eology of genderseparation -- men had to be defined as the enemy. In order to adopt this identity women wererequired to reject half of their lives and turn their own husbands and sons into the enemy. It isdifficult, if not impossible to get women to reject men as the enemy, just as it is to get men toreject women as the enemy. Equally important, there are numerous cross-cutting identities ofwomen. Women are dissimilar: They are mothers, daughters, wives, homemakers, andbreadwinners. To create “sisterhood” among these multiple identities is indeed a difficult if notimpossible task. Among women leading diversified lifestyles and holding contradictoryconvictions, it is impossible to attain a uniformity of identity and purpose. Individual womenasserted their own identity and too many parameters divided them. This heterogeneity undermines“sisterhood.” Women, also have different ideologies: Radical, conservative, liberal, andmoderate. Phyllis Schlafly, leading advocate of conservative issues, led her flock and ralliedagainst women’s liberation, successfully defeating the Equal Rights Amendment in 1982. The women’s movement itself moved women into the world of men, the working worldthe labor force. Women become integrated in the workforce and this reduced the effectiveness ofsisterhood as a rallying point for women. Once incorporated within the workforce, womenbecome more like men in order to succeed. Workforce integration also reduces thedistinctiveness of “sisterhood.” “Sisterhood” and its promise of solidarity for women’s identitywas an imaginary nexus, too narrow in its ideology and too broad in its scope.In summary, to be successful in politics groups must be able to develop a“we-consciousness” among their members. Women are simply too diverse to accept the idea of acommon “sisterhood.” Without shared identities, the women’s movemen...
