Feminism is a broad movement that includes different social theories, political

movements, and philosophies. It critically examines existing social relations,

particularly those related to gender. Feminist theory focuses on understanding the
origins and forms of gender inequality and addresses issues like power dynamics,
sexuality, and gender politics.

Feminism is political and activist in nature. It tackles immediate concerns such as

reproductive rights, domestic violence, equal pay, and discrimination. It also addresses
long-term issues like patriarchy, oppression, and the objectification of women.

In the context of development, feminism highlights gender inequality, the unequal

burden of work on women, and the limited representation of women in
decision-making processes. Early feminist activism aimed to create grassroots
movements that united women from different backgrounds who faced similar forms of
oppression.

However, there has been criticism that early feminist ideas were primarily shaped by
Western middle-class academia and did not sufficiently incorporate the perspectives
of Third World intellectuals and activists. As a result, there has been a shift towards
recognizing and embracing differences, contradictions, and diverse strategies within
feminism. This has led to the emergence of various feminist causes rather than a
single unified movement.

The history of feminist activism and theory is often shaped by those in power who
write history. The commonly accepted narrative is that feminist activism began in the
late 19th century among Western women. However, it is important to recognize that
women's movements existed before that time, such as in ancient Greece, the medieval
world, and with notable women like Olympes de Gouge, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Jane
Austen in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Extending the history of feminism further into the past may reinforce the idea of
Western exceptionalism, so it is crucial to acknowledge that women all over the world
have fought against their oppression throughout history. Women's movements have
emerged countless times, and brave women have suffered for their beliefs, which
continues to be the case in many different contexts today.
The first wave of Western feminism took place in the late 19th and early 20th
centuries, influenced by urban industrialism and liberal and socialist politics. Activists
in this wave focused on equal contract and property rights for women, as well as
opposing the ownership of married women and their children by their husbands. By the
end of the 19th century, feminist activism increasingly focused on gaining political
power, particularly the right to vote. It was not until 1918-1928 that women in Britain
and the United States finally gained suffrage rights, highlighting the gender bias in
modern political democracy.

The second wave of Western feminist activism and theory emerged in the early 1960s
and lasted until the late 1980s. It expanded the feminist critique to include capitalism
as biased, discriminatory, and unfair. In the United States, second-wave feminism
emerged from the civil rights and anti-Vietnam War movements. Women, dissatisfied
with their second-class status even within activist circles, began collectively
challenging discrimination. Betty Friedan's book, "The Feminine Mystique," played a
significant role in this wave, highlighting how women were often confined to finding
meaning in their lives through their husbands and children. Friedan was instrumental
in forming the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966, which was part of the
broader Women's Liberation movement. Second-wave feminists engaged in various
forms of activism, including protests against beauty contests and the establishment of
consciousness-raising groups.

Differences emerged within the feminist movement, with various branches such as
black feminism, lesbian feminism, liberal feminism, and socialist feminism. bell hooks,
an African American feminist intellectual, criticized the movement for lacking minority
voices and failing to address the issues that divide women.

The third wave of feminism, which emerged in the 1990s, brought poststructural and
postmodern ideas into feminism, making it more diverse. Third-wave feminism
challenged the second wave's essentialist definitions of femininity, which assumed a
universal female identity and focused heavily on the experiences of
upper-middle-class white women. Instead, third-wave feminism emphasized the
ambiguity of gender terms and categories, incorporated queer theory and transgender
politics, and rejected gender binaries. It also addressed antiracism, women-of-color
consciousness, postcolonial theory, critical theory, transnationalism, ecofeminism,
libertarian feminism, and new feminist theory. Third-wave feminists often focused on
micro-level politics and embraced a wider range of gender expressions and
representations.

Some theorists have identified a "postfeminist" trend in the early 1990s, suggesting
that feminism was no longer necessary. However, during the second and third waves,
feminists interested in inequality, poverty, and gender relations produced critical ideas
on development. Feminist issues also gained importance in international agencies
dealing with development problems, leading to the formation of feminist development
theory as a recognizable system of concepts, discourses, and practices.

The recognition of women's position in development came about because more and
more women joined the global workforce due to economic globalization. Women
became a significant part of the new global working class, but they faced challenges.
They often had lower wages and higher unemployment rates compared to men. Many
women worked in industries like garment manufacturing, but these jobs were often
under poor conditions.

Despite these challenges, women's participation in the workforce increased their

influence in households and communities. However, critics argue that this type of
development mainly benefits employers who prefer cheaper labor. They believe that
women should have better working conditions and advocate for gender equality, social
well-being, and environmental sustainability.

Many feminists join movements and organizations that resist free trade and
liberalization policies. They push for economic policies that prioritize gender equality
and social and environmental welfare. These activists seek alternatives that provide
better health, education, clean water, affordable childcare, and basic nutrition for
everyone.

The importance of women's roles in development has led to their inclusion on the
development agenda due to their significance and their insistence on their rights and
well-being.

Feminist Epistemology

Feminist epistemology is about understanding how knowledge is created and judged

as true or false. In the late 1970s and 1980s, feminists started to focus on this and
raised important questions. They challenged the idea that reason, science, and
progress were the only valid sources of knowledge. They argued that these ideas were
based on male perspectives and excluded women's experiences.

One philosopher, Genevieve Lloyd, pointed out that historically, men were seen as
rational and women as emotional. Thinkers like Descartes and Spinoza believed that
men were capable of clear thinking and reason, while women were associated with
emotions. This created a division between reason and emotion, with men being seen
as rational and women as emotional.

Later, during the Enlightenment and romanticism periods, there was some appreciation
for emotions, but the division between reason and emotion remained. Feminists
critiqued this division and argued that many problems in society were actually caused
by male-dominated reason itself.

Poststructural feminists took this critique further by challenging the idea that reason
alone could solve all problems. They argued that reason itself was often biased and
contributed to the problems it tried to solve. They questioned the assumptions and
biases underlying knowledge production and sought more inclusive and diverse ways
of understanding the world.

According to Sandra Harding, feminists have moved from wanting to improve science
to wanting to transform its foundations and the cultures that support it. They argue
that the current forms of science are centered around men and support each other.
Despite the belief that science is progressive, feminists believe it actually serves
regressive social tendencies.

Feminist thinkers have looked at how gender roles, the division of labor between
genders, and the construction of individual gender identity have influenced the history
and philosophy of science. They challenge the very foundations of science and its
social impact.

Feminists have found that the methods and truths of science, which were thought to
be objective, are actually influenced by gender, class, race, and culture. They use
techniques like literary criticism to uncover the hidden social meanings behind
supposedly neutral scientific claims.

Feminist epistemologies aim to create alternative foundations for scientific knowledge

that take into account diverse perspectives and experiences. They want to address the
biases and social structures within science and find more inclusive ways of doing
research.

andra Harding outlined three main feminist perspectives on science: feminist

empiricism, feminist standpoint theory, and feminist postmodernism.

1. Feminist empiricism: This perspective says that if women scientists follow the
traditional scientific methods more closely, they can correct biases in science
that favor men.
2. Feminist standpoint theory: This theory argues that because women are often in
a subordinate position in society, they have a unique perspective that can
provide a deeper understanding of social reality. Women's experiences and
viewpoints can reveal things that may be missed by men.
3. Feminist postmodernism: This perspective challenges the idea that there is only
one universal truth. It emphasizes the idea that our identities are complex and
shaped by many factors, and that diverse experiences and perspectives should
be recognized and valued.

Sandra Harding also questioned whether feminists should try to provide one definitive
feminist view of reality when science often aligns with sexist and racist social
projects. She concluded that while feminist ideas have their own issues, they have
already contributed to a better understanding of biases in science.

Dorothy Smith, a sociologist, added to the feminist standpoint theory by pointing out
that women often have to suppress their own knowledge and experiences to fit into the
male-dominated intellectual world.

Dorothy Smith was interested in how official documents shape authority and power in
society. In our knowledge-based world, ruling practices rely on authorized knowledge
created by experts. This knowledge is used to make organizations function smoothly,
and people adopt these concepts in their daily lives.

Smith believed that these ruling practices prioritize certain perspectives and overlook
the knowledge that comes from people's everyday experiences. Women, in particular,
have unique insights because they often find themselves in situations where they don't
quite fit in. This different perspective can challenge the prevailing ways of knowing
and acting.

Smith developed an approach called "institutional ethnography" to understand how

different aspects of everyday life, professional practices, and policymaking are
connected. This approach pays attention to how social organization is influenced by
texts and discourses.

By studying institutions, ethnic groups, and other contexts, Smith aimed to produce a
sociology that focuses on the political-economic context and the ways in which social
life is shaped by language and texts.
Smith's ideas were somewhat similar to those of poststructural thinkers like Foucault.
However, she disagreed with the idea from postmodernism that denies the existence
of a reality beyond language and concepts.

Audre Lorde, a black lesbian scholar, criticized some feminist writings for assuming
that all women experience the same oppression just because they are women. Lorde
believed that differences among women should be seen as strengths, and that
community shouldn't require ignoring or denying these differences.

Trinh Minh-ha and Chandra Mohanty also emphasized the importance of recognizing
differences. Mohanty specifically criticized how some feminist writings created a
simplified image of a "Third World woman," which ignored the diverse experiences and
realities of women in the Third World. This process was referred to as "discursive
colonization."

In simpler terms, Smith's ideas were somewhat similar to poststructural thinkers, but
she disagreed with the idea that reality is purely a result of language and concepts.
Lorde, Minh-ha, and Mohanty stressed the importance of recognizing and valuing
differences among women, and criticized the tendency to oversimplify or ignore the
diverse experiences of women in different contexts.
Chandra Mohanty, a feminist scholar, criticized much of the feminist work on women in
the Third World. She felt that these analyses made assumptions based on privilege
and had a narrow, ethnocentric view. According to Mohanty, these analyses
oversimplified the diverse experiences of women in the Third World and didn't consider
the impact of Western scholarship.

Mohanty also found similarities between some Western feminist positions and the
project of Western humanism. She argued that Western men could only see
themselves as the "center" because they defined "woman" and the "East" as the
"periphery" or the "Other." This created a sense of center and periphery based on
boundaries, where the periphery determined the center.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the influence of postmodern philosophy and social theory
started to shape feminist theory. Postmodern feminism viewed modern reason as
normalizing, Western, and embodying a scientific rationalism that suppressed
alternative ways of thinking. Some feminist theorists began to question whether
feminist ideas were compatible with Enlightenment concepts of the person and
knowledge.

Some feminist theorists had different opinions on the topic. They believed that it was
worth criticizing Western humanism. For example, Christine Di Stefano thought that
mainstream postmodernist theory didn't pay enough attention to gender in its
interpretations of history, politics, and culture. This means that postmodern theory
seemed to continue the same ideas as modernism. One concern was that if feminists
fully embraced postmodernism, it would be hard to have a unified feminist movement.
Some thinkers suggested that feminists should be skeptical of criticisms against the
Enlightenment because women were finally gaining the power of reason. They felt that
postmodern feminism was undermining rationality. Luce Irigaray wondered if
postmodernism was just another way for patriarchy to deceive women. Nancy
Hartsock pointed out that while postmodernism appeared to support marginalized
groups, it sometimes hindered them instead of helping. Postmodern theories didn't
provide much political guidance and often just repeated the effects of Enlightenment
theories. Other feminist theorists, like Flax and Di Stefano, were unsure about whether
to prefer modernism or postmodernism. However, Sandra Harding argued for a more
balanced approach. She believed that feminism could benefit from both Enlightenment
and postmodern ideas. Harding thought that feminism stood on Enlightenment ground
because improved theories contribute to social progress. She believed that feminist
inquiry could produce less biased theories without claiming absolute, universal, or
eternal truth. In her view, both feminist science theorists and their postmodern critics
had valuable perspectives. Harding thought that feminism needed both the
Enlightenment and postmodern agendas.

Donna Haraway, who sat between the modern and postmodern perspectives, proposed
a feminist way of understanding knowledge called "situated knowledges." She
suggested that objectivity should focus on specific and detailed information,
considering real experiences instead of abstract ideas. In simpler terms, objectivity
means having precise knowledge based on specific situations and personal
experiences.

Donna Haraway believed feminism could be a powerful tool for understanding the
world. She argued that those who exist on the fringes of society, often ignored or
silenced, have valuable perspectives. Their experiences, far from the centers of
power, might offer a clearer view of reality because they have less to gain from
sugarcoating problems. However, Haraway wasn't suggesting all viewpoints are
equal. She championed the idea of "situated knowledges" - knowledge informed
by a person's specific experiences and background. True knowledge, in her view,
comes from questioning existing ideas and power structures. It's about
challenging the status quo and searching for better solutions.

Haraway's ideas extend to the realm of development. The traditional notion of

progress, a one-size-fits-all approach, might not benefit everyone equally. She
argued that development plans should be more inclusive, considering the diverse
needs and experiences of different communities. Instead of top-down planning
from a distant perspective, development efforts should prioritize the "situated
knowledge" of those directly impacted. By valuing the voices of the marginalized
and understanding the specific circumstances of each situation, Haraway
believed we could create development projects that truly improve lives.

Feminist Criticisms of Development Theory

Feminist thinkers are taking a critical look at how development has been planned,

arguing it's mostly been designed by men, without considering women's

experiences.
One thinker, Catherine Scott, looked at how theories about progress and

development (like "modernization") might be biased. She argues these ideas

often portray modern societies as more powerful and rational, while traditional

societies (often with stronger female roles) are seen as weak and emotional. This

creates a one-size-fits-all model that ignores the realities of many women's lives.

Scott also points out how development plans often separate the "public" world

(work, politics) from the "private" world (family, home). This reflects a Western

way of thinking that sees the public sphere, dominated by men, as more

important. Feminist thinkers argue that development plans need to consider both

spheres and how women contribute to both.

Catherine Scott criticized dependency theory, especially the U.S. version, because it

didn't question the idea that capitalism is always dynamic and progressive. She

believed that dependency theory, like modernization theory, saw traditional social

structures as obstacles to progress in less developed countries. Both theories believed

that industrialization was the key to economic development, but Scott thought they

should reconsider what modernity, industrialization, work, and development really

mean. She preferred feminist standpoint theory because it helps understand how

power structures affect people's lives, and it offers the possibility of redefining

development based on individuals' aspirations and efforts.

Women, Development, and Theory

Feminist thinkers weren't happy with how development was planned. They

pointed out that women, who do a ton of work in many developing countries,

were completely left out of the picture. They argued that focusing on women's
experiences and the relationships between men and women would completely

change how we approach development.

Instead of just focusing on big industries and government projects, feminist

ideas would consider things like the informal economy (small, local businesses)

and the work women do at home. They'd also look at how development projects

might affect families and how men and women share power in communities.

This approach, called "feminist standpoint theory," basically says that women's

everyday lives offer valuable insights into what development should really look

like. By considering women's experiences, alongside the bigger picture of society

and the environment, we can create development plans that are fair and truly help

everyone. There are different ways feminists approach this issue, but the main

idea is to make development more inclusive and consider the needs of all people,

not just men.

Women in development

Women in development refers to the recognition and inclusion of women in the

process of economic growth and improvement in developing countries. The
concept was first introduced by Ester Boserup, a Danish agricultural economist,
who highlighted the importance of women's role in agriculture and the negative
impact of modernization on their status.

Boserup argued that the modernization process, heavily influenced by Western

ideas of gender roles, had marginalized women and limited their access to new
technologies and resources. This had a detrimental effect on their power, income,
and overall well-being. However, Boserup believed that with more enlightened
policies from governments and international agencies, these mistakes could be
corrected.

Her work led to the emergence of the "women in development" phenomenon,

which aimed to draw attention to the situation of women in the Third World. In the
United States, the Percy Amendment to the 1973 Foreign Assistance Act called
for projects that integrated women into national economies, thereby improving
their status and contributing to overall development efforts.

To support this movement, the Office for Women in Development was established
within the USAID organization in 1974. This office served as a hub for
researchers, practitioners, and institutions interested in development issues
related to women. The United Nations also declared the years 1976-1985 as the
"United Nations Decade for Women" and established the United Nations
Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) to assist the poorest women around the
world.

The aim of these initiatives was to increase women's participation in various

sectors, improve their access to resources, employment opportunities, and
income, ultimately bringing about significant improvements in their living
conditions. The focus was on empowering women and integrating them fully into
the development process.

The WID (Women in Development) approach accepted the prevailing view of

modernization as a linear process of economic growth. It aimed to integrate
women into development projects by addressing issues like maternal mortality.

During the late 1970s, several studies documented facts about women's lives. For
example, one UN study found that as a group, women put in two-thirds of the
total working hours but constituted only one-third of the labor force, receiving
one-tenth of the total remuneration. The study also found that women owned only
one percent of the world's material goods, and their rights to ownership were
often less than those of men.

Despite efforts during the UN Decade for Women from 1976-1985, the relative
position of women actually worsened in terms of access to resources, work
burdens, health, nutrition, and education!
This limited progress led to a shift towards the more radical Women and
Development (WAD) approach, which questioned the integration of women into
existing systems. Feminist movements also became more disruptive in
demanding attention to women's issues and relevance of feminist theory.

By 1985, Third World women constituted the majority attending the Nairobi UN
conference and defined the main issues. Alternative forums also facilitated
organizing and discussions on themes like gender-based violence and
feminization of poverty. This marked the movement becoming more diverse and
heterogeneous, with greater involvement from Third World countries.

Caroline Moser (1993) identified five different approaches within the WID school,
reflecting changes in the policies of Western development agencies:

1. Welfare Approach: Before 1970, this approach focused on women's reproductive

roles and related population issues, with programs initiated in areas such as
birth control.
2. Equity Approach: This approach reflected calls for equality coming from the UN
Decade for Women, which faced resistance from men.
3. Antipoverty Approach: This approach focused on women entering the
workforce, having access to income-generating activities, and joining the
existing economic mainstream.
4. Efficiency Approach: Aligned with IMF structural adjustment programs, this
approach stressed women's participation in restructured economies.
5. Empowerment Approach: This approach reflected Third World feminist writings,
grassroots organizing, and women's need to transform laws and structures
through a bottom-up approach.

During the late 1970s and 1980s, the WID approach faced increasing criticism. It was
argued that WID programs, as implemented by international development agencies,
originated in two modernist discourses: the colonial discourse and the liberal
discourse on markets. The colonial discourse homogenized and essentialized Third
World people by using the image of the "poor woman" as an object of pity and remorse.
The liberal discourse promoted free markets, voluntary choice, and individualism,
which were found to be disempowering to Third World women.

#### Representational emphasis and limitations in WID approach

The WID approach focused on showcasing successful women as role models to
encourage others to integrate into society. However, it didn't question why
women were oppressed by men or the unequal division of labor between
genders. It also didn't consider other factors like social class, race, or culture that
influence women's lives.

#### Narrow analysis and focus on poverty

WID only looked at women's work in terms of productivity, ignoring their
reproductive roles and responsibilities. It emphasized poverty but didn't address
the overall oppression of women. This limited its ability to bring about meaningful
change.

#### Lack of critical questioning and division

WID didn't challenge the existing power structures or the dominant development
paradigm. It created a divide between the needs of women in different parts of the
world and the perspectives of feminist thinkers from Western cultures.

the WID approach had limitations in how it represented women and analyzed
gender issues. It didn't question the root causes of women's oppression or
consider the broader context of their lives. This limited its effectiveness in
promoting gender equality and challenging societal norms.

Postmodern feminist critics argued that the WID approach often portrayed Third World
women as backward and in need of help from the First World. They claimed that WID
ignored the differences, knowledge, and expertise of women in the South and
promoted foreign solutions to their problems. This aligns with U.S. aid policies.

Adele Mueller, a critic of WID, pointed out that WID programs shifted control over
development issues from Third World settings to centralized development agency
headquarters in Western countries. She argued that WID defined development as a
technical problem that could only be solved using methods from the First World.
Mueller's main critique was that WID discourse actually served to manage and
reinforce the hierarchical divisions of the capitalist world order.

Despite these criticisms, WID continued to exist because of its strong influence and
power structures. However, in response to these criticisms, a new approach called
Women and Development emerged

Women and Development

The Women and Development (WAD) approach had a different perspective compared
to WID. While WID believed that including women in modernization would benefit them,
WAD argued that women's involvement in modernization actually made them poorer.
WAD drew on ideas like dependency theory and neo-Marxism to understand
underdevelopment.

WAD focused on how men and women interacted in society, rather than just looking at
social classes like Marxism does. It recognized that women played important roles in
both productive work (like jobs) and reproductive work (like caring for families). WAD
pointed out that women's integration into global capitalism by powerful countries led
to their marginalization and oppression. For example, women often ended up working
for low wages in factories owned by multinational corporations in special economic
zones.

In socialist feminism, there is a connection to socialism and a critical view of Marxism.

Socialist feminists pointed out that classical Marxism had some drawbacks when it
came to understanding women's experiences. They believed that Marxist analysis
didn't pay enough attention to the specific reasons behind gender inequality, like men
having power over women.

One of the main criticisms from socialist feminists was that classical Marxism focused
too much on the economy and didn't consider the issues related to gender inequality.
They argued that Marxist analysis missed the causes of gender inequality and how
men dominate women. They believed that a feminist socialist analysis was necessary
to understand the systematic nature of gender inequalities. They thought that both
Marxist analysis, with its historical and materialist approach, and feminist analysis,
which recognizes patriarchy as a social and historical structure, were important.

One important concern of socialist feminism was rethinking the importance of

women's work. They looked at different aspects of women's lives, like their roles in
production, reproduction (having children), socialization (teaching children societal
norms), and sexuality. Each of these aspects had its own challenges and dynamics, but
together they formed a significant part of women's experiences. Socialist feminists
believed that women's work in the home was undervalued and exploited. They argued
that even though women didn't work outside the home for wages, their labor was
crucial for maintaining society and supporting the labor force. They believed that
women's domestic labor was often used to oppress them, especially under capitalism.
In socialist feminism, the focus shifted to understanding the division of labor based on
gender and the different social practices that contribute to physical and psychological
differences between men and women.

Socialist feminism believes that women's experiences and the work they do are
influenced by the social relationships around them. They argue that women's needs
related to having and raising children are just as important as basic needs like food
and shelter. They also recognize the importance of sexual satisfaction and emotional
nurturing, which often require work, usually done by women. However, traditional
Marxist theory often overlooks these struggles over reproductive activities.

Socialist feminists explore the implications of these ideas. For example, they point out
that masculinity and femininity are socially constructed within the family. Boys are
raised to be achievement-oriented and work outside the home, while girls are raised to
focus on emotional work, whether inside or outside the home. Socialist feminists also
criticize the public-private distinctions that contribute to the exploitation of women.
They argue that women's unpaid labor in reproducing the workforce and their direct
employment in factories or producing goods are forms of exploitation. In this sense,
women are seen as a superexploited working class.

Some scholars aimed to develop Marxist ideas by considering women and gender
more explicitly. Others recognized that Marx and Engels didn't fully address gender
issues, although Engels had some understanding. They argue that a combination of
Marxist analysis, which looks at the historical and material aspects, and feminist
analysis, which recognizes patriarchy as a social structure, is needed to understand
the development of capitalist societies and the challenges faced by women.

Engels believed that women's position in society became worse with the rise of class
societies. Anthropologists Mona Etienne and Eleanor Leacock expanded on this idea
by focusing on the importance of social relationships in understanding inequalities
between men and women. They identified four main types of production relations
throughout history:

1. In early societies, women had more autonomy and played various economic
roles.
2. In tribal societies, trade and specialization led to some inequalities, with men
dominating external relations, which affected women's previous equality.
 3. Pre-industrial societies saw the emergence of stratified relations, where
patriarchal households became economically independent, and women's work
was limited to the private sphere.
4. Industrial capitalism brought about the exploitation of women alongside the
overall subjugation of people.

These analyses linked the way societies produced goods with gender relations.
However, some feminists felt that traditional Marxist analysis was not enough and
called for new concepts like "patriarchy." Heidi Hartmann defined patriarchy as a set of
social relations where men have power over women's labor, maintained by denying
women access to essential resources. This concept connects the social institutions
that enforce unequal power relations with the personal processes of psychology and
consciousness through which people, especially women, accept and justify their
unequal positions in society.

Socialist feminists have made important advancements in expanding the Marxist

concept of how society reproduces itself. They believe that production and
reproduction are both crucial aspects of development theory. This broader
understanding of development includes considering gender relations, women's work in
both the home and the public sphere, raising children, and the family as the central
unit of reproduction.

Throughout history, the processes of producing goods and creating families have
happened together in the same place. However, with the idea of "development," these
processes started to separate into different areas, driven by inequality and dominance.
Women's unpaid labor became essential to sustain the surplus production system.
Socialist feminists argue that development is influenced not only by class but also by
gender. Gender and class intersect to shape how development unfolds. Inequality in
society leads to harmful and biased forms of development, creating dangerous
conditions. Socialist feminists advocate for a different kind of development based on
equal gender relations.

Maria Mies, a sociologist, analyzed the international division of labor from a feminist
perspective. She argued that it is a violent and exploitative process dominated by men.
Mies connected this division of labor to the separation and subordination of men from
women, locals from foreigners, and humans from nature. She believed that the
accumulation of wealth through exploitation led to a narrow concept of progress that
devalued basic community needs.
Mies also linked the colonial division of labor, where raw materials were exchanged for
industrial products, to the subjugation of women as consumers and the establishment
of internal colonies. In more recent times, the use of cheap female labor in the
developing world has been connected to the manipulation of women as consumers in
the developed world.

Mies called for the abolition of these exploitative relationships and the end of the
exploitation of women, nature, colonies, and classes. She developed a feminist
understanding of labor that focused on the role of mothers, peasants, and artisans.
She emphasized the importance of work being connected to immediate life, involving
an interaction with nature and organic matter.

In the early 1980s, as women in the Third World were seeking new development
theories that embraced feminism, conferences were encouraging the empowerment of
women as active participants in development, rather than viewing them as problems.
During this time, a significant event took place in India: the establishment of DAWN
(Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era) in 1984. DAWN is a network of
scholars and activists from the Global South who work at the intersection of feminist
scholarship, activism, and policy analysis.

DAWN focuses on four main research areas: the impact of globalization on the
economy, sexual and reproductive health and rights, changes in political structures
and society, and environmental sustainability. The organization aims to influence
discussions and policies related to development, preserve the achievements made in
UN conferences, advocate for more accountability and restructuring of global
governance institutions, and promote gender analysis within progressive development
organizations and social movements.

The founders of DAWN drew from their grassroots organizing experiences and
connected them to larger perspectives on development. They recognized that the
struggles faced by poor women in the Third World, as they fought to ensure the
survival of their families and themselves, offered valuable insights into the processes
of development. Their aspirations for a future free from the multiple oppressions of
gender, race, and nationality served as the foundation for new visions and strategies.

DAWN, through extensive research and discussions, developed alternative

development strategies that had a significant impact on subsequent research and
activism. They argued that short-term approaches to improving women's employment
opportunities were ineffective without long-term strategies to give people, especially
women, control over economic decisions that shape their lives. DAWN emphasized the
importance of including women's voices in development definitions and policy-making.

At the fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995, the Platform for Action
highlighted women's human rights, including education, food, health, political power,
and freedom from violence. DAWN's work emphasized the experiences of oppressed
women who knew poverty and performed undervalued work vital to social
reproduction. They highlighted the conflicts between women's economic well-being
and mainstream development processes, which were often inequitable due to gender,
class, and colonial legacies.

According to DAWN, women were controlled through sexual violence, and men
dominated public spaces, making it hard for women to find jobs in the formal sector.
Education and media also reinforced gender stereotypes. A combination of crises like
poverty, food insecurity, financial problems, environmental degradation, and
population pressures made it almost impossible for many people to survive.

Instead of addressing poverty and gender inequality, nations focused on militarization,

while donor agencies showed a lack of concern. The World Bank, for example, shifted
its focus away from basic needs in the 1980s and encouraged recipient governments
to make structural adjustments.

In contrast, DAWN proposed an approach that took into account the perspectives of
poor women in the Third World. This approach would focus on resource use, the
importance of women's labor in meeting needs, poverty and inequality, and policies
aimed at empowering women.

The basic-needs approach used by agencies like the World Bank in the 1970s involved
providing loans for urban services, supporting small farmers, and promoting social
forestry. However, this approach relied on commercialization and market integration,
which worsened existing inequalities. Development programs typically followed a
top-down approach, but Sen and Grown argued that policies should prioritize meeting
people's basic needs and involve local participation.

The "integrating women in development" approach used during the UN Decade for
Women had flaws due to cultural attitudes and the nature of the development
programs themselves. Short-term efforts to improve women's employment
opportunities would be ineffective without long-term strategies to give women control
over economic decisions that affect their lives.
Sen and Grown suggested a shift from focusing on exports to meeting internal needs,
reducing military spending, and regulating multinational corporations. This would
require structural transformation rather than just adjustments.

Critics of the Women in Development (WAD) approach, like Eva Rathgeber, argued that
it didn't fully consider how gender operates within different social classes and
overlooked variations in patriarchal systems in different contexts. They also felt that
WAD often grouped women together without considering factors like race, class, or
ethnicity.

Some critics believed that Marxist and dependency feminist perspectives took
inflexible positions that hindered practical and effective changes. Others thought that
analyses like those by Sen and Grown were too influenced by Western ideas and didn't
accurately capture the experiences of non-Western societies.

Critics also felt that feminists using the Marxist approach hadn't fully addressed its
limitations, and expanding this framework obscured many aspects of women's
experiences. Furthermore, they criticized Sen and Grown for assuming that poor
women from the Global South were heavily influenced by Western feminism, instead of
appreciating the diversity of their viewpoints. In simpler terms, critics wanted a more
nuanced understanding of gender dynamics, more consideration of cultural
differences, and a broader perspective on women's experiences.

Gender and Development

GAD is an approach that focuses on understanding and addressing the unequal

treatment of women in development. It originated in the 1970s with a group of
feminists. They wanted to analyze how gender relations between men and women
contribute to women's subordinate position in development.

GAD differs from another approach called Women in Development (WID). WID sees the
division of tasks between men and women as natural and focuses on giving more
value to women's work. But GAD argues that this division of tasks actually creates
dependency between men and women, so it needs to be changed.

GAD recognizes that women are not all the same. They are divided by factors like
social class, race, and religion. To understand women's roles in society, we need to
look at how men and women relate to each other.
GAD also believes that women's disadvantaged position is a result of a global belief in
male superiority. In many societies, men have power and control over women. GAD
sees this as a problem that needs to be addressed.

In terms of development practice, GAD aims to give women more opportunities to

participate in decision-making and improve their lives. It also looks at how gender
relations interact with other factors like politics and the economy, which can lead to
changes in society.

Unlike the Women in Development (WID) and Women and Development (WAD)
approaches, Gender and Development (GAD) saw the state as an important actor in
promoting women's emancipation. GAD went further in questioning underlying social,
economic, and political structures, which made its recommendations challenging to
implement because structural change was deemed necessary.

However, GAD also opened new strategies for feminist intervention. Its multifarious
approach distinguished between capitalism, patriarchy, and racism, allowing feminists
to identify key weak points in official policies for strategic interventions. Some saw
these strategies as necessary to address the needs of poor women, while others
argued that GAD still had modernist tendencies and essentialized poor women.

Critics pointed out that GAD's focus on the image and discourse resulted from the
influence of poststructural and postmodern ideas on the gender debate. They argued
that GAD was primarily guided by Western feminism and economic development,
limiting its understanding of individual women's identities and local contexts.

In response to these critiques, an alternative framework was proposed, focusing on

the identities of women in developing societies. This framework aimed to address the
specific experiences and aspirations of individual women by acknowledging and
accepting their present identities.

Women, Environment, and Developmen

The Women, Environment, and Development (WED) perspective emerged in the 1970s
when feminists noticed similarities between men's control over women and their
control over nature. They saw connections between masculine science,
industrialization, and the harm to the environment.

One ecofeminist, Carolyn Merchant, believed that the root of our environmental
problems lies in the worldview developed by influential figures in modern science.
They saw the world as a machine rather than a living organism. The exploitation of
resources in the name of progress led to the destruction of nature.

Other ecofeminists, like Vandana Shiva and Maria Mies, focused on the exploitation of
nature in the Third World. They argued that science and development were projects
driven by Western patriarchy, harming nature. Development in the Third World imposed
Western ideologies on communities with different relationships with the natural world.
Women resisted this harmful development to protect nature and their own way of life.

These struggles aimed to free nature from exploitation and empower women. For
example, Indian women played a significant role in conserving forests, land, and water.
They challenged the idea of nature as a resource to be exploited and instead saw it as
a living force that sustains life.

Critics of the WED perspective argued that it focused too much on image and
discourse, influenced by poststructural and postmodern ideas. They also believed that
it was limited by its dependence on Western feminism and economic development, not
fully considering the identities and contexts of women in developing societies.
The Women, Environment, and Development (WED) perspective believes that gender
differences in experiences with nature and responsibility for the environment are not
due to biology, but how society views gender based on factors like class, race, and
location.

Feminist scholars studying the environment have different viewpoints. Some, like
socialist feminists, don't agree with the idea that women are naturally nurturing.
Instead, they see women's roles in relation to reproduction and production in unequal
economies.

Feminists consider how unequal control over resources affects ecological changes.
They focus on gendered knowledge (how women understand and interact with their
environment), gendered environmental rights (women's rights to property, resources,
and space), and gendered environmental politics (women's involvement in collective
struggles for natural resources and environmental issues).

The concept of "sustainable development" is important in the WED perspective. It

connects ideas of fairness between generations, balancing economic and
environmental needs, and reducing waste and pollution from industrialization.

Feminists also explore alternative economic models that consider environmental

degradation, poverty, and participation. They believe that Western development
economics should learn from other cultures and value women's nurturing and
sustaining of the environment.

Postmodernism and Development

The Postmodernism and Development (PAD) perspective asked if a more accessible

and politically engaged form of postmodern feminism could help with the issues faced
by women in Third World societies. It criticized the Gender and Development (GAD)
view for portraying Third World women as "other" and using images of women as
victims, sex objects, and isolated individuals.

Postmodern feminists believed that the WID view was influenced by colonial and
neocolonial thinking and reinforced by the focus on markets, which disempowered
women. They found postmodernism appealing because it emphasized differences and
gave space for the voices of marginalized groups. It also challenged the idea that all
women in the global South are the same.

Postmodernism questions fixed truths and the idea of a fixed subject. Critics of
postmodernism questioned the certainty of Eurocentric development studies and
criticized the exclusion of local knowledge by Western experts. They believed that
these critiques were important for understanding and addressing the development of
women.

When feminism, postmodernism, postcolonialism, and development came together,

some important ideas emerged. They questioned how "Third World" women were seen,
challenged development theories that made poor women feel powerless, focused on
giving voice to women's knowledge and experiences, celebrated diversity and multiple
identities, and encouraged open conversations between development experts and the
people they were helping.

For example, Jane Parpart (1995) criticized the idea that development experts had all
the answers to solve problems in developing countries. Postmodern feminists
understood the difficulties faced by poor women but also recognized that extreme
postmodernism could make it hard for them to take action together. They believed that
by listening to women, understanding their differences, and having open discussions,
development efforts could empower women in the global South to express their own
needs and goals.

Critique: A Failure of Nerve?

The feminist perspective on the modern development process focuses on how

development policies and practices often favor men over women, leading to gender
inequalities. Feminists argue that development tends to shift resources and power
towards men, making women more vulnerable to disasters and limiting their control
over resources.

Feminist scholars have identified different causes for these problems, such as unequal
distribution of benefits, limited control over resources, and the dominance of
male-centered ideas in Western culture. They view the world from a different
perspective, questioning and reversing traditional norms and values.

Feminist critiques of development go beyond just reversing male dominance. They

draw from diverse experiences and histories, acknowledging that Western feminist
perspectives are just one part of a larger feminist movement. There are many different
experiences and perspectives that need to be recognized and appreciated.

Interventions in the development process can take various forms, and sometimes
there are disagreements within the feminist movement. The diversity of perspectives
makes it challenging to find common ground in development projects. The very idea of
"progress" itself is often seen as influenced by Western thinking.

It's important to note that the feminist perspective on development goes beyond
Western feminist reactions to male domination. It involves interactions between
different traditions and recognizes the role of anticolonial struggles in both Western
and Third World contexts. The global feminist movement is diverse and encompasses
a range of perspectives.

The WAD perspective on feminist developmentalism aimed to reduce inequalities and

empower poor women. They believed in reorganizing how things are produced to
better meet the needs of poor people and giving women more control over their own
decisions. However, recent discussions on feminism and development have been
uncertain and repetitive, lacking clear solutions.

Many of the conversations about women and development consist of examples and
stories that touch on general themes but don't provide definite answers. This
incomplete information makes it hard to come up with effective changes. It seems that
feminism is divided and hesitant to make strong statements or speak up for others,
focusing more on strategies than big changes.

This hesitation might be because of reactions to criticisms of early feminist ideas from
women in poorer countries. But it's time to move past that and regain confidence.
Feminists, no matter where they come from, should stand up for poor women
everywhere. We can develop different ways of thinking about development from a
feminist perspective, even though it might be challenging.

We need to revisit the core issues and consider real alternatives that combine feminist
and socialist ideas. Feminist thinking, taken to the extreme, requires us to think in new
and different ways. It's time to develop clear arguments that speak up for others and
have a big impact.