'{HE SRR'LRCR'ERRE ANS} ENRE‘RRELRRRONSRERFS £35 QRSRRPS Wfi’i‘ééf‘i A LGQRL SSCRRL R253 ERRERT: A BASE SW :31" 05 TERE ‘%R’E¥’S REGR‘ERfEféT EN MN £3303 WW 1958-3973 W337 ‘v - I“ . , : \. ' 1‘ I ‘ “ ‘lR3 1 n , K V '\ \ ABSTRACT THE STRUCTURE AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS OF GROUPS ' WITHIN A LOCAL SOCIAL MOVEMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT IN ANN ARBOR FROM 1968-1973. By Regina Lorraine Teasley This case study examines group structure and the relationships of specific movement organizations to the local movement. The relation- ships among movement groups and the factors which promote unity and cooperation are discussed. Factors which promote factionalization and schismogenesis are also examined, as is the role of such divisions within the local social movement. THE STRUCTURE AND INTERRELATIONSHIPS OF GROUPS WITHIN A LOCAL SOCIAL MOVEMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE WOMEN'S MOVEMENT IN ANN ARBOR FROM l968-1973 By Regina Lorraine Teasley A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Sociology l976 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank the members of my committee, Marilyn Aronoff, Elianne Riska, Marilyn Frye, and particularly Barrie Thorne, for their assistance and criticisms. I am especially appreciative of the support, patience and insight of Sarah Jessup, without whose aid this project would not have been completed. 11 Chapter II. III. IV. VI. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..... . ................ REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............... METHODOLOGY ..................... THEORETICAL INTRODUCTION ............... HISTORY ................. . ..... Origins of the Women' 5 Movement in Ann Arbor . The consciousness raising (CR) rap groups ..... The Older/Reform branch ...... . ....... Women's caucus groups ............... Lesbian groups .................. University-oriented groups ............ Single issue groups . . .............. Health care .................. Media groups ................... Community outreach groups ............. Summary of local movement events ....... '. . STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MOVEMENT ...... Recruitment .................... Primary recruitment to the movement . . ; . . . Recruitment into the Movement Center in the Younger/Radical branch ........ Recruitment into specific movement groups . . . Structure ..................... The Younger/Radical branch ........... The Older/Reform branch ............ Summary .................... Connections within the local movement ....... Connections between the two branches ...... Connections among groups in the Older/ Reform branch ......... . Connections among groups in the Younger/ Radical branch .............. iii Page Chapter Page Separations and fission .............. 84 Separations between the two branches ...... 84 Factionalization and schismogenesis ........ 87 The Older/Reform branch ............ 88 The Younger/Radical branch ........... 89 VII. IMAGES ........................ 95 VIII. CONCLUSION ...................... 101 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................ 107 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Time line of groups involved in the Women's Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... l7 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Literature on social movements tends to focus either on movements viewed broadly, "the anti-war movement," "the Women's Move- ment," or on specific movement organization, e.g. the National Organi- zation for Women (N.O.W.). Within local communities, one often finds several social movement organizations which fall--through a shared particular cause or ideology, or self-identification --within the same movement. The central question of this thesis is: How do such groups interrelate? This is a case study and sociological analysis of the Women's Movement (the Feminist Movement) in Ann Arbor, Michigan from l968-l973. The second wave Of the Women's Movement in the United States (Officially begun in l966) has received limited attention from social scientists. This may be attributable, in part, to the lack of concern, on the part of social scientists, with social movements in general and the origins of social movement in particular. It is also conceivable that the Women's Movement is discredited and an assessment of its importance diminished by the very sexism it seeks to eliminate. While the media has characterized the Women's Movement (where it has chosen to publicize it at all) as a product of, or reStricted to, large cities such as New York or Washington, D.C., it is important 2 to note that smaller, non-coastal cities also produced active Feminist Agroups. Ann Arbor, an "all American city" in 1967 and later the scene of intense student movement activity, is a community worthy of study. Ann Arbor is not a "typical" city; it was portrayed as a "radical" or "progressive" city by the national media in the 19605. It was among the first cities in which marijuana laws were liberalized. Long-time leftists at the University of Michigan campus claim for themselves the honor of beginning the student anti-war movement and originating the widely employed tactic of the "teach-in." In 1972, Ann Arbor became the first city to officially celebrate "Gay Pride Week," and was, in 1974, the first city in the U.S. which elected to Office a candidate 1 But local residents also know that the running openly as a Lesbian. city council is generally predominantly Republican and that Ann Arbor has an extremely high cost of living. Ann Arbor is a relatively afflu- ent city of approximately 100,000 people; it has not heavy industry and contains the University Of Michigan with its approximately 32,000 students. Histories of the resurgence of Feminism in the U.S. (Hole and Levine, 1971; Freeman, 1975; Abbott and Love, 1973) have focused on the national Women's Movement. This focus lends itself to observing those groups which have some sort of national organization, e.g. N.O.W. In a social movement of major significance, such as the Feminist 1Kathy Kozachenko was elected to the City Council on the Human Rights Party ticket. movement, which is predominantly "grass roots" in nature, an examination of the movement at the local level is not only valuable, but necessary. (This is particularly true for the "radical" branch of the Women's Movement as it is decentralized, and, like a kaleidoscope, forms and 2 an understanding of its complexity reforms, constantly changing shape, virtually requires intent Observation at the local level.) The six-year period of 1968-1973 is of particular importance to the Women's Movement. Although the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) was formed in 1966 (Hole and Levine, 1973: 84-85), the Women's Movement in the second half of the twentieth century really began to form in 1968. Hole and Levine note (1973: 119) that 1968 was the year in which women's groups concerned with Feminist issues formed across the U.S., and the Miss America Pageant protest, September 7, 1968, "was the first time the mass media gave headline coverage to the new Femi- nist movement" (p. 123); thus, in this study, the origins of a local Women's Movement will be examined. This study explores the following sorts Of questions: How does a national movement, such as the Women's Movement, manifest itself on the local level? Do the findings correspond with characterizations of the national Women's Movement; specifically, does one find in Ann Arbor the division between the two branches of the Women's Movement by which Freeman (1975) characterizes the Women's Movement nationally? What is the structure within groups, do "reform" oriented groups, as Freeman (1975) suggests, operate in a formal fashion involving a 2I am indebted to Marilyn Frye for this analogy. structured hierarchy, and do "radical" and "unstructured“ groups actually create more equal participation and decision-making by all involved? What factors increase unity and cohesiveness within groups and between groups in the local Women's Movement? What factors dis- courage cooperation and give rise to conflict or distrust between groups? What is the role Of factionalism and schismogenesis in the development of the local movement? CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Sociologists have spent comparatively little time studying social movements. Heberle (1951) noted that although ". . . it may be claimed that the study of social movements was one of the origins of sociology," paradoxically, "(l)ittle systematic theoretical work has been done in the study of social movements." (1951: 3, 2) Killian (1964: 426) Observed that not only has the subject of social movements ‘generally been grouped with other forms Of collective behavior (e.g., rumors, mobs), ". . . the field of collective behavior . . . has been a neglected area of sociology."3' Freeman (1973) has noted that the origins of social movements are particularly overlooked. If and when social movements are studied, they are often seen as "general," as when generalizations are made about "the Women's Move- ment," "the Student Movement" (Blumer, 1969: 9; Smelser, 1962: 273). While the definition itself is often vague, general social movements are often seen as amorphous, lacking cohesion and direction. They are characterized more by emotions and beliefs than by concerted action. In contrast, Heberle characterizes such descriptions as "trends or tendencies," and attempts, though vaguely, to distinguish them from 3See Smelser, 1962: 1-4 for a further examination of the paucity of literature on social movements. social movements; while he agrees that both are ". . . related to the general social phenomenon of social change, trends are to be considered as processes, social movements as a kind Of collective." (1951: 8-9) A second major perspective on social movements takes this "collective" as its point of departure; specifically, it studies a social movement organization. In this view, the social movement is seen as "specific" (Blumer, 1969: 11) or "norm oriented" (Smelser, 1962: 273-274) in which case it is expected to have a formal/hierarchical structure, takes specific actions and attempts to achieve specific goals (and is more amenable to observation and study). In distinguishing between the "general" and the "specific" or "norm-oriented" movement, Smelser uses the following example: "Feminism, the general movement for women's rights, has manifested itself in numerous specific norm- oriented movements for the establishment of equal rights in education, economic opportunity, political participation, etc." (1962: 273-274) In this approach, one is likely to take as the object of study an organization with a formal structure and specific goals, such as the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.); one then runs the risk of equating it with, or taking it to be representative of, the "general" social movement, which remains undefined and unexamined. Killian notes that, Many movements are comprised of diverse segments, each with its own structure, loosely united only by their allegiance . to the central explicit values, and by the tendency of out- siders to view them as parts of a single whole. (1964: 440) and Freeman explains that, "(t)he (Women's) movement manifests itself in an almost infinite variety of groups, styles and organizations." (1975: 49) It is my contention that the vague notions of the I'general" movement dismisses from the range of study precisely that area in which much of a movement, such as the Women's Movement, takes place, and redirects attention to specific movement organizations, especially those organizations which are national in their scope and membership (e.g., N.O.W. or the National Women's Political Caucus—-N.W.P.C.). This makes nearly impossible an accurate assessment of the complexity and nature of that portion of a "grass roots movement"--such as the Women's Movement--which is "grass roots" (i.e., the local movement). It skews the observer's perception by obscuring that segment of the movement which is more experimental in its group structure. This study focuses specifically on groups within the local movement as they evolve and relate to one another, and the manner in which they come to comprise the larger movement--in this case, the Women's Movement--at the local level. In sum, this is an effort to elucidate the relationship of the specific movement group to the ongoing social movement. An insightful description and analysis Of these rela- tionships is Offered by Gerlach and Hine (1970) in which they examine the "infra-structure" of the Black Power and the Pentacostal movements and find them to be "decentralized, segmentary and reticulate." (1970: 33) Regarding structure within specific movement groups, Freeman (1972) offers a valuable addition by extending Heberle's observations about informal group structure-~"Every group has some kind of struCture, but not every group is organized." (1951: 273)--to groups within the Women's Movement which have no formal structure, elucidating their informal hierarchies. The most valuable and important work to date concerning the Women's Movement, in particular, is Freeman (1975) and this work is complemented by the impressive history and analysis Offered by Hole and Levine (1971). For the most part, the relevant social movement literature which is capable of analyzing social movement groups which do not have formal, hierarchical structures, and Of comprehending the complexity and subtlety of the movement origins, and intra-movement relationships among groups, has yet to be written. Hopefully, this study will help to shed light on some of the areas which require further examination. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Twenty-three respondents were interviewed using a semi- structured interview schedule. Interviews ranged in length from one to three hours. Information sought about groups included: name, number and characteristics of members, duration, purpose of group, decision-making techniques, strategies/tactics, connections with other Feminist groups (especially locally), perceptions of other local Femi- nist groups. (Much unanticipated information was gleaned from inter- views.) In short, the group was the unit Of analysis and respondents were asked to describe the groups in which they had participated and their perceptions of the groups with which they were familiar but in which they had not participated. Interview excerpts will be included in quotations. While most individuals were familiar with some groups and unaware of others, many of the groups and events were described by two or more women, and their recollections were compared. The first contacts were made through personal acquaintances and names acquired from local newspapers and the University of Michigan (in the case Of those women who had been employed by the University as the Women's Advocate and the "Lesbian" Advocate (actually, the Human lO Sexuality Advocate)).4 New names were obtained from respondents when the nature of the study and the desired information were explained to them. Additional information was obtained from local newspapers (The Ann Arbor News and The Michigan Daily), from movement newsletters and newspapers (The Women's Liberation Newsletter, Spectre, Women's Information Network, Herself, the Feminist House Newsletter), pamphlets (from PROBE, The Women's Film Collective, Radical Lesbians, GAWK, and the Community Women's Clinic), and intra-movement letters and contact lists. Several women shared with me impressive collections of news- paper clippings, movement publications and posters. Some information regarding dates and places was obtained from the University of Michigan and the files Of the Women's Advocate were especially helpful. 4These positions are discussed below p. 37 and p. 32, res- pectively. CHAPTER IV THEORETICAL INTRODUCTION Two major means of characterizing the Women's Movement have emerged; these differ as to their assessment of those factors which are central to the groups or branches within the larger Women's Move- ment, which primarily distinguish the groups from one another and which affect their direction. They are: Freeman's (1975) emphasis on group structure, and Firestone's (1973, among others, Cf. Yates, 1975) empha- sis On ideology. In The Politics of Women's Liberation, Freeman (1975: 49-50) distinguishes two branches of the national Women's Liberation Movement-- the Older and the Younger. The Older branch, begun first by women whose median age was "Older"5 and including the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) and the National Women's Political Caucus (N.W.P.C.). It is composed primarily of working women (and some men) and is cen- trally concerned with the problems of this group, particularly those which are economic or legal. Groups in this branch tend to have a hierarchical structure and to Operate in a formal style (a la Robert's Rules of Order). The Younger branch is peopled with women who are 5Marilyn Frye has Observed that the notion of difference in age may be symbolic; that actual age may be of less importance than life-style or period in life, e.g., a married woman with children may be perceived to be "older" than her unmarried counterpart, student ver- sus professional may also result in a similar attribution of age differ- ence. ll 12 "younger," college-educated, and it ". . . consists of innumerable small groups engaged in a variety of activities . . ." (p. 50) In this branch, groups strive not to be hierarchical and, in fact, there is no national organization. "These groups have a variety Of functions but a very consistent style. Their common characteristics are a con- scious lack of formal structure, an emphasis on participation by every- one, sharing of tasks and the exclusion of men." (Freeman, 1975: 103) Freeman briefly dismisses the counter position that distinc- tions in the Women's Movement are primarily ideological, by contending that the labels "reformist" and "radical" ". . . tell us little of relevance . . . . Some groups often called "reformist" have a platform that would so completely change our society it would be unrecognizable." (1975: 51) She also argues that the ideology (or ideologies) of the Women's Movement are more complex than such restrictive labels would allow. Her criticism of restrictive labels is valuable but does not seem a basis for dismissing the importance Of ideology in the Women's Movement. Feminist ideology is indeed complex and is not clearly defined; that is not to say that it is nonexistent, only that the move- ment as a whole has no generally agreed upon theory, set of goals, analysis of the position of women in society, definition of "the enemy," or firm set of allies. Firestone contends that there are, however, general ideological tendencies; specifically, that there are two major 13 6 and Reform perspectives which debate these issues: Radical Feminism Feminism (also called Conservative Feminism.)7 Radical Feminism is a political perspective which, though not thoroughly delineated, includes a long-range goal of revolution, elimi- nation of the capitalist state and replacement of it with any of several alternative systems, e.g., socialism or anarchism.8 This perspective emphasizes a radical restructuring of sex roles and of the family, with many of its proponents advocating the elimination of both.9 I have heard advocates of this approach sum up their position while dif- ferentiating themselves from Reform Feminists, “We don't want a piece of the pie; we want a new pie." This camp has tended to emphasize anti-hierarchical structures and participation by all interested women. Reform Feminism is a perspective emphasizing the right of women to be equal to men; this is what Yates (1975: 35) calls the "masculine-equalitarian model." It does not challenge the existing 6This position is dynamic and also may vary slightly from place to place, e.g., Ann Arbor, with its history of left-leaning student politics, may have infused more of this approach into the Radical Feminist perspective. 7For further disCussion of these divisions see Firestone, 1973; Yates, 1975. 8Mitchell, 1973, notes both variance in perspective and pro- posed solutions within the Feminist movement. This she explains by emphasizing the multi-faceted oppression of women. "When one has to contend with oppression in every sector, there is room, initially, for all forms of political groups or attitudes to move in. . . . Women's Liberation includes within its somewhat shadowy circumference most political positions developed during the sixties and before." (p. 67) 9See Hole and Levine, op. cit., for a discussion of the "Feminist Social Critique," (chapter 4, especially pp. 214-215). 14 institutions except by demanding equal access to, and participation in, them for women. Reform Feminism especially emphasizes making room for qualified women in better-paying, prestigious jobs and eliminating dis- crimination by sex in employment. This position is Often characterized as one which demands, "a piece of the pie." These differing characterizations of the division within the Women's Movement may, in fact, be complementary. Freeman differentiates branches in the overall movement primarily be organizational structure and membership characteristics. Not only is this distinction of impor- tance for understanding the nature and development of the two branches she describes, it is also a distinction which is extremely salient to many participants. Although Freeman (1975: 10, 50-51) argued that ideological distinctions within the movement are unimportant, Firestone (1973) has contended that ideological differences are central to the movement, and, certainly in Ann Arbor, groups factionalized and broke up over ideological debates.10 An examination and analysis of the local manifestation of the national Women's Movement, as it is seen in this study of Ann Arbor, will be significantly aided by the use of both Freeman's and Firestone's descriptions; both divisions, by structure and by ideology, are foUnd in Ann Arbor and are central to an under- standing Of the local movement. Inasmuch as divisions do exist within the local Women's Move- ment and must be characterized in some manner, and since the ideological 10It may be that Women's Movement groups in college towns are more prone to ideological discussions and debates than are those found in non-college towns. 15 divisions noted above (Firestone) are closely linked to the two branches described by Freeman, the following will be employed as a working description: The branches will be referred to in a manner which reflects the complementarity of these two characterizations. The Younger branch tends to espouse the goals and employ the tactics cOnsidered to be appropriate by the Radical Feminist position, and the Older branch conforms closely to the Reform Feminist position. Thus, I will characterize these branches as Younger/Radical and Older/ Reform.'] 1'These need not be thought Of as precisely descriptive, so as not to reify them, let me remind the reader that these are mental constructs. CHAPTER V HISTORY What follows is a history of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor from 1968 through 1973. First, the origins of this local move- ment will be briefly discussed, then the groups which make up the local movement will be categorized and examined according to what may be taken to be their central orientation or defining characteristic. They will appear in the following order: CR/rap groups, Women's Caucus groups, Lesbian groups, University-oriented groups, single-issue groups (pro-abortion, women's health), media groups and community outreach groups. This history will consist Of information about the nature, operation and interaction of the groups, providing historical detail which will be employed in the analysis which follows. Origins of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor In contrast to the national Women's Movement (which, accord- ing to Freeman (1975) originated with reform-oriented groups that evolved out of government committees on the status of women in the early 19605), in Ann Arbor, the movement began with the formation of the Younger/Radical branch. The first groups (which could be called Feminist) to emerge in Ann Arbor were general, consciousness raising (CR) groups, which 16 l7 .ucmEm>oz m.=mEoz on» cw um>Fo>cw maaogm mo mcw— mswh .F mgzmwu P .1 9.1.2me uwcmflu m.:meoz wwwcsee u b ql) t pram co. Lon< mo sppmm: cw cmsoz .EzucmLmRmm cowugonnli T“ . icompwpmou cowpugrcowpgonmgong< ccmnl. . .z ".1 .2 pm :28: 15% 233.228 $ ll . ., nw3.3.u.ov cowmmeEou m smvpnmawm op omppwesou . - xmgmn.orpmsooswo mm» Co maosmo .cwsoz . m mauzmq rmUWuwboa mtcmsoz . t .i .3.o.z I.I. . “I . . 1 ”EOE Ii I w a SBZS .5: 9:22:55 t . 325 550:5 2.2: I « A.z we .sv wpmoo>u< :mwnmmATI . v P I) Poogom xmwcaesou m.:msor .H.z. Crow Emucmu mFm rlllllm.l. I: wgu m.cwEo3 mmzoz ngmxgm mmso: umwcwswm I I a . ¥3u< m.cmeoz muvpmim umwmlvmm mrwmim mgmpmwm mm; zumcowaz—o>mm» I I 25.58.. :3 .sg v .a.m.t mzozmu m.:msoz D 1 d Emp_mpmzmz .Aua ,I ngwz zaumtzsw Em. 8.; mowpw_mo m.:mEo3 . Tit omkggz I copuogwnWA m.:mso3 o z o m < a a z < z m a o z o m < a a z < z m a o z o m < a w z < z m a a z o m < o a z < z m a mmmp mmmp Pump ommp 18 had no unique political position except that they were concerned with the condition of women in society.12 For almost two years (mid-1968 through early 1970) these small CR/rap groups we§e_the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor. Employing a variety Of tactics and embracing a vague, but increasingly delineated, political perspective, they undertook a variety of activities, including helping to create new CR/rap groups, protesting the war in Vietnam and the Miss Ann Arbor Pageant.13 Groups falling into this category were peopled exclusively by women, almost all of whom were students, especially Juniors, Seniors and Graduate students. *There was much shifting of participants from one group to another. Two Of the original CR/rap groups grew out Of pre-existing communications networks, as Freeman (1975: 48) would anticipate; speci- fically, communications networks developed in the New Left. The Thurs- day night group was composed of women who were involved with the Draft Resistance Movement, a particular segment of the Ann Arbor "radical community" (as they referred to themselves). While they thought of themselves as "radical" people (Freeman, 1975: 58), they were dissatisfied 12The CR/rap groups may be seen as a mechanism by which new participants become enmeshed in the Women's Movement and (Feminist) friendship networks are established. CR/rap groups are considered to be legitimate Feminist or pre-Feminist activity by the movement and thus provide interested women with something like a free ticket to Feminism. See Freeman (1975: 117) for a further examination of the role of these groups. '3This protest followed the lead Of the nationally publicized Feminist protest of the Miss America Pageant. (Hole and Levine, 1971: 123 19 with their inability (rooted in their being female and hence not subject to the draft) to actively participate in Draft Resistance (see Thorne, 1975). Their network was readily cO-opted by the incipient Women's Movement. Sisters Rising was another CR/rap group which grew out of a communication network originating in the New Left, in this case Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In 1970 another segment of the population of Ann Arbor became involved in what can be characterized as the Older/Reform branch Of the local Women's Movement. The Women's Caucus of the Michigan Democratic Party had, in December, 1969, pressed for fifty percent representation of women among delegates to party conventions and, from these actions, emerged FOCUS on Equal Employment for Women. The Women's Caucus of the Democratic Party created not only a pre-existing communications network but also an extra-movement tie which increased communication flow between movement groups in the Older/Reform branch. Gerlach and Hine (1970: 62) note the importance of such "extra-movement linkages." At one time or another, membership in the Women's Caucus Of the Demo- cratic Party overlapped with the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.), the National Women's Political Caucus (N.W.P.C.), FOCUS, and the Committee to Establish a Commission on Women for Washtenaw County (C.C.W.W.). These groups were concerned primarily with legal and economic reforms of concern to women, and participants in these organizations were primarily women in their 30's. Most of the participants were married, many had children and many were professionals. 20 The consciousness raising (CR)/rap groups Noting that the educational vehicle which was the Rap Group was developed by the "Younger" branch, Freeman (1971: 4-5) explains and describes it as a . . (structure) created specifically for the purpose of altering the participants' perceptions and conceptions of themselves and society at large . . .(through "conscious- ness raising"). Women come together in groups of five to fifteen and talk to each other about their personal problems, personal experiences, personal feelings and personal con- cerns. From this public sharing of experiences comes the realization that what was thought to be individual is, in fact, common; that what was thought to be a personal problem has a social cause and probably a political solution. Information could be Obtained for only six early CR/rap groups, and these will be briefly described with an emphasis upon an examination of their scope and their outcomes. The first Feminist group in Ann Arbor was formed in the sum- mer of 1968; it was a Consciousness Raising (CR) group which quickly fell apart; shortly thereafter the "Thursday night group“ (discussed above) was formed. Having been involved in the Draft Resistance Move- ment, many of the members of the group continued their work in such activities of the Ann Arbor "radical community"14 while attending the group. This group was exceptionally stable, lasting until summer, 1970. Though they spoke with one another about their perceived Oppression, they did not_conceive of themselves as a CR group--such 14Their connections and ties within this milieu, the ideolo- gies they shared, and their self-concepts as "radicals" largely affected the nature of their Feminism. 21 categories of experience not yet having been named. They did develop an analysis Of their position in society and the oppression they felt as women. One of the group's early activities was to set up a "litera- ture table" on the University of Michigan campus, where they made available to interested persons "Feminist literature" with which they had become familiar through connections with Feminist groups in other cities, attending conferences and so forth. They also created the first teach-in on Feminist issues in Ann Arbor, held in late 1969 or early 1970. Probably their most visible effort was their protest of the Miss Ann Arbor contest in 1969 (see Hole and Levine above, p. 1). As Feminists, women in the Thursday night group were dissatis- fied with local New Left groups which were increasingly espousing ". . . little incipient analyses about women," (as a group participant des- cribed them); these were viewed as, at best, incomplete. In response, the Thursday night group spoke to the local 505 group about "women's politics"; while, for the most part, the males did not respond favor- ably,'5 "I think we cause quite a ripple among the women," a participant explained. A similar group, the Monday nighthroup, participated in approximately two meetings with the Thursday night group during 1969, in an attempt to bring women of the Ann Arbor "radical community" together for forums, but very little solidarity was achieved. 15One is reminded of the descriptions of the sexism and lack Of concern women faced from men in the New Left, e.g., Freeman (1975: 57-61); Morgan (1969); Piercy (1969). 22 Such CR/rap groups sprang up and separated rapidly and the membership shifted about between them. Late in 1968 there were only a few such groups, but through 1969 they increased geometrically primar- ily because the existing CR/rap groups created new groups. They did so for two reasons: 1) One of their goals was to expose more women to a Feminist perspective, and 2) the existing groups could not absorb the number of interested women, the size of the group being relevant to the establishment of intimacy and rapport.16 Early in 1970 a CR/rap group called "Women's Liberation" 17 formed in Ann Arbor. The group was primarily composed of Social Work students at the University of Michigan who discussed Feminist articles '8 They also dis- and books which were increasingly becoming available. cussed the joys of heterosexuality, "they had a desperate fear of being labeled 'Lesbian.‘ Apparently even the politically active women felt the need to emphasize how heterosexual they were," a participant explained. The Charlotte Perkins Gilman Collective formed in the latter part of 1970. This group began as a CR/rap group which became a study 16See Pamela Allen, Free Space, 1970, for discussion of CR groups, esp. concerning intimacy and trust. 17The word had only recently come into being and one woman in the group had read "the Florida Paper,‘l see Hole and Levine, 1971: 111. 18 . . . This group was aware of the first women s movement news- letter which was put out by Jo Freeman and others in Chicago. 23 group and later transformed itself into the Women's Film Collective (see p. 50 below). This pattern of development (i.e., CR/rap group-- study group--task group) is not uncommon in the Women's Movement. Sisters Rising (fall 1970-early 1971), a left-leaning con- sciousness raising group was composed primarily of young women (twenty- twenty-one) who had been in SDS and had left the group prior to its demise; most of the women were students, many of whom were enrolled in Residential College. Sisters Rising met in the Residential College'9 and had approximately thirty members. Decisions were made collectively and the group had no formal structure. This group in particular es- chewed formal leadership which they perceived had been used to oppress them in SDS. Although they avoided associations with Radical Lesbians for fear their organization would appear to be all or exclusively Lesbian, they sponsored an event on Halloween, 1970 which was attended by many women from Radical Lesbians, as well as women from other groups. The event, called a "witching,"20 had been announced via posters and over 100 women attended. There were incantations, hexes and chants, though the event was emphasizing class-struggle. "'Smash the Capitalist state' was essentially the thrust of the march, and women, as witches, were seen as bringing this about," a participant remembered. 19Residential College, East Quad, was considered by students to be the radical sector of the University, and was attended primarily by those who considered themselves to be "radical." 20Hole and Levine (1971: 126-130) note that the New York WITCH was composed of left-leaning women who employed guerrilla theatre and "zap" tactics in much the same way. 24 Their own statement in the fall of 1970 was, "Sisters Rising is a group of women who have come together to create a strong revolu- tionary force in this community . . . ." (Women's Liberation News- LELL #4) The characteristics of groups and group members in the CR/rap groups corresponded closely to Freeman's (1975: 49-58) notion of the Younger branch of the Women's movement, i.e., the groups were small, informally structured and the participants were primarily young college- 21 affiliated women, many Of whom had been involved with New Left groups. The Older/Reform branch The following groups represent the local beginnings and con- tinuation of the Older/Reform branch of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor; the groups can be characterized as having a formal structure, ties to more legitimate groups and members who are predominantly career women in their 30's. FOCUS on Equal Employment for Women grew out of the Women's Caucus Of the Democratic Party. Their own statement in late 1970 characterized them as, ". . . a group of Ann Arbor professional women which Worked against the nomination of Judge Harrold Carswell to the Supreme Court and which filed a complaint with the Department of Labor, Office of Federal Contract Compliance, against the University of Michi- gan alleging individual and patterns of sex discrimination." (In 2'Though most participants were students, I use this term to include those not enrolled, but involved in the "student community." 25 Women's Liberation Newsletter #4) The first complaint was filed May 27, 1970 followed by a second in November of 1970. In the spring of 1970 the organizational meeting of the Com- mittee to Establish a Commission on the Status of Women for Washtenaw County (hereafter C.C.W.W.)22 was called and was attended by several members of the women's auxiliary Of the Ann Arbor Jaycees, in addition to members of several other area service and interest groups. The organization had begun as one concerned with issues pertaining to women and members quickly concluded that many areas of major concern to women were county-wide problems which required county-wide solutions. Thus, they embarked on their endeavor to establish a County commission on women. But C.C.W.W. was concerned with several issues, e.g., employ- ment problems, problems of teen-age parents, and family planning for low income persons; thus, C.C.W.W. became an umbrella group, creating several task forces and encouraging spin-off groups. A chairperson was elected and a core of twenty women who were "really committed" set about creating, organizing and maintaining the organization, "and there were forty more who could be counted on when needed," a member noted. The majority of the members, all of whom were women, were married and had children, though many were divorced or were in the process of divorcing. There were very few students. In October, 1970, they presented information to the County Commissioners emphasizing discrimination against women especially as 22 For further information on C.C.W.W., see Herself, v.1, n.1. p. 2 (1972). 26 employees and requested a Women's Commission to oversee such affairs. After ten months of inaction by the County Commissioners on this sub- ject, they returned and challenged them. They requested, and were granted permission, to review county files to ascertain if there was sex discrimination in employment. Six months later, early in 1972, they had data which showed that women were discriminated against in county employment and were under-employed. Their report was released in April, 1972 and they subsequently met with county employees to make them aware of the findings. After C.C.W.W. requested a commission and was able to demon- strate county-wide employment discrimination against women, a legal opinion was issued which said the county could not legally form a com- mission, but could instead form an advisory committee, which it did. The last action of C.C.W.W. was a reception held for the Advisory Com- mittee members in April, 1972. While C.C.W.W. was an organization which originated in, and was specifically concerned with, the Ann Arbor area, the other groups in the Older/Reform branch are linked to national organizations. The Ann Arbor chapter of the National Organization for Women (N.O.W.) was formed in the late spring of 1971 and began with approxi- mately ten women. Although its local origin is not agreed upon, it 23 seems that women in PROBE actually organized the first meeting, bring- ing in a representative from the national organization. The group was 23PROBE into the Status of Women at the University of Michigan, see p. 39 below. 27 composed primarily of women in PROBE and the Committee to Establish a Commission on Women for Washtenaw County (C.C.W.W.). While there were some Lesbians at outset of the group, they ‘ left after perceiving their interest was not appreciated. Most of the members were women in their 20's to early 30's, many were married, though some were divorced, and some had children. They were employed women (primarily professionals), not students. They tended to be (political) party-oriented, for example, many of them had worked with the Women's Caucus of the Democratic Party for some time. In the latter part of 1971 and early in 1972, Ann Arbor N.O.W. aided those seeking abortion reform through referendum by pass- ing their petitions. They also worked with the Michigan Women's Poli- tical Caucus in 1972-1973 on legislation of concern to them both. The Ann Arbor Chapter of the National Women's Political Caucus was formed in the summer of 1971 and was composed of members of FOCUS, N.O.W., Women's Caucus of the Democratic Party and members of groups which were not specifically feminist. W.P.C. seems to be primarily a state-legislation oriented organization. Women's caucusggrggps Their very difference is their similarity; these are the exclusively women segments of larger sexually mixed groups and their distinguishing characteristic is that they are not primarily Feminist. Despite the fact that their primary commitments have lain elsewhere, they have played an important role in the local Women's Movement. 28 As has been noted above, the local Women's Auxiliary of the Jaycees became involved in C.C.W.W. and many Of the members shifted their alliances from the Jaycees to C.C.W.W. The Women's Caucus of the Democratic Party produced not only FOCUS, but members of that organization were heavily represented at one time or another in N.O.W. and W.P.C. with some maintaining dual membership while others shifted their commitment. In the Younger/Radical branch of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor, several caucus groups were involved. Some simply sent women members to recruit and proselytize while others Offered invalu- able services. The Women's Caucus of the International Socialists (IS) was involved with the Ann Arbor Women's Movement in 1970 primarily in an attempt to recruit women to its ranks, but, as an Observer recalled, "it was never a big draw.‘l Women of the Young Socialist Alliance (Y.S.A., the youth organization of the Socialist Workers' Party) came not only to recruit members to their organization, but to direct (or, more precisely, re- direct) the local.Women's Movement, especially the more radical groups. Y.S.A. women were involved in the Women's Liberation Coalition (see p. 37 below) and the Ann Arbor Abortion Action Coalition (see p. 42 below). Freeman (1975: 129-134) discusses the attempted Y.S.A. inter- vention into and redirection of the Women's MOvement throughout the U.S. Some idea Of the political perspective of Y.S.A. women can be gleaned from their statement in the Women's Liberation Newsletter late 29 in 1970; their political discussion group was slated to discuss "how do (women in the Women's Movement) relate to The Radical Movement?" (emphasis mine.) The Women's Caucus of the New University Conference stated in contrast that they were "stUdying the dual role of a women's libera- tion group associated with another radical group." (Women's Liberation Newsletter #4) The Red Star Sisters (fall 1970-February 1971) were the women of the White Panther Party (later the Rainbow People's Party); a group of "street people who were primarily into dope and rock 'n' roll" was the way in which one observer described them. The R.S.S. occasionally appeared at conferences and women's meetings, although they thought . autonomous women's groups were politically incorrect. They stated that "these men are our brothers and we must struggle beside them." They also contended that they were already liberated inasmuch as housework and childcare were shared in the White Panther community, but they were sympathetic to women who still experienced problems with it. One observer explained,."Red Star Sisters was the W.P.P.'s response to the fad of the da --their response to the charges that they were sexist. Red Star Sisters was an attempt to prove that those claims of male; domination weren't true." The Women's Caucus of the Human Rights Party, a local inde- pendent politiCal party, was particularly active in 1972 and 1973. They were involved particularly with Lesbian Feminist activities, offering not only legal and political know-how but also raising issues 30 of concern to Lesbian Feminists at City Council meetings. It was H.R.P. which engineered and passed the Human Rights Ordinance which made Ann Arbor one of the few cities in the country which outlawed discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. Gay Liberation, formed locally in 1970, gave rise to a women's caucus which was to quickly separate themselves: Radical Lesbians. Lesbianggroup§_ The first meeting of Radical Lesbians was held in the summer of 1970 and was organized by four women; one had been involved in Gay Liberation, one in New Left and Feminist groups, and two in 5.0.5. (all locally). Early on, a debate ensued between two members regarding the group's name; one suggested "Gay Women's LiberatiOn" while the other favOred "Radical Lesbians."24 The group's own statement issued in the latter part of 1970 reads as follows: ". . . we consider ourselves part of the Women's Liberation Movement because we're oppressed both as women and as les- bians. Moreover, lesbians are particularly oppressed because they're used as bogey women by men to keep other women in line. In our meet— ings we discuss our problems as homosexual women and take actions toward solving them. We welcome any woman, gay or straight, interested in these problems." (Women's Liberation Newsletter #4) A The organization, which began as a support group (though participants differed in their expectations of the functions of the 24Note the different political perspective denoted by these names. See Hole and Levine, p. 122 and Freeman, 1975: 108. 31 group) had approximately forty (40) women at its peak and the meetings were held in the Residential College at the University of Michigan. The women in Radical Lesbians were very close and felt they had to be totally open with one another; therefore, a great deal of trust developed between them. "We were all we had," a participant recalled. They socialized together at private parties and later at the first all-women's dance, which they organized in the spring of 1971; over 100 women, straight (heterosexual) and gay, attended. The group began discussing politics more frequently and attempted to make themselves more visible, empldying "legitimate“ tac- tics such as speaking to college classes and "zap" tactics such as painting “Radical Lesbians" on buildings. They disapproved of role- playing and concluded one could be free of it. Their discussions con- cerned topics such as non-possessiveness, jealousy, and potential or actual affiliations with other movements, such as Gay Liberation--a ' topic on which there was much discussion and little agreement. Two women, one a core group member and another an active participant, became lovers and their relationship produced not only an unlikely brand of politics--emphasizing their role as the vanguard or radical conscience of the group--but also increasing distance between themselves and the larger group which they saw as not radical enough.25 Their perception was that the group had become popular, attracting many 25Note that while there were several couples in Radical Les- bians, it was the formation of this particular couple of two charismatic and highly political women which rocked Radical Lesbians. 32 women who were not committed to radical Lesbianism, and thus it had lost its value as a political group; therefore, they announced their intention to separate and form their own group, Revolutionary Lesbians. Pgrple Star, a statement Of the ideas of Radical Lesbians, was being put together at this time (early spring, 1971) and these women pulled their articles from it and put them into their own paper, Spectre, .which published five issues through December, 1971 emphasizing a class analysis and discussions of Lesbian Oppression. After the schism there was little connection between Radical Lesbians and Revolutionary Les- bians, the latter viewing the former with scorn and caution. Many women in Radical Lesbians were badly shaken by the experience and were not to forget the harsh words and the violation Of trust that a pre- eminence of "politics" had produced. In the fall of 1971, while Radical Lesbians was slowly dis- integrating, the position Of Lesbian Advocate was created by the University of Michigan as an addition to the minority advocary program. 'It was actually half of the position of "Human Sexuality Advocate" shared by a Lesbian and a Gay man, the position being the result of agitation primarily by gay men. The Lesbian Advocate created Lesbian rap groups and attempted to coordinate efforts within the Lesbian "com- munity" but there was little activity until the summer of 1972. In 1972 Ann Arbor became the first city to officially cele- brate Gay Pride Week, again at the impetus of the Human Rights Party city council members (see p. 2 above). Shortly after its celebration, the endeavor to create an organization which would provide local Les- bians with support and social activities, avoiding the problems of 33 "politics," was completed with the formation of GAWK, the Gay Awareness Women's Kollective. GAWK was conceived of and formed primarily by six women, three of whom had been involved in Radical Lesbians and most of whom were involved in Feminist House (see p. 53 below). GAWK was a mix of students and workers, ages ranging from eighteen to thirty years with most participants in their 20's. At a representative meeting, ten to fifteen women would attend, at most, thirty. In the beginning GAWK emphasized community outreach, helping and supporting women who were "coming out" (i.e., identifying themselves as Lesbians) and educating local people about Lesbianism. They showed films and spoke to college classes and, on two occasions, they spoke with members of N.O.W. GAWK was composed of at least three subgroups, the interaction of which determined the direction the group was to take: 1) The core women and those who were committed to GAWK, primarily a friendship group, the more conservative of these were becoming radi- calized; 2) The more conservative Lesbians (often older than the mean age) who were attracted to GAWK as a support group but were increas- ingly uncomfortable with GAWK's "up front" image and increasingly radical perspective, many of whom left, "back to the closet, I guess," as one informant put it; and 3) The Packard House women who were only loosely affiliated but who were "extremely radical," and who were com— mitted to complete and utter separatism, encouraging other members of GAWK to share their political leaning. An example of GAWK's early outreach endeavors was their pub- lication of a pamphlet emphasizing that Lesbians are everyday people who are actively oppressed for their sexual preference; they also put 34 out a Lesbian issue of Herself (a local Feminist publication, see p. below) with the help of some of the Herself staff, in October of 1972. As GAWK became weary of discussing the same subjects, monog- yny, separatism, etc., the discussions turned increasingly to "politics.'I As one participant explained, "Lesbianism is political, you just can't get away from it," and the ranks thinned. There was an emphasis upon giving up "class privilege" (especially from Packard House women) and several participants in GAWK quit college and acquired "heavy politics";26 group cohesiveness was very important and GAWK became very cliquish. Decisions were made chaotically, "It would take up to two hours to come to a decision.“ Because of the structure of GAWK, its increasing exclusivity and the fact that it was primarily based on two or three friendship groups to begin with, it was not successful in assimilating new members. To meet the needs of new womeh, GAWK attempted to create CR groups and devised a plan consisting of two meeting a week, the regular meeting and one designed specifically for new women, but neither was successful. The first Lesbian Advocate had moved away and another woman was endorsed by GAWK and acquired the position. She was encouraged by participants to provide GAWK with direction, but even she had difficulty organizing the group as many women attended meetings purely for social 26This denoted primarily a political perspective which was "radical" (e.g., revolutionary) and therefore to be taken seriously, though it may also have meant a strong commitment to and concern with "correct" Feminist politics. 35 purposes. Because Of her position, the Lesbian Advocate traveled a good deal and thus helped to keep GAWK abreast of current issues. As GAWK became more exclusive, it de-emphasized ties with other Feminist groups, "We were heavy dykes and we were doing our thing," a member observed. But it did create ties with other Lesbian groups; for example, several state-wide conferences were held in southern Michigan and were attended by Ann Arbor Lesbians, and GAWK sponsored a Lesbian conference in the spring of 1973. In June, 1973 women of GAWK had created a collage of photos depicting women, especially Lesbians, into which they had put much effort and which they considered to be art and, as such, wanted it displayed in the Ann Arbor public library as other works by community artists Often were. The Head Librarian refused without viewing the piece and the Lesbians organized a picket of the library with signs explaining the situation (women of the H.R.P. encouraged appeals to the Human Rights Commission). In 1973 a group of younger (19-22) women began involving themselves in GAWK and sought Changes such as more formal organization, clearer direction and possible alliance with G.L.F. These women were primarily from the Residential College at the University of Michigan and did not meet with much positive response from the existing group, some of whom left completely. But they were able to redirect the group and it continued for about five months, ending late in 1973. Five women who were friends and had been in Radical Lesbians, moved into a house on Packard Street. This was not a unique phenome- non; there were other houses in which a group of Lesbians lived together, 36 but their life-style and goals set them apart. Their idea was to create a Radical Lesbian Commune; they were trying to "live out" the politics developed by Radical Lesbians and Revolutionary Lesbians and stressed in Spectre, of which they had read every issue. The group emphasized the acquisition of non-traditional skills, e.g., auto- mechanics, while denying their educational/middle-class privilege, and making communal decisions about money and ideology. They pooled their money and alternated working to support others and being supported while learning skills. Together they studied Karate at local Karate schools and taught a self-defense class to local women. They had political disagreements with the Revolutionary Les- bians, who printed Spectre, and had few connections with other women. "We called ourselves 'dyke separatists' which meant separate from any- one who wasn't a 'dyke separatist' for the most part, even from radical straight women and from Lesbians who didn't have their politics to- gether," a member said. For them, discussing politics was particularly important; "Constantly we went through, 'What is the politically correct thing to dO?'" It was seen as a manifestation of their politics to be, “as intimidating, strong, and "out" as possible. "We were heavy-booted, wore blue jeans, Old leather jackets and had short hair." They walked arm in arm in public. Occasionally they came to GAWK meetings and discussed politics, emphasizing their own. One informant noted, "Packard House was the most militant, most Lesbian separatist group. They had a great deal of influence over the Lesbian community." Another woman recalled, 37 "Packard House had a significant influence; certainly they had a definite political perspective. People knew where Packard House was politically, they were into skills and they accused (some women) of being into male-left politics." University-oriented(groups There was an attempt in the fall Of 1970 to form a coalition Of student-oriented and/or radical women's groups; it was called the "Women's Liberation Coalition" and, although most of the organizers were not students, they were able to procure a small office in the Student Activities Building at the University of Michigan. The primary function of the organization was holding mass meetings of interested Feminists. Though the purpose Of the meetings was to increase a sense of solidarity and coordinate efforts, the coalition suffered from both a definite lack of direction and difficulties with communication between women of different groups, e.g., caucus groups and autonomous groups. The coalition was also faced with conflicts prevalent within the Women's Movement at that time. In the midst of the conflict and dis- organization, the highly organized members of the women's caucus of the Y.S.A. appeared and attempted to take over the organization. "They'd volunteer to do the (administrative tasks) and suddenly you'd realize they'd set up agendas in advance," one participant related. (fn, p. 28) The Coalition was short-lived and ended in February of 1971. The University position of the Women's Advocate was formed in October of 1970, and Claire assumed the position on October 26. She had not been involved in mainstream women's groups in Ann Arbor 38 and had, in fact, been a clerical worker employed by the University, but had been involved in "Clericals Organizing" and PROBE (see p. 39 below). During 1970, she worked primarily with the Women's Liberation Coalition and after it ended early in 1971, she concentrated her efforts on PROBE and the file review organized by the Commission for Women at U. of M. She held the position through the end of 1972, after which it was vacant for one year. She lent support in both time and money to several campus-affiliated groups. In the fall of 1970, several interested individuals and small groups already existed when the Woman's Advocate, from her limited University-allotted budget, was able to hire a woman to coordinate efforts for a Women's Studies program at the University Of Michigan. Those interested and active were described as a "cast Of thousands" and were diverse, several were faculty women, there were many graduate students and a few undergraduates, with a core of about twelve women. The organization began loosely, the participants sat in a circle, and decisions were made by consensus; based on egalitarian principles, the group was "unstructured" (i.e., had no formal structure), people with ideas directed action. "It was beginning from scratch; people picked up on whatever they could find, e.g., know reprints, and brought it for 'show and tell,'" a participant said. The first general meeting was held February 16, 1971 in the Student Activities Building. In the fall of 1971, they taught the first Women's Studies course. Responsibility for lectures was divided up among interested and prepared women; although it was very egalitarian, 39 it was also disorganized. The second semester was quite different. The ancestor of the steering committee began meeting and organizing both the course and the campaign to have Women's Studies accepted as a program at the University of Michigan. They leafleted to arouse interest in the course and spent endless hours talking with faculty and administrators in an effort to create a Women's Studies program; and in 1972 they were approved, receiving an office and one teaching assistant. 27 PROBE into the status of women At the suggestion of FOCUS, at the University of MiChigan formed the third week of June in 1970. PROBE and FOCUS were amazingly complementary in their access to re- sources; FOCUS, with lawyers among its membership, devised a plan by which to file a complaint against the University for sex discrimination in employment, and PROBE, with a large contingent of clericals, affili- ated with Clericals Organizing, had access to the incriminating evidence which could informally be given to the H.E.W. investigators28 so as to make their investigation infinitely easier. PROBE had approximately ten to fifteen members with five as a core; at least one of the five was also active in Clericals Organiz- ing. The group published a lengthy booklet, The Feminine Mistake: Women at U. of M., which covered the kinds of problems and discrimination 27See p. 24 above. 28Regional investigators from the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare (H.E.W.) were sent to the University Of Michigan to investigate the complaint filed by FOCUS alleging discrimination by sex in employment. 40 that women faced at the University, gave advice and offered information regarding services. It was primarily designed to raise the conscious- ness of those who read it. PROBE, which helped to organize the local N.O.W. chapter, lasted almost two years, ending with the final act of the Fleming Foiiow29 early in the spring of 1972. In her second year, the Women's Advocate worked closely with PROBE on H.E.W. and labor com- plaints. After FOCUS filed the second complaint in November of 1970 and PROBE provided the H.E.W. investigators with plenty of incriminat- ing evidence, the Commission for Women at the University of Michigan was created by President R. Flemming and charged with carrying out the file-review demanded by H.E.W. to ascertain whether or not there was discrimination in employment. The Commission, headed by an appointed chairperson, was composed of thirteen appointed members, two of whom were men; in the beginning there were no students on the Commission. The University made the file-review as difficult as possible by not allowing the Commission a budget or computer time, and giving only limited access to files, until H.E.W. stepped in again and assured greater access to resources. The Commission completed the file-review, finding signifi- cant discrepancies, which enabled many women tO receive back-pay and 29Members of PROBE openly followed University of Michigan President, Robben Flemming, in his daily meetings. They found he had almost no contact with women and cited this as one of the major rea- sons he could not understand their problems. 41 which enabled the Commission to require the posting of job Openings and the reclassification Of some jobs. After the file-review, they began publishing a newsletter, the Women's Information Network, which dealt with the notion Of equal pay for equal work and access to equal employment. Regarding the role of the Commission, a member explains, "We're an 'in house' group; there is only so much noise we can make; we really aren't able to make trouble with the University; the best we can do is leak the information and let somebody else make a stink." The Child Care Action Group was formed by approximately ten women in the summer of 1970 in an attempt to force the University to provide adequate child-care for parents employed at or attending the University. Their efforts were entirely ignored until they drew up a petition with their demands on it and began collecting signatures around the campus; shortly thereafter the University took notice. But the University's interest was, at best, half-hearted. "We were con- stantly shunted from place to place and in one building didn't even have adequate toilet facilities," remarked a group member. The only real support they received was from Mrs. Cohen and Mrs. Flemming (appelations they demanded) who sponsored a fundraising tea at Mrs. Cohen's house. The Child Care Center ended up in Mary Markley, a freshmen dorm, ". . . with the University trying to sabotage it at every step along the way," according to an activist in the group. 42 Single issueggroups In the summer Of 1971, the state-wide Michigan women's class action abortion suit was filed in Detroit; based on the right to equal protection under the law (fourteenth amendment) and the right to privacy (ninth amendment), the suit demanded repeal Of all state anti-abortion legislation. Of the more than 1,000 plaintiffs in the suit, there were at 'least eighty in the Ann Arbor area who were periodically called to— gether, along with all other interested persons, for mass meetings concerning the state of the suit. These occasions not only strengthened local movement networks, but also gave participants a sense of being in a broader movement. Those active in the suit strongly supported proposal 8, the abortion reform referendum, noting that while abortion reform was not a solution, it was an important step and should certainly be supported in addition to the abortion suit. The suit was won in September, 1972, but was staid until the Supreme Court decision liberalized abortion laws in February of 1973. In late spring, 1971, Ann Arbor women formed a local chapter of the Women's National Abortion Action Coalition (WONAAC), an organi- 30 which demanded zation directed by leftist women, especially Y.S.A., repeal of all anti-abortion legislation. The Ann Arbor Abortion Action Coalition, A.A.A.A.C. as it was later to call itself, was also heavily 30See p. 28 above. 43 influenced by Y.S.A. women who "were Old hands at organizing'| and were 3' In addition to experiencing free reign in the "unstructured" group. the three or four Y.S.A. women in the group, the core was composed of approximately seven other women including high school students, married women, college students and lesbians; most members were in theri 20's. Although they were formed with no ties to the Michigan Women's Abortion Suit, coordinating the suit quickly became their primary en- deavor; they also sponsored a teach-in on abortion in October of 1971, attended the abortion march in Lansing March 13, 1971, and organized buses to the national abortion march in Washington, D.C. on October 20, 1971. A.A.A.A.C. attempted to organize all kinds of women around the issue of abortion, including those involved in the abortion suit and all other interested persons, and was quite successful in creating interest and support. Some of the women in A.A.A.A.C. helped to col- lect signatures for the abortion reform referendum. After several frustrating and unsuccessful attempts to reform existing abortion laws through the state legislature, interested persons formed a state-wide group, based in Lansing, to hold an abortion reform referendum. The vote was slated for November 7, 1972 and the numerous local chapters, including one in Ann Arbor, began a tedious door-tO-door drive in October of 1971 to obtain the 212,488 signatures necessary tO put the issue on the ballot. The bill stated that abortion could be 3'"Unstructured" groups are especially vulnerable to take- over. See Freeman (1975: 131) for a further discussion. 44 performed by a licensed physician at the request of the patient “. . if the period of gestation has not exceeded twenty weeks" and is performed in a licensed facility. Though more than enough signatures were collected and the bill was voted on, it was defeated after a strong “blitz" anti-abortion campaign sponsored by the Catholic Church. The abortion reform drive was not a young people's or exclu- sively women's project. Of the initial group of organizers, not one person was under thirty years of age, and forty percent were men. Many of those involved in Ann Arbor were also members of Planned Parenthood, League of Women Voters and Zero Population Growth; there was little organized support from college students. A participant explained, "the more radical women disdained to get involved with the abortion reform drive, feeling it was not far-reaching enough." N.O.W., W.P.C., and the Rainbow People's Party (see p. 29) passed petitions, the Women's Advocate attempted to aid, especially through her many ties with student- oriented Feminist groups, and by the latter part of the campaign more Feminists from the Younger Radical branch were appearing and aiding, e.g., A.A.A.A.C. and the Women's Crisis Center. The referendum was an attempt to bring the question of abor- tion to the citizens of Michigan and its nature was based on this group. After pro-abortion activists despaired of succeeding with the legis- lators, they changed the target group and chose a bill which they thought would be passed by the populace. The failure here was keenly felt for some time after; even after the Supreme Court decision which forced liberalization of state laws, anti-abortion proponents resurrected 45 the defeat in attempts to stop abortion clinics and other attempts to provide safe, inexpensive, easily accessible abortions. Health care The Women's Health Collective (W.H.C.) was formed in April of 1971 by six to eight women, one of whom was writing her thesis on free clinics, and it met in the Women's Movement room in the Student Activities Building on the University of Michigan campus. They did some panels at the University of Michigan medical school concerning women and health care delivery, held a "learn-in" (intended to be more egalitarian than a teach-in) on women and health and worked on the abortion teach-in (October, 1971). Their primary activity was, however, teaching "Our Bodies, Ourselves" courses, each cOurse lasting six weeks. One course was taught on the University of Michigan campus and another was taught in the community center on Main Street. When the Women's Community School (W.C.S.) began in the fall of 1971, W.H.C.'s course affiliated itself with W.C.S. Two of the women in W.H.C. were involved with the coordination of W.C.S. Most women in the W.H.C. were plain- .tiffs in, and actively supported, the Michigan Women's Abortion suit, the group's (W.H.C.) position being "Free Abortion on Demand." After more than a year of teaching the "Our Bodies, Ourselves" courses, the women in W.H.C. were tired of them, but the courses were still in demand, so the group experienced a turn-over in membership, especially late in 1972. Advocates for Medical Information (A.M.I.) was formed in November of 1972 by two women, one of whom was a founder of Herself. 46 32 and other potentially They sought to inform people about 1) D.E.S. dangerOus drugs prescribed for women, and 2) J. R. Willson's Obstetrics and Gynecology textbook, which they viewed as "dangerously sexist." They attempted to stir up action around these issues. Their major tactic was writing letters to the editor of the Michigan Daily (the student newspaper) in an attempt to make the (student) public aware of these problems; they wrote at least five letters in a period of seven months. Their major activity was on April 12, 1973 when, on the diag. of the University of Michigan campus, they burned a copy of J. R. Willson's textbook (he was head of the Department Of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Michigan Medical School at the time the book was burned), objecting particularly to phrases like, "The traits that compose the core of the female personality are feminine marcissism, masochism and passivity," and "The normal sexual act . . . entails a masochistic surrender to the man . . . there is always an element of rape." They also burned Dr. Reuben's Agy Woman Can and other paperbacks on female and homosexual psychology. Gay Liberation Front joined A.M.I. in the demonstration with a guerrilla theatre portrayal Of violent electro-shock treatment to "cure" homosexuality. A.M.I., although only two people, was able to present itself as a group and was successful in gaining national and local attention for the 32D.E.S. (diethyl stilbestrol) is a synthetic estrogen used as a "morning-after pill." It has been found to result in vaginal carcinoma in daughters of women who took it during pregnancy to prevent abortion. 47 book burning, attempting to emphasize throughout not the act, but the content, of the books. It ended in the summer of 1973. Another specific protest organization, the Coordinating Com-- mittee on Representation of Women in Health Care Planning, was formed in November of 1972, in response to news revelations about the clandes- tine activities surrounding the formation of a local abortion clinic. The group wanted, "an input of women into health services that serve women and to have women representatives on the governing boards of such facilities," (their statement in the Feminist House newsletter, 1972). They were primarily concerned with Family Planning Medical Services, a proposed abortion clinic organized by J. R. Willson, author of the burned Obstetrics and Gynecolggy textbook and head Of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Michigan Medical School, and two other men. C.C.R.W.H. demanded fifty percent repre- sentation of consumers (women) on the board of directors. F.P.M.S. had hoped that the Board of Regents at the University Of Michigan would O.K. the University purchase of a building to be leased to F.P.M.S. so that the clinic could conduct research while per- forming abortions and offering other services. C.C.R.W.H. was highly distrustful of a "research-oriented clinic" and, after they felt F.P.M.S. had misled them and bargained in bad faith (F.P.M.S. appointed a seven-member board, including two female nurses and five males, prior to the meeting to be attended by C.C.R.W.H. at which the board was to be discussed and decided on), they attempted to end F.P.M.S. An appeal to the Board of Regents was successful and the building purchase vetoed 48 in December of 1972. By March 28, 1973 F.P.M.S. was ready to give up on the proposed clinic. After the success in stopping F.P.M.S., many of the partici- pants in C.C.R.W.H. began planning the "Community Women's Clinic"; the group was formed March 12, 1973. On April 15, 1973, at a meeting in St. Andrews Church, to which interested persons concerned with women's health care were invited, the Community Women's Clinic elected a co- ordinating committee to coordinate its four to five task forces. The organization's goal was "high quality, sympathetic health care at a reasonable cost," which, they perceived, was possible only in a consumer controlled clinic. (Letter to Michigan Daily, April 12, 1973) By June Of 1973, C.W.C., which was still in the process of organizing, was more specific and concrete in their statement of goals. They planned "to provide services by December of 1973, (with the) cost (Of service) being determined by the patient on the basis of what she feels she can afford." The C.W.C. aimed at ". . . promoting three guiding concerns: 1) The right of women to control their own bodies, 2) Demystification of professional knowledge and skills, and 3) Develop- ment of self-sufficiency and self-control in women through knowledge about their own bodies." (Michigan Daily, June 21, 1973, p. 4) With the loss of the anticipated revenue-sharing money (they had requested $50,000.00), C.W.C. suffered a serious set-back, but that did not wholly account for its demise. One major proposed scheme for creating the capital needed to form the clinic was to receive loans, or sell shares promising approximately 4-1/2 percent interest to in- vestors. This suggestion produced an ideological debate between those 49 who favored it and those who saw such a "capitalist venture'I as unpalatable, suggesting instead interest-free loans. While some parti- cipants perceived this to be the crux of the group's problems, others reported that personality problems, "power tripping" on the part of one or two women, made continuing involvement impossible for them. Whatever dealt the final blow to the Community Women's Clinic, it had ended by early fall, 1973. Media groups Several groups directed their energies toward consciousness- raising, aiding the flow of information between groups in the Women's Movement and/or providing the community at large with an opportunity to come in contact with the Women's Movement. While several groups published statements of purpose or informative pamphlets (PROBE: The, Feminist Mistake, Radical Lesbians: Purple Star, the Commission for Women at the University of Michigan: Women's Information Network, GAWK: "People Call Us Names," the Women's Crisis Center, and Feminist House), only four groups organized specifically around the feminist production of newsletters, newspapers and film: Women's Liberation Newsletter, Revolutionary Lesbians (Spectre), The Women's Film Collec- tive and Herself. The Women's Liberation Newsletter was begun in early summer, 1970 by a young woman who left town shortly afterward. It was continued by three women who had been involved in early women's groups (in the Younger/Radical branch) and all Of whom were students. While the group was based in an apartment (loaned to it for the summer months by a 50 participant), three mimeographed issues were circulated locally. After the lease ran out, they moved to the Women's Office in the Stu- dent Activities Building on campus and involved themselves in the formation of the Women's Coalition. Four more issues were circulated, the last one printed in February of 1971. W.L.N. sought primarily to enhance communication between local women's groups and, thus, was complementary to the "mass meetings" sponsored by the Coalition. W.L.N. itself stated a policy of openness, and printed any material it received from a woman. The second media-oriented group to emerge in Ann Arbor was an exclusive, self-proclaimed "radical" group (actually consisting of only two women), which emphasized a combination of Marxist and Radical Lesbian perspectives. Revolutionary Lesbians, the result Of a schism in Radical Lesbians in Spring, 1971 (see p. 32 above), published five issues of Spectre beginning in March and ending in December of 1971. The paper was distributed in Ann Arbor through the University bookstore and was sold outside Ann Arbor by subscription. The Women's Film Collective, formerly the Charlotte Perkins Gilman Collective (see p. 22 above), formed early 1971. The group sought to "demistif(y) the medium (film) by educating women in the technology of film-making," while producing a film "by, for and about women." "The project will enable experienced film-makers to further develop their skills and share their knowledge with other women." (Their statement in Women's Liberation Newsletter #7, February, 1971) The group sponsored a Women's Film Festival March 25-29, 1971 on the University of Michigan campus, including several films and 51 workshops. Prior to the festival, the group heatedly debated the proposed presence Of men at the festival; they concluded that the screenings would be mixed and the workshops following would be either mixed or all women. The group characterized themselves as a mix of political perspectives, values and life-styles. At its peak (summer, 1971) there were twenty-five participants, but by April of 1972 there were five; it seems the group had ended by summer of 1972. (Ann Arbor News, April 16, 1972) The most successful media group was also the last formed during the period 1968-1973: Herself. With the $500.00 the group received from the Steinum/Sloan benefit held February 14, 1972, they were able to procure an office located next to the Feminist House office. The fifteen-women group, committed to bringing information about the Women's Movement, especially local issues, to local women, published their first issue in April of 1972. When Herself formed, it attempted to assure there would be no hierarchy and that the group would be open to all women, requiring only brief commitment, e.g., for one issue, and positions would be rotated. Their goal was to teach skills to women while putting out an informative paper. Because of its structure the staff turnover was high and people with more time to spend had more influence on the nature of the paper, besides which, a long-time participant noted, ". . . it's rather chaotic. It's certainly not the most efficient structure, but it's good for the community." The founding members 52 were mostly non-students whose average age was twenty-six, but the staff characteristics varied tremendously with the turnover. With their third issue, something of an exclusive or "scoop" on China, from two local women who had recently returned with photos and some interesting information, Herself received inquiries from all over the United States. By the fifth issue they had more out-Of-state subscribers than local buyers and so felt compelled to shift their focus from local issues to both local and national issues.- "It's still a struggle to decide which to focus on," explains the only founding member still with the paper. Today Herself is an ongoing organization, publishing approximately eight issues a year. Community_outreachgroups By 1972, the exclusive campus orientation of the Younger/ Radical branch was fading and was being replaced by an increasing interest in "local women" and "non-students," as they were referred to by members of this branch. , Concern for non-student women had not been totally absent prior to 1972. A group of local abortion counselors had, since 1971, assisted student and non-student women in procuring abortions (espec- ially in New York), and the Women's Community School had taught several courses, ranging from Feminism to handi-crafts, all of which were open to all women, and many of which were held off-campus. Both the Women's Community School, which ran from the fall of 1971 through the summer of 1972, the Women's Health Collective, with the efforts directed toward both student and non-student women, 53 were part of this transition. This move was also encouraged by the single-issue groups, such as abortion reform and repeal, in which mem- bers of both branches of the Women's Movement and previously uninvolved "local women" intermingled. Elements of what I have labelled "the Cluster Group," because Of their many ties and close interaction, are Feminist House, the Women's Crisis Center, GAWK and Herself. These groups, marking the culmination of the shift, were formed, chose their location and their tactics in an effort to shift, physically and ideolog- ~ically, from a campus orientation to an emphasis on the larger commun- ity.33 A Feminist House, planned since fall of 1971 by a few women highly involved with the Younger/Radical branch, was to be the physical center of the local Feminist Movement, hoping to house most local groups (in the Younger/Radical branch). To fund this center, they planned the Gloria Steinum/Margaret Sloan benefit speeches on February 14, 1972. The benefit was a surprising success, clearing $2,500.00. From this, Feminist House received $1,000.00 and the rest was divided among other groups in the Younger/Radical branch, in a mass meeting including representatives from almost all groups in the Younger/Radical branch. Feminist House was conceived of as being a formally structured organization which would help to initiate and coordinate projects and groups. They planned to enter into a partnership with the Women's 33One may infer an infusion of Leftist politics, shunning the "bourgeois" University in favor of "the workers." 54 Crisis Center and some funding proposals were drawn up emphasizing this relationship. There was a heavy overlap of core people early in the development of these organizations. But Feminist House began encountering problems as soon as they set about finding a location. The rents in Ann Arbor were high and no house had yet been found which could be reasonably afforded, so they finally settled on an office in town in the interim. The Office _ was small and could not house the Women's Crisis Center which then located in a small office in a local church. In addition to the problems of lack of space, early in its development, Feminist House was significantly restructured with the formation of the Gay Awareness Women's Kollective (GAWK), a primarily lesbian organization. Since Feminist House had been heavily lesbian from the outset, this diversion of energy was very significant. Though GAWK maintained an affiliation with Feminist House and held meetings there, some participants of both GAWK and Feminist House perceived this as the manifestation of the "Gay/Straight split" in the larger Women's Movement.34 Feminist House did serve as a clearinghouse for local informa- tion, publishing irregularly a newsletter (not unlike the Women's Lib- eration Newsletter) including statements by and activities of local groups in the Younger/Radical branch. With the addition of serious disagreement about the goals of Feminist House (base fOr social activities to encourage communication 34See Freeman (1975: 134-142) for a discussion of this wide- spread phenomenon. 55 and solidarity vs. base for political action) and ebbing enthusiasm, the Feminist House group dissolved early in 1973, though the Office was maintained by GAWK until the end of 1973. After several local rapes and "horrendous assaults" (as one respondent described them), the Women's Crisis Center group was formed in the fall Of 1971; concern about rape was, throughout, central to the organization. The original core group consisted of women in their 20's, most Of whom were students (at the University Of Michigan). Their goal for the Women's Crisis Center was to Offer services to women in crisis situations while attempting to raise their conscious- ness via a feminist perspective on their situation. The core group postponed opening the center when they realized they did not possess the requisite counseling skills. The organization then waned and, early in 1972, experienced a significant membership change in both the core group and the larger group. The new women, most of whom were older (approximately 24-25) and many of whom were graduate students, sought to make the Crisis Center more "professional," and advocated, among other changes, formal organization of the group. Although the altered group was more effi- ciently organized and did provide volunteer counselors with training, there was an increasing dissatisfaction on the part of several partici- ' pants. Particularly those women who had been involved in the earlier group felt that the "professional types" were "into power," (as one participant related), and many were displeased with the group's apparent loss of a radical perspective. Finally they left the Crisis Center altogether, as one participant observed, "the radical women left 56 because they were too Often outvoted by the more conservative women who wanted to work within the system rather than to challenge it.“ One who supported the new direction of the Crisis Center noted, "We began as a rape crisis center, the first in the country, but we soon found We couldn't limit our work to that problem. Other groups were action-oriented or ideologically-oriented, but none provided services." The Women's Crisis Center is an on-going organization. Two other groups which grew out of this shift in emphasis from the campus to the local community in the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor were GAWK and Herself. GAWK's original goal was to raise the consciousness in the city about lesbianism (thus their name, Gay Awareness Women's Kollec- tive). Both their publications, “People Call Us Names" and the lesbian issue of Herself sought to increase local awareness while helping those women who were "coming out" (deciding they were lesbians and/or openly calling themselves Lesbians). But this emphasis was short-lived and soon GAWK was primarily a social organization. As has been noted, Herself sought to increase communication within the local Women's Movement and especially at their first meet- ings they encouraged participation by women from Church organizations, the League of Women Voters, N.O.W., and organizations in the Younger/ Radical branch. Summarypof local movement events The following events stand out, in this history of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor, as milestones, salient markers of time 57 to participants in the movement. These were the occasions when masses of women gathered together, felt their strength, created greater unity35 and often raised issues which were discussed at length afterward. These events were also significant in that they presented non-movement observers with a representation of the local Women's Move- ment; inasmuch as they were able to create favorable impressions, they also helped to recruit new participants to local Feminist groups and activities. The first major event was the University-sponsored Teach-In on Women, held October 9-11, 1970. In an attempt to demonstrate the University's interest in the Women's Movement, a "representative" group of wcmen was appointed by the University to create the teach-in. Between the conservative members' ignorance of the movement and the "radical women" who had found their way on the committee, the speakers invited included not only (then) Michigan Senator Martha Griffiths, but also a member Of Radicalesbians (in New York), a Marxist-Feminist and Robin Morgan, a radical Feminist poet. The first public workshop on Lesbian-Feminism was held at this conference. The three radical speakers demonstrated unity of purpose; they came to speak with women (not to them), emphasizing "sisterhood" and commitment to the Women's Movement. They also came to embarrass the University, to demonstrate that the Women's Movement was not ameliorative, not reformist, but revolutionary. As such, they felt compelled to differentiate themselves 35Mass gatherings are seen as creating a sense of "vast support" by Blumer (1969: 16) and unity (Willson, 1972: 294). 58 from Martha Griffiths. When she spoke in a lecture style the following day, the radical Feminists ran down the aisles, "hooting and hollering and took the stage"; pandemonium followed, an observer recalled. Reac- tions to the event were mixed and much discussion ensued. On Halloween (October 31, 1970), Sisters Rising sponsored a "Witching"; since the event is described in detail above (p.23 ), suffice it to say that the event was a march of over 100 women, exclu- sively members of the Younger/Radical branch, which participants found not only invigorating, but also fun. In April of 1970, the Women's Film Collective sponsored the Women's Film Festival; it was held at the University and screened films by and about women. An art show by local women artists accompanied the event. The festival served to significantly swell the ranks Of the Film Collective. On February 14, 1972 (Valentine's Day) Gloria Steinum and Margaret Sloan (both of Mg, magazine) spoke before a capacity crowd at the Power Center (a large auditorium on the University Of Michigan cam- pus). As was noted previously, this event was sponsored by promoters of Feminist House and the $2,500.00 they cleared was divided among groups in the Younger/Radical branch. The following events were concerned with the abortion issue and were well attended by participants in both branches of the local Women's Movement, as well as many sympathetic non-movement persons. In October of 1971, a teach-in on abortion was held, sponsored by several local groups including Ann Arbor Abortion Action Coalition, the Women's Health Collective and the Women's Crisis Center. Over 150 59 people attended the fifteen workshops and speeches by Barbara Robb, one of six lawyers involved in the Michigan Women's Class Action Abor- tion suit, Flo Kennedy, a lawyer in a New York abortion law repeal suit, and Janet Wingo, a member of Welfare Rights Organization. The emphasis of the conference was the necessity of abortion law repeal and the speakers stressed the need for unity within the movement. On September 18, 1972 Steinum and Sloan returned to Ann Arbor and joined Candice Bergen, area singers, theatre groups and other speakers in a benefit for the abortion reform bill, Proposal B. Over 2,000 people attended despite a bomb-threat and a two-hour delay while the building was searched. Some of the speakers emphasized the neces- sity of abortion law repeal and Steinum called for free abortion on demand. CHAPTER VI STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MOVEMENT The foregoing history has been presented in an effort to provide background and contextual information for the following analy- sis. The structural characteristics to be examined are: recruitment, group structure, connections within the local movement, and separations and "fission" (Gerlach and Hine, 1970: 41) within the local movement. The complementary issue of the images presented (and perceived) by groups will then be briefly examined. Recruitment Freeman (1975: 47) sets forth the notion that a movement may be conceived of as having a center and a periphery, and though by this characterization she means to locate the founding cadre, the concept proves valuable in examining the two phases of involvement, recruitment and assimilation, of participants in this local movement, particularly the YOunger/Radical branch. Primary recruitment to the movement The first phase of recruitment is one in which potential par- ticipants are introduced to, and attracted to, the movement; they may 60 61 become acquainted with movement jargon, style of meeting, and may acquire at least a rudimentary understanding of movement ideology.36 The necessity for such socialization into the movement is suggested by a participant in an early CR group who explained, "We were a CR group in effect, but we didn't know it; we didn't have those cate- gories of experience."37 In the fall of 1970, the Women's Coalition, a "student" organization of women from diverse groups in the Younger/Radical branch of the Women's Movement, held four or five "mass meetings." Though the exact purpose Of the meetings is not clear, one apparently unintended consequence was that it familiarized many women with movement jargon and concepts.38 Women attending these meetings were from the Left (International Socialists, Young Socialists Alliance), Left-leaning women's groups (Sisters Rising), and other groups, including Radical Lesbians, rap groups and Consciousness Raising groups, as well as some women quite new to the movement. To engage in meaningful political discussion, they had to develop shared concepts. 36In the Women's Movement, this involves becoming acquainted with the ideological debates, since there is no generally agreed upon ideology in the movement as a whole. 37The movement experience of founders (those who create the categories of experience) differs from later joiners. One participant in an early CR group remarked that she thought her position was an enviable one in that her group had grappled with and developed an analysis of their oppression and the position of women from scratch. 38The concepts and jargon were those that appeared in the rapidly increasing Feminist books and publications. 62 In the process of becoming involved in the Women's Movement, women learned to translate their anger, perceptions and actions into terms, perceptions and experiences provided by, and/or consistent with, the perspective(s) of the Women's Movement.39 Forums such as the early "mass meetings" may have allowed women to be socialized into the move- ment by Observing the style of meeting and sharing their insights and understanding of the movement's analysis of the position of the sexes in society, goals, strategies and jargon. As evidence of the educative function and style of these meetings, a participant recalled, "There would be thirty of forty women in the room and two women would discuss Women's Liberation."40 Recruitment into the Movement Center in the Younger/Radical branch Several authors (Zald and Ash, 1966; Kanter, 1968) examined the rewards movement organizations offer to: 1) encourage participation and 2) maintain commitment; but little attention has been directed toward the mechanisms and the process by which a peripheral participant 39The perspective(s) evolve(s) overtime; different groups have different perspectives and rhetoric (which are tied to ideological differences). 40The Origins of these women's familiarity with Feminism is not known by me; however, some local participants attended Feminist conferences in other cities (e.g., New York), and those women who had participated in CR groups were familiar with the terrain of Feminist politics and some of the existing movement literature. 63 becomes more deeply involved in the organization and moves into the ongoing, dynamic "center" of the movement (an exception is Useem, 1972).“ A peripheral participant may be defined as one who is involved in activities which require only brief and/or limited commitment to, and concern with, the specific issue at hand, e.g., a volunteer coun- selor at the Women's Crisis Center. A woman may remain on the peri- phery of the movement, performing such tasks and then may leave the movement if, for example, her concern is with helping crisis victims not with Feminism or the Women's Movement. Or she may become more interested in, and committed to, the movement and may move into the movement "center." Other observers also differentiate between these two levels of participation. Useem (1972: 461) distinguishes between those who participate in and support the movement, and those who are committed to "building the movement." Oberschall (1973: 159) suggests the dis- tinction can be made not only on commitment to the movement ideology, but also on the amount of time and effort devoted to the movement. As a participant is drawn into the movement center, she will 42 be absorbed into movement friendship networks (as Useem notes, 1972: 4'Useem, 1972, studied participants in the Draft Resistance Movement and concluded that where many new participants were drawn into an organization, a need was created for maintenance Of continuity. The processes by which this occurred involved incorporation Of participants into existing friendship networks, and ideological and personal trans- formation of the new participants. 42But, as Freeman notes (1972), among "unstructured" groups, her access to the "center" may be contingent upon her ability to meet certain informal requirements (e.g., age, sexual preference). 64 452), her commitment to the movement ideology will be enhanced, she will conceive Of herself as a "Feminist" and extra-movement ties may be severed.43 . In the Younger/Radical branch of the Women's Movement in Ann 44 Arbor there exists a pool of Feminists and Lesbian Feminists committed 'to "building the movement." They refer to themselves as the "Feminist Community," "Lesbian/Feminist Community" or "the Community."45 This center, or "community," which appears to consist Of ' several friendship networks, has produced many of the organizers of various local groups in the Younger/Radical branch.46 For example, the organizers of Feminist House were women who had been involved in Radical Lesbians and/or the Women's Community School; organizers of the Com- munity Women's Clinic included core members from Herself, Feminist House and the Women's Crisis Center. Those involved in this movement "center" appeared in the movement time and again throughout this six-year period (1968-1973) in 43See Kanter (1968) for further discussion of the process of "free(ing) the personality system from other commitments.“ (504-506) 44Lesbian-Feminists claimed to have greater unity than other groups. They did seem to have a clear sense of collective oppression, "consciousness of kind," and much commitment to, and involvement with, one another. In any case, the group marks an intriguing intersection between an oppressed group, a subculture, and participants in a radi- cal movement. 45See Nisbet (1966: 47-48) for discussion of the warm and unifying feelings engendered by the use Of the term "Community." 46This center may well provide a high proportion Of the "heavies" (informal leaders) Of groups. See the following discussion of group structure. 65 Ann Arbor. 'This group formed a pool from which participants were mobilized for specific groups or actions. Recruitment into specific movement groups Recruitment of new participants into specific groups is problematic; though the energy may be needed, if the participants are not adequately integrated into the existing group, they may alter its nature and direction. Useem (1972: 452) notes that a large influx of new participants, "lacking interpersonal loyalties and political com- mitments to the movement may swing the organization toward a less radical and less cohesive direction."47 Thus, the ability of groups to integrate members, after gaining initial interest, may determine their success. The majority Of the groups in the Younger/Radical branch of the local movement, with their avoidance of formal structure, and their emphasis upon participation by all interested wOmen, have been notably ineffective at integrating new members. Most groups experience such fluidity of membership that any guiding purpose is soon lost and, 47The kind of participants attracted to the group will be influenced by l) the choice of audience to which the group directs its recruiting efforts (e.g., does it announce its existence in local news- papers, movement publications or through friendship networks?). 2) the image the grou presents (including the choice of tactics; see Willson, 1970: 262), e.g., radical, conservative, inclusive (welcoming all) or exclusive (requiring specific commitment or member character- istics). The effectiveness of the presentation of the group image may enhance self-selection of like-minded persons, and 3) outside factors (e.g., intensification of the Vietnam war led to an increase in the number oi males joining the draft resistance movement) (Thorne's insight. 66 as Sagarin (1969: 93) has observed; "the organization i§_the meeting." A participant in the 1970-1971 Women's Coalition recalled, "it was a loose organization; there were people coming and going. You'd make a decision one week, new people would come in, then two weeks later, they'd question the first decision, revote and change it." In such a state, the organization's demise is not long in coming as it has little to sustain participants over time. In contrast, the structure and style of Operation of groups in the Older/Reform branch may enable groups to integrate new members with greater success. Through their formal organization, responsibility and authority are delegated to persons who promise a time commitment to the group, e.g., President and Vice-President of Ann Arbor N.O.W. are elected to two-year terms. Issues are decided upon and task forces and strategies Chosen with the assumption that the commitment will be maintained. While the likelihood of continuity is enhanced by this structure, the numerous small, informal task forces within groups in- crease the likelihood of developing friendships within the group. These friendships increase the probability of becoming integrated into the group--in addition to becoming absorbed in movement friendship networks --through frequent, informal interaction with "old-timers." (See Useem, 1974: 462 for a discussion of the importance of this phenomenon in the draft-resistance movement.) Structure In the study of the structure of social movements, most socio- logists assume a hierarchy; for example, Oberschall (1973: 146-147) 67 contends that "(l)eaders . . . are the architects of organization, ideology and mobilization for the movement," and he suggests it may be asked ". . . whether relatively leaderless movements are possible at all." While this concept of a core of leaders who create and direct the movement is descriptive of neither of the branches of the Women's Movement (especially on the local level), it is particularly untrue of the Younger/Radical branch. 'The Younger/Radical branch Gerlach and Hine (1970: 33), aware of the paucity of litera- ture concerning non-hierarchical social movements, have devised their own description of such movements. They explain that the "infra- structureu of a "movement organization can be Characterized as a network--decentralized, segmentary and reticulate." By this they mean the movement as a whole does not have formal leadership positions, though it may have several symbolic leaders, none Of whom control the movement, and that it is composed of many small groups which are con- nected to one another by a web-like network of friendships and other ties. This description captures the organization of the Younger/ Radical branch of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor. Freeman (1975: 51) suggests that, in contrast with the Older/Reform branch, this branch was experimental in its methods of organizing. Beginning with structures such as the Consciousness Raising group (created in 1969, [Hole and Levine, 1971: 137]). they favored anti-hierarchical 68 structures, created no formal structures and therefore referred to their groups as "unstructured." Freeman (1975: 51) suggests this style of organization was the product of experience in other movements, particularly the New Left, where equality and democracy were valued (at least in theory). Some participants justify the lack of formal structure by explaining that such a style is in keeping with the values (e.g., egalitarianism) and goals (e.g., increasing women's self-confidence and leadership skills) of the movement. For example, Herself has no formal structure, encour- ages participation by any interested women and, therefore, constantly trains new participants. An organizer justified the arrangement by saying, "It's certainly not the most efficient structure, but it's good for the Community." However, it may be that the non- or anti-hierarchical struc- ture in the Younger/Radical branch was less a continuation of the egalitarian ethic of other movement groups, than a strong reaction to the sexist oppression and tyranny experienCed by women in earlier New Left movement. The significantly less-than-equal status of women in the early New Left, e.g., SDS and anti-war groups, has been observed by several authors (Jones and Brown, 1968; Morgan, 1969; Piercy, 1970; Freeman, 1975; and Thorne, 1975). The experience Of struggling for change while being oppressed by one's "comrades" was a lesson not soon ‘ forgotten; women coming from this experience eschewed leadership or formal structure of any kind, feeling it was inherently oppressive (Hole and Levine, 1971: 156). A participant in Sisters Rising, a group which had emerged from the local chapter of SDS, explained, “you could 69 just see where they'd come from: macho, ego-tripping leadership . . . ." Their style of group participation reflected their fear of leaders; remarks were prefaced with apologies and assurances that, "I don't want to lay a trip on you; this IS just my opinion." Heberle (1951: 272) notes that inasmuch as no group is without a structure, one can Observe an unequal distribution of power and influ- ence; Freeman (1972) concurs and points out the inevitable development of informal elites ("heavies") in "unstructured" groups which were prevalent in the Younger/Radical branch. A participant in Radical Les- bians recalled, "there was definitely a hierarchy, but it was an unspoken hierarchy. There were people who were stronger, who had been in the 'group longer, who were more vocal, who had more influence." (Useem, 1972: 456, describes a comparable situation in the draft resistance movement.) 'In the Younger/Radical branch inclusion in certain friendship groups may have made some participants more influential than others, "and other criteria were informally employed to designate "heavies," 48 e.g., marital status, sexual preference. Given the likelihood that 48It is possible that friendship ties within the organization and to other Feminist organizations could help establish a core group in a local community which could have access to most relevant informa- tion and could wield much influence. This may be another facet of the previously described "community," or these may be the influentials within that group. Access to informal positions of power and influence within a group requires time and energy; therefore, the fewer competing ties one has, the greater the likelihood of inclusion in the "heavies." If one sees participants in other groups socially that time can be used to exchange information. For these reasons and others, certain membership characteristics may be required for inclusion in the informal elites, 70 participants will eventually leave the group and/or "burn-out" (take an indefinite leave of absence from the movement because it is felt to be too demanding and exhausting), the possibility of the informal elites remaining the same people throughout is slim, but the character- istics requisite for inclusion may remain the same once the informal system is established, ". . . one of the most successful tactics of maintenance is to continuously recruit new people who 'fit it,'" (Free- man, 1972). 'In the Younger/Radical branch, the "heavies" were also bounded by the ideal of "leaderlessness" and could not openly go about the business of directing the group, besides which there were competing groups of informal leaders in some groups (e.g., at least one respondent perceived this situation existed in GAWK). Such a situation was not conducive to consistency in the direction the group took; it also allowed the influence of especially strong personalities to be writ large. 'As Gerlach and Hine note (1970: 44), pre-existing bonds and separations may heavily influence the course of "unstructured" groups. The Older/Reform branch ' Freeman (1975: 50) contends that groups in the Older/Reform branch generally had a style of organization involving electing officers by vote and conducting meetings in a formal, democratic fashion. How- ever, in Ann Arbor, groups in the Older/Reform branch do not fully e.g., Lesbianism, no children. It is my overall perception that the majority of "heavies" in the Younger/Radical branch of the Women's Move- ment in Ann Arbor from 1968-1973 were Lesbians. 71 conform to this model; though they do possess a formal structure and decision-making by vote, much of their work and decision-making takes 'place in committee or task force, where the situation "is much more informal," (as a member of the Commission for Women at the University of Michigan explained). Participants noted that while the Committee to Establish a Commission on Women for Washtenaw County (C.C.W.W.) had a chairperson and used formal procedure at business meetings, they emphasized auto- ' nomy and had several ongoing issue-oriented task forces; "Everyone said, '60 do your own thing,'" one participant explained. N.O.W. and The Commission for Women at the University Of Michigan operate in a similar manner. The membership in these task forces or committees is generally relatively fluid, and some participants have relatively lit- tle contact with the formal structure since many of the volunteers involved in committee do not attend the more formal bi-weekly business meetings. In the spirit of favoring autonomy, groups such as N.O.W. and C.C.W.W. lend their support, if sometimes in name only, to the efforts of activist individuals, declaring them, at their request, to be a committee or a subcommittee, and thus adding legitimacy to what was primarily an individual effort. Regarding decision-making, in spite of the trappings of democratic Operation, participants in each of the groups noted that in many cases decisions were made by those who were "in the know" or who were at the right place at the right time. Others were consulted when possible, but many decisions were never brought to a vote and 72 those deciding were more consistently those involved with the particular issue than those who were elected leaders. Concerning those decisions which were brought to a vote, one C.C.W.W. participant ex- plained, "Whoever was at the meeting made the decision; there seemed to be a lot of consensus." Members of both N.O.W. and C.C.W.W. main- tained that most of their decisions "were more or less consensus." Though there was often the formal procedure of making a motion and taking a vote, most projects started when one woman said, "I'm inter- ested in this. Let's do it!" and those who were interested joined with 'her and formed a committee or a task force--an issue-oriented group ,*under the umbrella of the larger organization. I Despite their lack of conformity to a "Robert's Rules of nggp? style of operation, these organizations did possess a formal structure and did go about their business differently than did women in the "unstructured" groups. TO begin with, they did not fear hier- archy or leadership and many of the women in C.C.W.W., N.O.W., N.W.P.C. and FOCUS were women with experience in public speaking, leadership, and formal group participation. This is partly attributable to their age (most of them are in their 30's), to their occupations (most of them are professionals), and to their life-style (many have children and, because of their class position, may have had time and the inclina- tion to become involved in P.T.A., Planned Parenthood, etc.). This is not to say that each and every woman was a leader, but they did not distrust leaders and were comfortable with their structure and style Of organization. (They generally justified their organization by not- ing that it was effective and pragmatic, rather than that it was in 73 keeping with their ideology.) They also possessed skills and bureaucratic "know how" which assisted them in attaining their goals. As a participant in the abortion reform referendum explained, I'The older women knew how to organize, how to get things done. They weren't afraid to appear to be authoritarian." Summary Freeman (1975: 10, 51) suggests that it is not ideology, but the structure and style of organization which primarily differentiates the two branches, but examination of the movement in Ann Arbor suggests this difference may be neither as clear-cut nor as central as she suspects. Regarding structure, it might be more fruitful to conceive of the movement as groups placed along a continuum, from, at left, informally structured and "leaderless" groups and, on the right, those with a formal, hierarchical structure and formal decision-making. In Ann Arbor, one would find it heavily weighted to the left of center in numbers of groups.49 There would also be several groups in the center, with voting and/or some formal structure, e.g., a rotating chairperson. An example is the Community Women's Clinic (C.W.C.), which possessed a somewhat formal structure; it had a chairperson and a treasurer, but was peopled primarily by young, student-affiliated women. 49However, if each Of the relatively autonomous committees of umbrella groups such as C.C.W.W. were counted as a separate group, there would be much less numerical disparity. 74 Connections within the local movement Possessing some notion of the characteristics of participants in the Women's Movement and the kind of structures they devise, one must ask what binds them together, both as members of one movement and as participants in smaller groups. Connections between the two branches Within the local Women's Movement as a whole, a sense of unity is engendered when outsiders attempt to delegitimize the movement or make statements regarding the sanctity of the traditional woman's role and the depravity of non-traditional women. Gerlach and Hine (1970: 35) observe that segmented groups, when attacked, "conceptually . become one people." Certainly, inasmuch as the Feminist analysis of society emphasizes systematic oppression of women as women, they share a sense Of collective oppression. In the history of the local Women's Movement in Ann Arbor, certain issues increased solidarity; rape, for example, was an issue on which women at all points in the gamut of Feminist perspectives could agree, at least regarding the necessity of eliminating it, if not upon its political significance. Even GAWK, which never professed to being a "political" organization and which generally held itself aloof from "straight women's issues," was involved in anti-rape programs, e.g., their pamphlet ("People Call Us Names") stated, "We join forces with other women's groups to stop assault." The Women's Caucus of H.R.P. (the Human Rights Party) joined the Women's Crisis Center in 75 an attempt to reform the city's legal code regarding rape and police treatment of rape victims. Another issue around which Feminists from both branches could rally was abortion legislation, the right of a woman to control her body. The mass meetings of the Michigan Women's Abortion Suit plain- tiffs and interested persons were held not only to generate support for, and interest in, the suit, but also to encourage a sense of soli- darity among concerned Michigan women. "The suit was an organizational device; they wanted 1,000 plaintiffs because they wanted to bring them all together in a common endeavor, to show them that there were a lot of like-minded people out there," the area coordinator of the suit recalled. Despite the fact that there were two campaigns in Michigan concerned with abortion, with different goals (reform and repeal of the laws) and different strategies (referendum, class action suit), there was much overlap of effort and sympathies. Certain groups attracted wide support and endorsement from other groups; representation of Women in Health Care Planning was endorsed and supported by approximately twenty local groups interested in women's health care, including the Women's Health Collective, the Women's Crisis Center and N.O.W. (Ann Arbor News, December 14, 1972, p. 32) At the outset, both Feminist House and Herself, in accord with the broadening of scope in the Younger/Radical branch in 1972, sought to include input from all women concerned with women's issues. Feminist House succeeded in holding two meetings which drew participants from a broad range of women's groups, including participants in N.O.W. 76 and the League of Women Voters, as well as many women involved in the Younger/Radical branch. Herself attempted to include information about, and to involve, women from diverse groups in Ann Arbor. In their first issue, they interviewed members of Church Women United, included arti- cles on the Women's Film Collective and the Michigan Women's Abortion suit, and printed an extensive list of local organizations and services. On the whole, however, ties between the two branches (Younger/ Radical and Older/Reform) of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor were few. In examining the lack of inter-connections between specific move- ment organizations, Freeman's distinction between the two branches correspondends to a division keenly felt by participants, and as Free- man says, "In many ways there were two different movements. . . ." (1975: 49) The connections between the two branches were minimal, and those which did exist were generally channeled through a "border group" such as FOCUS or the Women's Crisis Center, which, by virtue of their unique combination of membership characteristics, goals and/or strate- gies, were found to be acceptable to both sides. Pre-existing friendship networks encourage solidarity and often increase communication among groups, as do membership overlap and extra-movement linkages, but these were almost totally absent between the Younger/Radical and Older/Reform branches in Ann Arbor. There was, however, a connection between the branches in the form Of the "Free Agent" (my term). People who were self-starters and who had ongoing projects which brought them into contact with several groups which may have had no other ties to one another. If a "Free Agent" 77 were respected, she would likely increase communication and a sense of solidarity within the local Feminist population. Marsha was a con- spicuous example; she launched a dynamic critique of sexism in the schools, especially concerning discrimination against young women in athletics. This endeavor won her respect and support in both camps. An affable, intelligent, but unpretentious, independent married woman in her early 40's, she was almost uniquely suited for the role of "Free Agent." The Women's Advocate at the University of Michigan was also a person who connected groups in both branches. (One woman, Claire, held the position from October, 1970 through December, 1972.) She served as a go-between for many groups which might never have had any communication with one another otherwise. Her position, with its exceptional access to information (she was known and respected by participants in both branches), significantly increased the information flow, especially within the Younger/Radical branch. One attempt by the Advocate's office to increase communication and/or coordinate efforts between the various groups which made up the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor was a list of organizations, places and positions of interest to women. Issued in'October of 1972, it listed thirty-one organizations, with brief explanations of goals or services offered, an address and phone number. It included the entire range of women's groups concerned with women's issues, from the League of Women Voters to Female Self-Defense (taught by the Packard House residents). 78 Connections among groups in the Older/Reform branch N.O.W., W.P.C., C.C.W.W. and the Commission for Women at the University of Michigan with their secondary ties to such organizations as the Democratic Women's Caucus, women employees at the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan, Planned Parenthood, Women's Auxiliary of Jaycees and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom were a movement unto themselves. These organizations had a significant membership overlap among them and certainly agreed upon strategies and larger goals. Their goals were to assist women who were employed and to 'eliminate discrimination by sex in employment. N.O.W. and C.C.W.W. were also concerned with problems faced by employed women with children and divorced women (especially child-support); they were concerned particularly, though not exclusively, with middle-class women and middle-class occupations. Members of these organizations were (white) middle-class (predominantly professional) women with school-aged chil- dren and were married or divorced. Both N.O.W. and C.C.W.W. were involved with issues concerning young people in school, e.g., teen-age parents, high school education (especially concerning discrimination by sex) and hot lunch programs (which Ann Arbor does not have). "We worked first on issues that had almost universal support . . . and chose not to deal with issues (such as Lesbianism), which would divide the membership," explained a long-time participant in C.C.W.W. In sum, they were concerned with issues and goals relevant to themselves. 79 Another reason for solidarity within the Older/Reform branch was an explicit division of labor; N.W.P.C. was working primarily at the state level, lobbying in the state legislature; N.O.W. aided N.W.P.C. and needed their services since N.O.W. was a non-profit organi— zation and could not lobby; C.C.W.W. worked at the city and then county level, while the Commission for Women at the University of Michigan dealt with issues concerning the University. The Commission for Women at the University of Michigan had few formal ties with the other organi- zations in this branch primarily because the kinds of issues it dealt with did not lend themselves to coalitions with groups concerned with local or state issues. Women in these organizations also agreed upon means and strategies to achieve their goals; they "played by the rules" of the existing political order. They were very persistent, innovative, and they did make demands, but they did not employ tactics such as disrupt- ing city council meetings (as GAWK, H.R.P. and Gay Men did in 1973, p. 87 below) or in other ways demonstrate dissatisfaction with, or disrespect for, methods of input which were (or appeared to be) open to them. A member of N.O.W. explained, "We've gotten what we wanted n50 without going to more radical means . . and went on to speculate, "maybe that means we're not demanding enough." 50Lipsky (1968: 1149) suggests that, “Groups whose members derive tangible satisfactions from political participation will not condone leaders who are stubborn in compromise or appear to question the foundations of the system." 80 The organizations in this branch were quite stable, the position of the group on specific issues was generally clearly spelled out, and ties with other organizations were Often formal, e.g., they created a joint task force on a particular issue. Connections among groups in the Younger/Radical branch As Gerlach and Hine have noted (1970: 55-56) decentralized, segmentary, reticulate movements are dependent upon informal ties, such as friendship networks, for communication and cooperation. Having grown out of pre-existing communication-networks, many groups were connected to one another through friendships established in other movements. For example, some participants in Sisters Rising were acquainted with two women in Radical Lesbians, having worked together in Ann Arbor $05. The numerous formal extra-movement linkages which helped to connect groups in the Older/Reform branch were, for the most part, absent from this branch, though many communications networks were established and/or maintained through involvement in the University. For example, another tie between Sisters Rising and Radical Lesbians was the Residential College (East Quad); both groups met in East Quad and some participants in each group lived in Residential College and were acquainted with one another. The movement center or "community" (several movement friend- ship networks composed of women dedicated to "building the movement," see p. 63 above) seems to have been the basis for innumerable informal connections within the Younger/Radical branch. In this active 81 communication network, participants from several groups shared information and sought or offered assistance for group endeavors. A related source of connection was overlap in membership between groups --some participants were involved in more than one women's group at the same time. An overlap in core members assured closer ties between groups, as is evidenced by elements of the "cluster group": Women's Crisis Center/Feminist House/GAWK. Although most connections between groups in the Younger/Radi- cal branch were informal, some formal ties did exist, e.g., the Women's Crisis Center was, ". . . incorporated under Feminist House." (Herself, v. 2, no. 1, p. 22) Several groups cO-sponsored events such as the November, 1971 teach-in on abortion which was sponsored by A.A.A.A.C. (the Abortion Action Coalition), the Women's Health Collective and the Women's Crisis Center. But these connections, both formal and informal, were not perceived by some participants as being sufficient, and other devices, such as women's centers, coordinating groups, events and publications, were specifically designed to enhance communication and to coordinate efforts. The importance of such devices, or at least the extent to which a need for them was felt, may be suggested by their frequency. As early as 1969 there was an attempt by members of the existing CR groups to form some kind of alliance. The Women's Libera- tion Newsletter, begun in early summer, 1970, made a concerted effort to increase communication between local groups in the Younger/Radical branch. The Women's Liberation Newsletter was affiliated with the Women's Coalition (which held approximately four "mass meetings") and 82 the Women's Liberation Room in the Student Activities Building, both of which were attempts to bring women together, literally, and to assist in coordinating efforts (neither was successful). The teach-in on women at the University of Michigan (October 9-11, 1970) was intended by some of its coordinators to "get the movement going in Ann Arbor." By January of 1971, the Women's Advocate (and Kaplan, Women's Liberation Newsletter #6) and members of the Coalition felt that the organization was ineffective in increasing unity and in coordinating efforts. While the organization disbanded, Claire (the Women's Advo- cate) submitted to those interested her idea for a Women's Union at the University of Michigan which would create a women's center to co- ordinate efforts and offer other services. The Women's Advocate's Office also sponsored two important connective devices: 1) The Informa- tion Fair at the University of Michigan (October, 1971) at which a representative array groups was gathered, and 2) Listings of all area Feminist groups (issued in October, 1971 and October, 1972). In the last Women's Liberation Newsletter (#7, February, 1971), a group was planning a women's center which would be located near campus and would provide space for the many existing groups in the Younger/Radical branch. (This seems to be the origin of the idea for Feminist House.) The first all-women's dance was held in the Spring of 1971; increasingly, these dances were a chance to socialize together and to 83 . demonstrate solidarity between lesbian and heterosexual women in the Younger/Radical branch.51 A larger room in the Student Activities Building was procured for the school year 1971-72 which allowed for some meeting space for student-affiliated participants in the Women's Movement' (pre-) Feminist House met in this office until March of 1972 when it moved into its office on Liberty Street. The founders of Feminist House organized the Steinum/Sloan benefit, the proceeds of which were divided between the existing groups in the Younger/Radical branch at a mass meeting which had wide representation from local groups. Feminist House itself was supposed to be the ultimate connection, bringing most groups together under one roof. (It failed.) Herself helped to increase communication between local groups both within the Younger/Radical branch and between branches. On September 27, 1972, four women, one a founder of Herself and another the Women's Advocate, drew up tentative plans for an event similar to the Steinum/Sloan benefit. It was to be an attempt to pool efforts and to split the money that was obtained. A meeting about this event was held on October 12, 1972 in the Union at the University of 5'Such events are indicative of the manner in which the Younger/Radical branch of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor was more bounded, more exclusive and more sectarian than the Older/Reform branch, and thus encompassed more aspects of participants' lives. Zald and Ash (1966: 331) note that not only do exclUsive groups demand more of a participant's time, they also ". . . more extensively permeate all sections of the member's life." Kanter (1972: 48-49) recognizes the importance of socializing together (e.g., dancing) for enhancing a sense of unity and defining the "in-group." 84 Michigan. The "Weekend on Women," held in late spring or early summer, 1973, may have been the outcome of this meeting. While publications, events and other efforts attempted to increase communication between groups and-coordinate efforts, "con- sciousness of kind," cohesion, and commitment in this branch were also enhanced by altering appearance, by adopting similar styles of attire and grooming. "Feminine" attire was discarded in favor of that which represented "unity with the workers" by left-leaning Feminists, e.g., participants in Sisters Rising and other women who had been actively involved with S.D.S. or socialist groups could be recognized by their overalls and work shirts. Others, such as participants in GAWK, favored jeans, boots, flannel shirts, and were likely to don the "dyke costume" (vest, hat or cap, jacket) for social events such as the all— women's dances. Participants in most of the groups were encouraged to cease using make-up, curlers and other "beauty aids," and to stop shaving legs and underarms. By these distinctions, participants in the Younger/Radical branch could often recognize other participants, when passing on the street, for example, and might choose to speak, but would probably nod or greet one another even if they were not acquainted. Separations and fission Separations between the two branches Regarding group distinctions and differentiation within a social movement, Gerlach and Hine (1970: 41—42) Observe, 85 In a segmentary system (one composed of a great variety of . . . groups or cells which are essentially independent) each unit has different ideas about how to achieve the more general objectives of the movement and each interprets the movement ideology in its own way. As has been shown, the structure of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor is aptly described as segmentary and, like the movement as a whole, the many units tend to fall into one of the two broad descriptive categories which are the two branches. Though groups are capable of affecting alliances, or at least informally working together, on broad issues (e.g., abortion legislation) between branches, for the most part, the division into the Younger/Radical and Older/Reform branches remains intact for several reasons. As Lipsky notes (1968: 1149), the nature of a group's goals and their actual or anticipated rewards will affect their choice of strategies. Those participants who seek to refonn the system, e.g., those who endeavor to equalize wages, job opportunities and legal rights between women and men (as ends in themselves), are not likely to Challenge the bases or the rules of the system. One must also consider the fact that participants in the Older/Reform branch were working women (predominantly professionalS) and most were married; hence, they had a greater investment in the existing system and were less likely to question it. Festinger and Carlsmith (1959, in Kanter,. 1968: 505) posited that the higher personal investment one had in some activity, the more highly s/he would evaluate it and, thus, the greater likelihood that s/he would continue the behavior. Also, their ability to achieve goals, such as reforms in the system, e.g., concerning employment discrimination at the University of Michigan, was enhanced 86 by the expertise which they acquired through professional training, employment or volunteer participation. In short, they knew how to "work the system." For example, FOCUS, the group which filed the suit against the University of Michigan, was comprised of women who were familiar with bureaucracy (from their participation in the Democratic Party Women's Caucus) and many of them were lawyers. These conditions encouraged their positive evaluation of the existing system anu increased the likelihood that their goals would be to alter that system so that women would be allowed equal opportunity to work within it. In contrast, women in the Younger/Radical branch, especially as it was influenced by Leftist ideology, denounced the system and contended that playing by the rules would bring no change (see the dis- cussion of their goals, fn. p. 13). Indeed, inasmuch as they repre- sented a relatively powerless aggregate of people (poor female students, those employed in low-paying jobs, and lesbians), they were probably correct in their assessment. They had few resources with which to bargain and, of necessity, they resorted to protest or other appeals to the support of more powerful third parties when they sought rewards (Lipsky, 1968: 1145). For example, the participants in GAWK were flatly denied their request to display in the public library a collage which they had created. They responded to the refusal by protesting in front of the library. As Lipsky (1968: 1149) notes, groups which are relatively powerless and do not anticipate material rewards from their political efforts are likely to question to rules of the game, as indeed GAWK members did. When Gay Pride Week was denied by the heavily Republican city council in 1973 and Gay persons and H.R.P. 87 (Human Rights Party) members despaired of even bringing the issue up again for discussion, a city council meeting was disrupted by them and had to be postponed (though support of Gay Pride Week was never passed). Another tactic employed exclusively by participants in the Younger/Radical branch (and viewed as delegitimizing by participants in the Older/Reform branch) was the "zap tactic" (Freeman, 1975: 112), such as the Lesbians' inclination for spray painting slogans on build- ings, fences, billboards. In contrast, the Older/Reform branch favored a studied, rational, almost plodding approach to the issues to which they addressed themselves. This difference in choice of tactics between the two branches of the Women's Movement in Ann Arbor is the result of differences in membership Characteristics, actual or anticipated rewards, values, and goals; For example, groups whose ideology demands revolution may quickly find their credibility lost when less than radical or unorthodox tactics are employed. In short, groups present a "face" or "image" which is consistent with their goals, and the choice of tactics is an integral part of this presentation (see Willson, 1969: 226). Factionalization and schismogenesis Factionalization and schismogenesis are characterized as segmentation and fission by Gerlach and Hine (1970: 41-42) who note that in movements which are "decentralized, segmentary and reticulate" (1970: 63-78) fission is a creative force resulting in the proliferation of groups. It also gives rise to unlimited permutations of stragegies and elements of the larger movement ideology. The prevalence of this 88 pattern at once encourages experimentation and assures that no single failure will be too keenly felt by the ongoing whole. The Older/Reform branch Within the Older/Reform branch, there were conspicuously few factions and schisms. The fact that their organizations are not only 52 but also predominantly "umbrella" groups, may account for inclusive, this (Zald and Ash, p. 337). Only two separations occurred. The first was the withdrawal of the vast majority of N.O.W. members from the Democratic Women's Caucus after a dispute with the strong faction of 53 The second was a schism in U.A.W. (United Auto Workers) women. C.C.W.W. (the Committee to Establish a Commission on Women for Washtenaw County). A few women in the group had been divorced or were in the process of divorcing and were quite dissatisfied with certain lawyers; these women wanted to create a task force to examine these lawyers and to inform other women to avoid them. When the leaders of C.C.W.W. dis- approved of the task force, the intended task force became a faction and when the leaders of C.C.W.W. strongly encouraged them to discard their plan for fear it would delegitimize the larger group, the schism occurred; those interested in the endeavor severed ties with C.C.W.W. and continued with their project. 52Zaid and Ash (1966: 331) observe that the "inclusive" organization requires only brief or limited commitment of participants and its goals and policies do not define or restrict the participant's outside activities or behaviors. 53Freeman (1975: 80) notes a similar division in 1968 in the national organization Of N.O.W. 89 The Younger/Radical branch The proposition put forth by Zald and Ash (p. 337) that "The more the ideology of the (movement organization) leads to a questioning of the bases of authority, the greater the likelihood of factions and splitting," is born out by the Younger/Radical branch. As was noted above (p. 12), this branch Of the Women's Movement possesses not only an ethic of participation by all women and an emphasis upon non- hierarchy, but also a strong fear of leadership and tyranny. Partly as a result of this concern, there is much segmentation in the Younger/ Radical branch. In this proliferation of groups and this style of independence,54 when participants become dissatisfied with an organiza- tion (e.g., disagree with strategies, goals, or feel the group is un- successful), they will very likely withdraw their energies and support, singly or as a group, and regroup elsewhere or be absorbed into other movement activities (Gerlach and Hine, 1970: 77). The greater exclu- sivity and delineation of boundaries by groups may also increase the incidence of divisions (see Zald and Ash, 1966: 337). Another factor conducive to factionalization and schismogene- sis was noted by a long-time participant in this branch in Ann Arbor; she explained that such divisions occurred because "people have dif- ferent political perspectives," and those perspectives are considered to be of great importance. Hole and Levine (1971: 148) suggest that the separations were based on both ideology and structure, especially 54A long-time participant in the Younger/Radical branch remarked that groups are best characterized as autonomous and independ- ent. 90 early in the movement, "everything was so new and untested that the search for new forms led to intense intra-movement conflicts . . . (g)roups were forming, splitting over ideological and structural dis- agreements, regrouping and resplitting." As early as fall, 1970, there were identifiable factions within the Women's Coalition, and apparently within the Younger/Radical branch as a whole. The Women's Advocate explained, There were primarily two groups: 1) Academic, New Left women who were involved with men (politically). Some of them were in the Coalition but most of them were doing cau- cus things. They were gene rally graduate students, aged 21- 24; 2) Younger women students who were anti-academic, aged 19-22, who were more exclusively involved with women's groups. There was also a tight faction of Y.S.A. women who were attempting to "rule the roost." Among wOmen in the Younger/Radical branch, one's "politics" were very important. "Back then (1970-71) it was like a catechism; you had to have your own beliefs and state them openly. If you found someone who agreed with you completely, you had a friend," a participant recalled. The emphasis upon ideological purity made groups more exclu- sive, more clearly defined group boundaries, and made alliances between groups extremely difficult while increasing the likelihood of faction- alism and schismogenesis. (Zald and Ash, 1966: 337) Of Radical Les- bians it was said, "Every meeting was heavy, everything was deadly serious, even breaking up into small (discussion) groups (on the basis Of political perspective or sexual orientation); it was like if you get in the wrong group it was a life or death matter." Another parti- cipant explained, "You had to choose sides, in all the arguments, you would be pulled on one side or the other and if you didn't answer 91 right for your friend, she wasn't speaking to you. Friendships were ruined over things (like that)." As Zald and Ash (1966: 337) Observe, "Movement organizations concerned with . . . theoretical matters are more likely to split than movement organizations linked to bread and butter issues." Gerlach and Hine (1970: 53) contend that the level of personal commitment affects the nature and incidence of ideological differences. Since committed individuals are more likely to be concerned with ideological purity, and since exclusive organizations require greater commitment on the part of the participant, it is to be expected that ideological debates would be more common in the Younger/Radical branch (in which exclusive groups predominate) than in the Older/Reform branch (which is composed of inclusive groups). Thus, ideological debates are at once a product of, and reinforce, group exclusivity. Although the seriousness of political discussion in Radical Lesbians enhanced the development of factions within the organization, it was the growing popularity Of the group (along with personal dif- )55 which ferences and significant changes in personal relationships led to the schismogenesis and, ultimately, to the group's demise. Radical Lesbians became quite popular among those who would be "radi- cal," especially the residents in East Quad (the Residential College). "It became a fad: radical chic," noted a participant in the group. 55The two women who left the group had become lovers and some observers speculated that this affected their decision. Note this is a complexity which is relatively absent from straight (heterosexual) all-women groups. 92 This influx Of people less committed to the group--many of whom were bi-sexual or heterosexual--and who were not intensely concerned with how the Lesbians' struggle fit with other revolutionary movements (a question a founder had emphasized) since these new members were not well-integrated into the existing group, their appearance turned the group toward a less radical direction. (In his study of the Draft Resistance Movement, Useem, 1968: 452, observed that the influx of many new participants into an existing organization could significantly alter the direction of the group.) Finally, two core women left in disgust and formed Revolutionary Lesbians. "I guess they called themselves Revolutionary Lesbians because it was one cut above Radical," a parti- cipant in Radical Lesbians suggested. Within the Women's Crisis Center, there developed a minority faction which left, though not as a group. The disagreement resulted primarily from ideological differences. The gist of the disagreement was between two different goals: 1) providing a service for women, meeting their immediate "crisis" needs; or 2) raising their conscious- ness while assisting them, and the organization itself pressing for change in health care, social services, etc.56 Those who favored the second perspective were dissatisfied with what they felt the Women's Crisis Center was becoming ("just another service group") and left the organization without confronting the others. 56See Thorne, 1975, for a discussion of this conflict as it appeared in draft counseling in the Draft Resistance Movement of the 1960's. 93 Another group which split over an ideological dispute was the Community Women's Clinic, which was described by one participant as her "worst failure experience in the movement." Riding on the suc- cess Of Representation of Women in Health Care Planning (p. 47 above), C.W.C. was formed and was immediately beset with problems. Several participants suggested the reason it failed was intense disagreement about fund-raising, based on larger ideological differences. "We didn't want a male-directed family-planning abortion clinic; we wanted it controlled by the people who were using it," explained a participant. Some people felt that since this was the goal, the most pragmatic and efficient means should be employed to achieve it. But, as in the Women's Crisis Center, others disagreed and contended that the means were as crucial as the ends if the institution was to truly be an alternative; they did not want the C.W.C. to be a "capitalist venture“ paying in- vestors 4-1/2 percent interest. A struggle for change in structure and style of operation which posed a threat to the existing members, especially the "heavies," caused GAWK to produce a schism. (Factions had existed in GAWK from the-outset.) After GAWK had been in existence for several months and had settled into being primarily a social organization, several new lesbians entered--as a group. Since the organization was inclusive and one of its major goals was to be'a support group for Lesbians, these new parti- cipants were not formally discouraged from participation, but they were resented. A major reason for the rift between the long-time participants and the more recent participants was the changes the latter sought to 94 bring about in GAWK. They wanted more formal organization, more political action and, most importantly, they wanted to work with Gay men. To the "Old heavies" who felt they had been betrayed and oppressed by Gay men for too long, that was the last straw. Those who didn't immediately leave GAWK assumed an aloof posture, "The heavies would line up on one side of the room and the new women would sit on the other." While Freeman (1975: 10) de-emphasizes the importance of ideology in the Women's Movement and stresses instead the role of struc- ture, the factions and schisms suggest that for many participants, ideology was the yardstick by which they measured the value of their ongoing participation in a group. CHAPTER VII IMAGES Groups characterize themselves and their participants as certain kinds of people; they are both positively evaluated and dif- ferentiated from others through distinctive attire or by virtue of desirable qualities attributed to them, e.g., insight or wisdom. (Kanter, 1972: 115) The purpose of this positive evaluation and dif- ferentiation may be to attract members, to enhance and/or to maintain commitment or to create a favorable image Of the group among those from whom the group seeks rewards (including intervening third parties who might take up the protest cause; see Lipsky, 1968: 1145). Depend- ing upon their visibility, the images of groups are also affected by media characterizations (see Emling, 1974 for discussion of media effect on strategies). "The media portrayed the women who demanded repeal of anti-abortion laws as Crazies,“ a participant in both abortion reform and real efforts noted. The obvious effect of such a representation was to delegitimize and discredit the group. Whether or not these images were valid, their existence influenced alliances and intercon- nections. Where communication among groups was low (especially between branches) due to the virtual absence of formal or informal ties, group images could be then distorted and fixed, i.e., they became caricatures. 95 96 The following examples illustrate: Women involved in Packard House 57’58 They defined their actions viewed themselves as the vanguard. and life-style as "radical" (read, politically correct). While to many, their exclusivity made them invisible, to many others their image was confusing, intimidating or generally misperceived. One member explained, "Even now (1975) some women who meet me and recognize me (as a member of Packard House) say 'Wow! You're a real person.'" Many participants in the Older/Reform branch viewed participants in the Younger/Radical branch as "radicals"--a term the participants in the Older/Reform branch never used to describe themselves. Women in the Younger/Radical branch who were interviewed viewed organizations in the Older/Reform branch as "rear guard." They were seen as conservative (or, politically incorrect), "straight" grOUps with which more “radical" groups did not want to form alliances. Even within the movement for abortion reform, in which both branches were represented, a participant recalled, "The younger women were so self-righteous that communication with older women was difficult.‘l To some, the clear cut distinction between the images pre- sented by groups in the Younger/Radical branch and by groups in the Older/Reform branch was of practical value. Groups were aided in defin- ing precisely what they gene, i.e., their goals, strategies and member- ship characteristics, by differentiating themselves from what they 57"When (an exclusive) organization also has . . . goals of changing iociety it may be called a vanguard party." (Zald and Ash, 1966: 331 58Freeman (1975: 137-138) discusses the national trend in the Women's Movement toward Lesbians viewing themselves as the vanguard of the movement. 97 eepe get. For example, participants in groups which sought reform could put their demands in context by emphasizing that they were very different from "the radicals." Slater (1970: 120-126) discusses what he contends is the essentially complementary relationship between the radicals and the reformers; that is, that the existence and clamor of the radicals allow the reformers to move ahead while appearing to be "compromisers and mediators." These images became damning and self-fulfilling. As a former Ann Arbor N.O.W. president related, in the beginning of the local organization, there had been several Lesbians involved (though many of the non-Lesbians may not have realized it). At one point a comment was made to the effect that the organization did not want (or ought not) to work on issues concerning Lesbians for fear it would delegitimize the group. "After that meeting, (the Lesbians) never came back.“ And even though N.O.W.'s national policy regarding Lesbianism changed (Abbott and Love, 1973: 134), the total absence of participation by ("out") Lesbians in Ann Arbor N.O.W. has maintained a black-out on the Lesbian issue locally. Another reason virtually no associations have been formed between the two branches is that, despite the lists of groups Circulated and other attempted connections, most participants in groups in either branch are either unaware or only dimly aware of groups in the other branch. Respondents from the abortion referendum, C.C.W.W. and N.W.P.C. had never heard of most groups in the Younger/Radical branch, with the occasional exception of the Feminist House/Women's Crisis Center and Herself, all community out-reach groups. Of the Commission for Women 98 at the University of Michigan, one member explained, "Most (radical) women don't even know we exist." And when I inquired of respondents in the Younger/Radical branch if they were aware of N.W.P.C., N.O.W. and other groups in the Older/Reform branch, most told me that there were no such organizations in Ann Arbor and many had not heard of the National Women's Political Caucus. Instead, they told me about an organization called the Women's Political Committee (a group of three long-time participants in the Younger/Radical branch who attempted to establish initiative and referendum in Ann Arbor in 1973). A division cOrresponding to the Older/Reform, Younger/Radical separation, but more simplistic, is that of students vs. local commun- ity women. One woman in C.C.W.W. remembered seeing posters for the first all-women's danCe and deciding not to attend because, "it was clearly a student function." In 1970 and the first half of 1971, most organizations in the Younger/Radical branch were clearly student organi- zations and made no attempt to (appear to) be anything else. "We were very University-oriented," recalled a founder of Radical Lesbians. Groups held meetings in University buildings and their efforts were directed toward University students; for example, the Women's Film Collective, which involved participants from a variety of life-styles and occupations, held their Film Festival and art display on campus. But increasingly, especially in 1972, there was a change in this approach; it was coupled with a general move away from the campus it- self and from a campus orientation, especially by the "cluster group," Feminist House/(GAWK))/Women's Crisis Center/(Herself). 99 Many of the mechanisms which enhanced commitment within groups and delineated boundaries between "movement people" and "out- siders" also discouraged the establishment of ties between groups within the movement, especially between the two branches. Appearance was a salient distinction for many; especially in the Younger/Radical branch it was seen as a manifestation of life-style and, ultimately, of one's all important "politics." "Clothing said who you were, what your politics were and who you aligned yourself with," explained a woman who had participated in several groups in the Younger/Radical branch. The Coalescence Of political perspective and attire (and the separations between the two branches) is suggested by the following statement by a woman involved in the Younger/Radical branch, explaining why she left N.O.W. after attending only two early meetings. "My head wasn't where their's was. They were nylon stockings, high heels and heavy make-up. They were women in their thirties, with children, and they wanted to work on legislative issues concerning women's legal rights." Because their appearance was relatively consistent with cur- rently acceptable "feminine" images, women in the Older/Reform branch especially, but not exclusively, were viewed by those to whom attire was salient as "passing," i.e., they did not relinquish their class and "femme" privileges, and thus helped to maintain sex role stereo- types; therefore, they were seen to be not taking risks or otherwise demonstrating their commitment to "Feminism." Participants in the Older/Reform branch did not view attire as an important issue; a woman wore what was appropriate for her work 100 and in which she was comfortable. They found the attire of many "radicals" to be incomprehensible, frivolous or tasteless, and saw such disheveled Feminists as misrepresenting the movement, or as giving it a bad name. The attire of women in the Older/Reform branch was con- sistent with their ideology Of sexual equality within the existing system; one woman explained the movement's goals as follows: "We'll know we've succeeded when the female schmuck can get as far as the male schmuck.“ CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION The purpose of this thesis was to examine the structure of movement groups and to more carefully study the interrelationships of groups within a local social movement. A major orientation on the question was put forth by Freeman (1975) in her conception of the two branches of the Women's Movement. These she characterized as the Younger and the Older. The Older was the first begun and was formed by "Older" women; in it formal, hierarchical structures predominate; it seeks to affect legal and economic equality for women and pursues these goals through legitimate means. The Younger branch was begun second by "younger" women, especially those who had had experience in other social movements. It is composed of a proliferation of groups which are experimental in structure and strategy, but are predominantly characterized by informal structure. Both branches were thought to have developed from pre-existing communications networks. As Freeman anticipated, the local Women's Movement grew out of pre-existing ties, especially friendship networks. Many members in the Younger/Radical branch had been involved in other social movements, e.g., Draft Resistance and S.D.S. Many early members of the Older/ Reform branch had been involved in a political party (Democratic) and other volunteer organizations, e.g., the Women's Auxiliary Of the 101 102 Jaycees. However, in Ann Arbor, the Women's Movement began with the Younger/Radical branch. This is probably attributable to the fact that the groups which helped to give rise to this branch of the movement were considerably more active in Ann Arbor than in some other areas. .Although Freeman was essentially correct in her characteriza- tion of the differing group structures found in the two branches, her description does not adequately capture the subtleties in the organiza- tion of the Older/Reform branch. In this study, organizations in the Older/Reform branch were found to be more flexible and informal in their overall structure than a superficial examination would indicate. (This insight may not be restricted to formal, hierarchical groups in the Women's Movement.) Indeed, they were seen to be very like some groups in the Younger/Radical branch in certain respects, e.g., fluid- ity of peripheral or volunteer membership. In addition, it was shown that not all groups in the Younger/Radical branch were "unstructured," and even those which claimed to be often employed procedures such as voting on specific issues. In sum, it was concluded that it might be more fruitful to view groups as points lying along a continuum, regard- ing their structure, from anti-hierarchical to formal, hierarchical; to characterize the groups as falling into two distinct categories would be misleading. In contrast, Freeman has contended that structure and style of organization primarily distinguish the two branches and contends that the modes of operation resulted from previous organiza- tional and movement experience; in so doing, she explicitly discounts the role of ideology as a determinant (1975: 10). 103 Contrary to her expectations, in Ann Arbor, ideology was seen to be of significance, especially in the Younger/Radical branch. Several participants explained and justified their group's lack of formal structure by noting that it was an outgrowth of, and in keeping with, the ideology of equality, non-hierarchy, cooperation and partici- pation by all. Ideology was seen to play a significant role, especially in factionalization and schismogenesis. In contrast, participants in the Older/Reform branch justified their group structure by noting that it was the most pragmatic. For them, Freeman's contention that group istructure was primarily the result of past experience seems true. It must be noted, however, that inasmuch as these groups did not challenge the bases of the existing system but, instead, sought equal Opportunity to compete within it, their structure and strategies were in keeping with their ideology. Regarding the non-hierarchical structure by which the Younger/ Radical branch is characterized, Freeman notes that it is composed of miriads of small groups. Gerlach and Hine (1970) have richly described this web-like decentralized structure noting especially the importance of segmentation and fission as creative and adaptive modes of Operation in a social movement. In Ann Arbor, groups were seen to form and dis- solve at an amazing rate. In such a structure, strength lies in divers- ity, and the divisions and recombinations of participants, goals and strategies are seen to have creative potential. In contrast, the Older/Reform branch seems to manifest its strength in unity; its organizations, once established, are ongoing and are primarily "umbrella" groups which give rise to a number Of task 104 forces or committees. This branch seems to have produced less group formation activity and fewer variations. These organizations were seen to be "inclusive," demanding only limited commitment from participants and not restricting of defining their behavior outside the group. In many ways, these groups did not significantly differ from the other "concerned citizens" groups in which members had participated. Bound- aries in the Older/Reform branch may be determined by the nature of issues chosen, but for the most part the groups do not appear to be bounded. Again, this may be attributed to their ideoloQY; they neither seek nor feel any need to set themselves off from other people in the existing system. Indeed, they are Feminists who seek an end to sex discriminatiOn, but they do not seek to establish a new order. Where the Older/Reform branch is inclusive the Younger/Radical branch tends to be more exclusive and bounded; this was demonstrated by the salience attire and appearance had for participants. This is Ob- viously partly attributable to an ideology which seeks to radically alter or eliminate the existing system; to subscribe to such a perspec- tive and goal requires commitment and some trust among participants. Another explanation for the greater boundedness and exclusiveness of the Younger/Radical branch is that Lesbian-Feminists constitute a sig- nificant segment of this branch and these participants constitute a subculture which would be bounded and exclusive inside, or outside, a social movement. This brief history shows important changes in the local Women's Movement. It traces the development from a virtually total lack of direction, especially in the early Younger/Radical branch, to 105 the formation of a relatively well-developed and effective local movement, which struggled to define ideology and attempted to bring about meaningful changes in the local community and the University for women. The Younger/Radical branch has shifted from a segment which was for a period of time heavily populated by participants who "didn't know what the hell was going on" (Hole and Levine, 1971: 157), and who were thus easy prey for would-be leaders such as the Women Of the Y.S.A., or they were women whose primary political commitment lay elsewhere (e.g., in a sexually mixed group), to a movement of women who are more sophisticated about their Feminism and more aware of their group struc- ture. Freeman (1975) contends that there is increasing sharing on the part of both branches in the Women's Movement; this sharing seems to be primarily in the kind of structure employed. By late 1973, the fear of "elitism" seemed to have subsided in the Younger/Radical branch; one participant attributed the success of the Women's Crisis Center to this acceptance of leadership. 1 By late 1973 there seemed to be less reticence on the part of participants in the Younger/Radical branch to employ tactics which were less than radical. For example, the Community Women's Clinic did not succeed, but it was attempted and received some support. In addition, three women who had had much experience in this branch of the movement and who were widely respected attempted to institute initiative and referendum in Ann Arbor late in 1973. In this branch, there seems to have been a general mellowing and relaxation of positions since its local beginnings and exuberance. However, groups in the Older/Reform branch do not seem to have changed much from their beginnings in the 106 Women's Caucus of the Democratic Party. Their style of Organization, their structure, tactics and membership characteristics have remained relatively unchanged. Suggested areas for further study are the relationship between group structure and ideology (especially the effect the former has on the latter), and the formation of a "movement community." This "com- munity" is salient to participants in the Youngen/Radical branch, especially to the Lesbian-Feminists,and is not dealt with in literature concerning social movements or literature concerning community. In movements such as the Women's Movement which, as Gerlach and Hine (1970: 33) have Observed, is "decentralized, segmentary and reticu- late," the role of the "movement community" for providing direction, 'leadership and continuity may be of significance. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbott, Sidney and Love, Barbara. Sgppho Was a Right-On Woman. New York: Stein and Day, 1973} Allen, Pamela. Free Space: A Pergpective on the Small Group in Women's Liberation.'TNew York} Times'Change*Press,'1970. Ann Arbor News. April 16, 1972, December 14, 1972. Blumer, Herbert. "Collective Behavior" in Studies in Social Movements. (Ed.) B. McLaughlin, New York: Free Press, 1969. Emliag, Diane K. "The Impact of the Media on Social Movement Strategies and Leadership Styles." Unpublished M.A. thesis (M.S.U.), 1974. Feminist House Newsletter. Undated, ca. 1972. Firestone, Shulamith. "On American Feminism." In The Study of Society, (Ed.) Peter 1. Rose, (third edition), New York: RandOm House, 1973. pp. 690-703. - Freeman, Jo. “The Tyranny of Structurelessness." In the Second Wave, v. 2, no. 1, 1972. "The Origins Of the Women's Liberation Movement." American Journal of Sociolggy, v. 78, n. 4, 1973, pp. 792-811. .The Politics of Women's Liberation. New York: David McKay, 1975. GAWK. "People Call Us Names." Undated, ca. 1972. Gerlach, Luther, and Hine, Virginia. People,_Power and Change: Move- ments of Social Transformation. 1970. Heberle, Rudolph. Social Movements: An Introduction to Political Socio— logy. New York: Appleton-Century, Crofts, 1951. Herself. v. 1, n. l, 1972. 107 108 Hole, Judith, and Levine, Ellen. Rebirth of Feminism. New York: Quadrangle, 1973. Kanter, Rosabeth M. "Commitment and Social Organization: A Study of Commitment Mechanisms in Utopian Communities." American Sociological Review, v. 33, n. 4, (August, 1968), pp. 499— Commitment and Community. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1972. Killian, Lewis. "Social Movements." Handbook of Modern Sociology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964, pp. 426-455. Lipsky, Michael. "Protest as a Political Resource." American Poli- tical Science Review, v. 62 (December, 1968), pp. 1144-1158. Michigan Daily, April 12, 1973, p. 4; June 21, 1973, p. 4. Michigan Women's Abortion Suit Statement. July, 1971. Mitchell, Juliet. Woman's Estate. New York: Vintage Books, 1973. Morgan, Robin. "Goodbye to All That." In Rep. (Pittsburgh: Know reprint, January, 1969). Nisbet, Rotert. The Sociological Tradition. New York: Basic Books, 966. Oberschall, Anthony. Social Conflict and Social Movements. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1973. Piercy, Marge. "The Grand Coolie Damn." In Sisterhood is Powerful. (Ed.) Robin Morgan, New York: Vintage Books, 1970. Sagarin, Edward.) Odd Man In: Spcieties of Deviants in America. New York: QuadFangTe, T969. 1 Slater, Philip. The Pursuit Of Lineliness. Boston: Beacon Press, 1970. Smelser, Neil. Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press, 1962. Thorne, Barrie. "Women in the Draft Resistance Movement: A Study Of Sex Roles in Social Movements." Sex Roles, v. 1, n. 2, 1975a. PP. 179-195. "Protest and the Problem of Credibility: Uses of Knowledge and Risk Taking in the Draft-Resistance Movement of the 1960's." In Social Problems, 1975b. 109 Useem, Michael. "Ideological and Interpersonal Change in the Radical Protest Movement." Social Problems, v. 19, n. 4, 1972, pp. 451-469. Willson, John. An Introduction to Social Movements. New York: Basic ‘ Books, 1973. Women's Liberation Newsletter (The). V. l, n. 4, 6, 7, 1971-1972. Yates, Gayle G. What Women Want. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975. Zald, Mayer, and Ash, Roberta. "Social Movement Organizations: Growth, Decay and Change." Social Forces, 44, 1966, pp. 327-341. Typed and Printed In the U.S.A. Professional Thesis Preparation Cliff and Paula Haughey 144 Maplewood Drive 1 East Lansing. Michigan 48823 Telephone (617) 337-1527 v I.. (I, I: E. ii: I I I I I 11111 9 111111