Women's Oppression is Profitable - Why Socialism is the Only Way For Women

This is a long post. Bolded parts for easy skimming.

Think about something for me. What kind of future do you want for women? What do you want women to be free to do? What do you want women to be free from?

Now, why don't women have those things? What are the barriers in place?

We live in a capitalist society. Under capitalism, that which is profitable inherently justifies its own existence. And the oppression of women is profitable. Capitalism relies on the unpaid reproductive labor of women. Not only do we produce the next generation of workers - we also feed and clothe and take care of the needs of the working class so they can go to work again tomorrow. Even if we are workers ourselves.

The oppression of women predates capitalism, but it does not predate the concept of private property. (Definition: private ownership of the means of production; distinct from personal property.) The two go hand in hand. Women are private property. We are a means of production. We produce the most valuable resource in the world - people. Women can never be free while the concept of private property still exists. So long as anyone can own the products of anybody else's labor, men will always believe they have the right to own the products of our labor.

Early Marxist feminists wrote heavily about this, calling women "the proletarian in the home," and noting the similarities between the boss/worker relationship and the husband/wife relationship, even when the wife also worked outside the home. Their primary argument was that reorganizing society around a socialist economic system, rather than a capitalist one, would equalize the relationship between men and women. They proposed several specific solutions:

First - Equal female participation in the workforce. Women should not be slaves in the home, isolated from society, toiling for their husband/master. They should be equal participants in social life, welcomed into all industries, and paid equal wages, with their unique needs as women (pregnancy/childbearing/nursing) accommodated.

Second - The socialization of domestic labor and bringing domestic labor into the public sphere. This has already been done with some things. The best example is public education. In the past, women would have been expected to educate their own children, in the home, privately and by themselves. (Rich women might have hired tutors/governesses or sent their children to boarding schools.) The advent of free public education freed women from this burden, increased the quality of education available to all children, and gave rise to the educated workforce we know today. This can be done with everything. Public childcare for children of all ages, at extended hours to accommodate different needs. Public cafeterias and drop-off laundry services to free women from the obligation of cooking and laundry. These aren't utopian hypotheticals, by the way. The USSR actually instituted these things. And even WWII-era Britian instituted public cafeterias (called "British restaurants"), partially to address the widespread malnutrition and partially to relieve the burden of cooking on the women who were now in the workforce, replacing the men who were at war.

Third - An immediate and brutal end to the sex industry. Marxists recognized that prostitution was a form of economic oppression and exploitation unique to women. The "Nordic model" has existed in Marxist theory for quite some time. In fact, post-revolutionary China instituted a very similar policy. Brothels were shut down, prostitutes were rehabilitated and re-educated, and pimps were harshly prosecuted. It was highly successful - prostitution almost completely ended in China until the market reforms.

Fourth - General socialist economic policies to ensure everyone has their basic needs met. How many women are trapped with parasitic men because they can't support themselves alone? They can't afford their own place, they can't afford to raise children on one income, they need his health insurance, etc. This kind of economic coercion is patriarchy's most powerful weapon. Here at FDS, we encourage women to pursue educations and careers that allow them to live independently and avoid reliance on men - but we know firsthand just how difficult that can be, especially when a woman has children. Independence from men should not be a privilege reserved for only those women who can pursue higher education or high-paying careers. It should be our right. If every woman in the world could be assured that she would not be homeless, starving, or without medical care if she left her man.... how many would leave? How many women could be set free?

I have been a politically active feminist for a long time. The more I studied and learned about feminism, the more I came to realize that women's oppression is intrinsic to a capitalist system. I was a feminist before I became a socialist, and I am a socialist because I am a feminist. I don't believe socialism is the panacea to women's oppression, but I do believe it is a necessary prerequisite. Women can never be free under capitalism. Socialism is the only way forward.

[EDIT: Removed some links to actual political parties around the world that promoted these policies. Not sure if they're against the rules, but it made this post seem more like a recruitment flyer than a discussion post.]