk about gender payout, people can see it as almost as if they're saying, there's a sexist boss that's paying a man twice as much as he pays a woman for the same work. And of course, that's not the case. And I don't think none of us are saying that that's the case. But this tends to actually just be a reflection of class society. Because of all the reasons that we've all spoken about of why women aren't involved in politics or in maybe the private sector more often, because they aren't involved in these, they tend not to be involved in higher paying jobs. If women are more expected to look after a house and to look after the children, it makes it a lot more difficult for them to climb up the employment ladder and get to the top where the people have been paid a lot more. So you get male bosses and female people lower down the ranks of a business, which means they get paid a lot less. And it's not specific and obvious like we're doing the exact same job and you're getting paid more than me. It's not been that for a long time, but it's just that women can't reach the heights in a lot of situations because of the way that capitalist society pigeonholed them and puts them into these specific situations doesn't allow them to break free of that. So to go back to your question that you initially posed, like how do we solve this? Well, we need to bring women out of the home. We need to allow them to unionise. We need to allow them to have all of these socialised things that we've all spoke about, socialised housework, socialised childcare, allow them to be involved in politics and in the running of society. This is what will make an actual difference to women not having some token bourgeois women at the top of society who is telling you that she's with you, that this is what a feminist looks like. Of course, it doesn't like we know Theresa May has done nothing but oppress women and the rest of Britain. So yeah, we really need to change the way that society runs and make sure that women can actually be involved in the everyday running of society. As long as we don't live in capitalism anymore, we won't have these exploitative situations take place and women won't be forced to enter into these exploitative situations just to buy a house or to buy food. It's kind of like capitalism's answer is just like, well, just by having women in power, things will gradually change, attitudes will gradually change and things like that. And I completely agree with everything that you said about women needing to unionise and also the entire economic model, everything that we do in terms of the way in which we work and relate to one another. All of that needs to change to allow women to even access union meetings in the same way that historically men have been able to do. I completely agree with all of that. But physically, what can we do? What do we do to fight against sexism? What can we actually do to make these changes? Yeah, I think we live in a time where lots of young men and women are seeing these injustices and seeing the oppression against women and really want to get involved in it. I also see lots of t-shirts about the future is female and girl power and all this kind of thing. So it's definitely a prevalent thing that's on people's minds. But how do we move beyond t-shirts? How do we move beyond even the law, which we can see doesn't really offer a solution to these things. And I'd say we just have to link the struggle, women's struggle with the class struggle. And the way to do that now is by linking up with the labour movement. And if we look at history, there's a lot of great examples of why we need to do that and how that works and how it can help. Even Sylvia Pankhurst, and we were talking about the suffragettes at the start, was a pioneer in terms of linking up the right to vote with the labour movement and using the unions in that kind of way. Because also, what is the point of sexism and all other forms of oppression, of racism, of homophobia? Why do these things exist? And the reality is these things are a gift to the bosses, right? Because they divide the workers and pit the workers against each other rather than letting them realise where the real source of all their problems comes from, which is the bosses, which is capitalism. And that's why these things exist in society, which is why as Marxists we are in favour of and call for mass, united, collective action between working class men and women in order to fight women's oppression and the way it manifests in different forms. Moving back to even historical examples, the Bolsheviks, and after the 1917 revolution, the Bolsheviks legalised the right to divorce, they legalised the right to abortion. This is years and years before Western democracies even started. We're talking about how Ireland still hasn't, and it might not be able to actually realise this right for women today. The Bolsheviks did this in 1917 and that is the legacy that we fight on and that is why the class struggle is completely integral to women's struggle and it's why it's dependent on it. Women throughout history have been at the forefront of every revolution. They started and sparked the Russian Revolution. International Women's Day originally is International Working Women's Day because it was the women that stormed, that started the revolution in Russia and that is really inspiring and I think that for young men and women that want to fight against women's oppression or all forms of oppression today, they should base themselves in the theory of the class struggle and the theory of Marxism essentially because I think that Marxism offers us the tools, the necessary tools to actually liberate women and all other oppressed groups in society and that's the anyway. Yeah, so thanks to everyone who's joined us at home and listened in. We're going to be taking a short break for a few weeks now but you can still follow us on all of our material that'll be published on socialist.net. You can also follow us on Facebook and Twitter and YouTube and you can also download a podcast from SoundCloud, Apple Podcasts, Stitcher or any other big podcast providers. So thanks again and see you next time.