The Spinster and Her Enemies - Feminish

AFTERWORD
Most historians have been remarkably uncritical in their
treatment of this episode (1880–1930) in the history of sex.
They have tended to duplicate the version of events offered by
1920s and 1930s propagandists of the ‘sexual revolution’. Alec
Craig’s interpretation in Sex and Revolution (1934) presents
the standard analysis beyond which historians have not much
advanced. Craig saw the ‘revolution’ of the 1920s as entirely
positive, especially for women. He explained the change in
sexual mores mainly in terms of economic development, rather
than in terms of the changing relations between the sexes. He
also attacked pre-war feminists for their puritanical attitude to
sex. It is this latter distortion which should be of most serious
concern to those who are interested in developing a balanced
history of sexuality or of feminism. Pre-First World War feminists
had constructed a theory of sexuality and embarked upon
campaigns around sexuality which were a hugely important
aspect of the women’s movement. Instead of being credited with
having a worked-out theory around sexuality, these feminists
have been dismissed as having an old-maid, prudish attitude of
mind. However if the campaign to transform male sexual
behaviour and protect women and girls from abuse had not
been so important a part of feminism then antifeminists in the
1920s would not have picked it out as a particular target for
ridicule. No other aspect of pre-war feminism was seen as so
challenging or so deserving of attack.
Today in Great Britain and the USA feminists are
campaigning against men’s sexual violence and challenging
men’s sexual behaviour in groups such as Women against
Violence against Women. Again an analysis of sexuality is being
developed which opposes the abuse and exploitation of women
194