Liberatory Childhood: Emma Goldman vs. Charlotte Perkins Gilman

• In Event: Democracy and the Social Question

Abstract

Historical feminists were, perhaps surprisingly, more likely than are contemporary feminists to have as part of their political thought a critique of adult-child relations that is intertwined with their critiques of male-female and class-based inequalities. Across time and political divides, they consistently argued for familial, school-based, and social practices that express greater respect for children and give greater weight to the voices of young people.

In this paper, I compare two historical feminist theorists, Charlotte Perkins Gilman and Emma Goldman, on the social status and everyday treatment of children—a topic on which they have never been brought together. I am especially interested in two aspects of their thought: first, how their critiques of the everyday treatment of children play a part in their critiques of capitalism, patriarchy, and individualism; and second, how they arrive at different visions of a liberatory childhood as part of their anarchist feminism vs. socialist feminism.

Our childrearing practices continue to need greater political attention. I believe that both Gilman and Goldman have lessons to offer that can teach and inspire us.

Author

• Penny A. Weiss, Saint Louis University