Lessons posted:

I'm confused by the design, the two-column-per-page layout makes it look like each paragraph is a sort of independent block of text hanging in space. It's distracting and makes it hard to read, especially since the columns aren't justified (and probably can't be without making it look horrible).

thanks for the crit. i can only defend it by saying that in the printed layout it's like four columns across and maybe isn't so bad but yeah, you're probably right I should change it

• People have already mentioned the "transperson*" thing as weird but I'm kind of confused as to why trans people are singled out at all
  
  
• This sentence on page 3 "This liberation cannot exist outside of our social reality—otherwise, it would be idealism and therefore unachievable." is bad for a lot of reasons, you should probably cut or rewrite everything after the em dash. Basically it's imprecise and incorrect in a few ways, i.e. it's worded in a way that makes it self-contradictory, liberation based around idealism isn't necessarily unachievable, etc., probably you just don't need that part because the following section makes the central point well enough on its own without bringing in idealism
  
  
• In that same section (i.e. that paragraph and the preceding one) you stop short of actually saying "Bourgeois women and proletarian women are in conflict". That's clearly the implication but it's good to be explicit about these things imo, you notice this a lot in TCM where he says something like "In a word/simply put" and then states his conclusion explicitly and concisely, it's good because it's rhetorically forceful and makes it impossible to get confused. Here maybe add something after the sentence "This is a reality of irreconcilable class contradictions."
  
  
• There's a Barbara Epstein quote at the bottom of page 3 with no close quote.
  
  
• The section on immigrant, non-white, native and queer women (pages 6-7) seems fairly weak, all it really says is that it's necessary for proletarian women to unite with these groups but doesn't explain much about the specific importance of these groups, (with the exception of immigrant women though even that section is sort of unclear), or what exactly the unity you're calling for entails. Don't have much good advice on how to change it soz
  
  
• W/r/t this: "Our exploitation and oppression are reproduced in a value system, in social relations, in the ways in which wealth is produced, and especially in the ways this wealth is appropriated" personally I would say production is primary in exploitation, rather than appropriation/distribution, but that's fairly minor and it might even be better to keep it as because it's more persuasive in the current rhetorical climate to focus on distribution. Idk though, there's a big section in Gotha which explains why the focus on distribution is a problem. Ditto to this on the salary inequality part on page 8.
  
  
• It might be good to emphasize re:Silvia Federici that the current state of uncompensated housework is a construction of the growth of the bourgeoisie through the Early Modern period, and the 19th century rise of industrialism, and more equitable status isn't just something from prehistorical classless society. This is in regards to the housework section on page 8.
  
  
• "With the development of the forces of production on a global scale, capitalist relations in the economy become the dominant relations that establish the value of labour. This value is strictly based on the creation and accumulation of maximum profits." I have a lot of problems with this but it's fairly technical Marxist stuff, most importantly that the objective of capital isn't maximizing profits but maximizing the growth of capital. That probably seems fairly pedantic and maybe even mere semantics but it's actually important to what you're talking about. Once you draw this distinction you can argue that e.g. the restaurant sector sacrifices profitability within its own industry to support increased profitability in other sectors that are more advantageous to the growth of capital, which results in reduced wages for restaurant workers. Idk if this is important to you here.
  
  
• "According to capitalist criteria, the service sector, including healthcare, education, administration and commerce, does not produce “surplus-value,” or at least insufficient quantities of it." This is just untrue. It is true that the public sector doesn't produce surplus value but that doesn't seem consistent with what you're saying here, in any case it's not true that services aren't productive, they're probably more productive than most stuff in the West.
  
  
• The whole section on unproductive labor on page 11. I think this works to the extent you're talking about unrenumerated reproductive labor (using something like Federici's definition that includes things like household labor, childrearing and so on) but again, not for the services sector. You're probably even right that for example childcare and healthcare workers are underpaid because their professions are considered "women's work" (this is an empirical question I'm ignorant about) but this would probably mean those works are more productive than average, not less. The whole question of unproductive labor is kind of complicated and I don't want to get into it here. Anyway I've been really critical of this section but I like the idea a lot, trying to find economic causes for the particular oppression of women, I think it's important and totally possible to rewrite it and have it all work.
  
  
• There are statistics throughout here, (migrant women represent 69% of female population growth, 95% of prostitutes want to change their profession, etc) and it may be good to source these though that would probably increase printing costs
  
  
• The typesetting is inconsistent at the top of page 15, is this intentional?
  
  
• page 16-17: "They will defend the proletarian feminist and anti-the programme for liberation as contained in the Manifesto." I think someone forgot to edit out that "anti-"
  
  
• Middle paragraph on right column page 17 is justified
  
  
• Page 17 "In correctly organizing our work, we must:" list is vague and mostly repeats things from the "we call for the creation of proletarian feminist groups" list on page 16, it should either be folded into that list/the concluding section or reworked as a sort of "practical first steps" thing.
  

futurewidow posted:

a couple ppl have mentioned the community service thing so I should address it. I think this is an attempt not to fall into a trap that other women's groups have fallen into, ie de-politicized activism for activism's sake.

the main purpose of this group is to raise political consciousness and develop female cadre. serving the people is a crucial component of all communist organizing but is better suited to organizations with higher capacity, ie- a task for the mass orgs. Hopefully one day the PFFt will grow large enough to be able to take that on but for the time being it would be too much to take on. to be realistic right now there's very little the PFFt can offer women in terms of services, but we can ensure things like childcare and meals are provided for at our events (even if we can't provide those things on a regular, on-going basis to women walking in off the street)

i agree that this should be made more explicit. in fact i would reframe it completely positively to state your position that you support such activities but from a particular stance and with particular focus on other activities for this organization in particular.

It is IMO almost never a good idea in the current situation to frame community service activities in a way that could be construed by even the most cursory reader as being negative. There are times/places where this is effective but I don't think here/now applies.

shriekingviolet posted:

hi futurewidow, I really liked this, would you be ok with me sharing it with an organizing friend of mine and asking for her feedback? I really appreciate her knowledge and experience (also she may be moving to toronto soon)

yeah fer sure

I wasn't at the founding conference that drafted/edited the manifesto, but I can take people's suggestions back to the toronto chapter of the group for discussion and put forward edits for the next conference in the next few months

futurewidow posted:

a couple ppl have mentioned the community service thing so I should address it. I think this is an attempt not to fall into a trap that other women's groups have fallen into, ie de-politicized activism for activism's sake.

the main purpose of this group is to raise political consciousness and develop female cadre. serving the people is a crucial component of all communist organizing but is better suited to organizations with higher capacity, ie- a task for the mass orgs. Hopefully one day the PFFt will grow large enough to be able to take that on but for the time being it would be too much to take on. to be realistic right now there's very little the PFFt can offer women in terms of services, but we can ensure things like childcare and meals are provided for at our events (even if we can't provide those things on a regular, on-going basis to women walking in off the street)

thanks for answering this.

I guess I don't know what it's like in CA but if i go into communities here (poor parts of the U.S. South) with nothing to offer they don't want to hear shit from me, very hard to politicize apart from it. We offer to harass slumlords, do immigration calls, provide rides to community health clinics, etc. In the middle of this work, we start having really good conversations, Good luck building your capacity for services. Service can be very political but you are right about it swallowing up your org if you're not prepared.

dank_xiaopeng posted:

i'm pretty handy with vector illustration, if you want me to spruce up your graphix a lil i'd be happy to

:< what's wrong wit them...

The section on immigrant, non-white, native and queer women (pages 6-7) seems fairly weak, all it really says is that it's necessary for proletarian women to unite with these groups but doesn't explain much about the specific importance of these groups, (with the exception of immigrant women though even that section is sort of unclear), or what exactly the unity you're calling for entails. Don't have much good advice on how to change it soz

something about native peoples being proletarianized through appropriation of previously common resources. possibly "forceful appropriation" altho at least in the states that characterization of the process evokes a conquest narrative that is a vast oversimplification

fleights posted:

how many members does your group have also how many members does the pcr-rcp have btw i do not work for the RCMP

yeah im not answering that

haha i just got flak for not including enough references to trans people or people of marginalized genders (I included one reference tho) when I wrote up copy for a may day flyer, this shit is getting ridiculous.

the whole reason I joined a proletarian feminist group was to get away from all the 3rd wave pomo bs

littlegreenpills posted:

thats totally true but from what fw is saying this org isnt going out as an org to directly engage with em (in my understanding at least some of its members will obviously be heading out into the world and doing in the fullness of time), it's more of a forum for working out a political line, techniques of organizing and so on, and so pomo warriors could in theory crap that process up even (or especially) if they feel its something they need to get mad about i dunno

If a technique of organizing in their opinion is to cater to pomo nonsense (out of fear? purity?) then no worries, the ground game will never materialize. See: almost every leftist our age, online.

Senorah posted:

littlegreenpills posted:

thats totally true but from what fw is saying this org isnt going out as an org to directly engage with em (in my understanding at least some of its members will obviously be heading out into the world and doing in the fullness of time), it's more of a forum for working out a political line, techniques of organizing and so on, and so pomo warriors could in theory crap that process up even (or especially) if they feel its something they need to get mad about i dunno

If a technique of organizing in their opinion is to cater to pomo nonsense (out of fear? purity?) then no worries, the ground game will never materialize. See: almost every leftist our age, online.

not at all, i guess im saying a little lip service on the flyers might be a smart tactic to calm disruptive people down so everyone else can get on with the realtalk, and more importantly doesn't have to impact the boots on the ground work at the end of the day

littlegreenpills posted:

not at all, i guess im saying a little lip service on the flyers might be a smart tactic to calm disruptive people down so everyone else can get on with the realtalk, and more importantly doesn't have to impact the boots on the ground work at the end of the day

It really gives them entry to throw red flags at everything you want to do because they will have succeeded before but you're right, they prob won't actually be around for hard work at all. Best of luck, Torontonians.

Senorah posted:

littlegreenpills posted:

not at all, i guess im saying a little lip service on the flyers might be a smart tactic to calm disruptive people down so everyone else can get on with the realtalk, and more importantly doesn't have to impact the boots on the ground work at the end of the day

It really gives them entry to throw red flags at everything you want to do because they will have succeeded before but you're right, they prob won't actually be around for hard work at all. Best of luck, Torontonians.

exactly

drwhat posted:

swirlsofhistory posted:

Oh god you're a maoist, never mind then.

it's cool reading things like this on a forum, it lets me see what it is like to try doing actual good things in the real world and have a bunch of people show up to shit on it because of ridiculous theory bullshit, without actually having to go through hearing this irl and have to stop myself from laughing at you

lol pretty much. if someone is willing to dismiss folks for any reason other than they're a trot then chances are that person is just shit.