In Response to the Firestone Questions

 Marxist-feminist philosopher Shulasmith Firestone (1954-2012) has argued that in order for women to be equal to men in society, women must be freed from their traditional roles in society as reproducers. Firestone’s solution for women’s freedom comes in eliminating the necessity of women in the reproductive process. 

I believe that Firestone’s utopian society for women is possible but it will take a long time for it to be accepted as normal when compared to other methods . I think the beginning of such a movement would have a better chance in a more liberal-accepting country in Europe than the US (given the current unwillingness for public discourse). I would go further by saying Firestone’s utopia for women is playing out currently in  modern Japanese society. While reproductive technologies have not met the level of standalone embryo birth (beyond IVF), female citizens are not penalized for pursuing their own professional/personal careers independent of social pressure to reproduce. This development came about without the elimination of women as an integral piece of human reproduction. 

However, whether Firestone’s utopia is desirable is a different question. The purpose of the utopia is to dissuade the perception and distinction of women as reproducers in society. To do so, a society has to manufacture another class of reproducers (now willing or complacent  participants in this type of reproduction) - whether that be male, female, or machine. That creates another class division. Would social stigma become worse for those who do or don’t choose? Is it better now, where women have advanced reproductive prevention measures and an increasingly supportive society? I am ambiguous here since I need to refine my own opinion but am interested in others’ responses. 

Do I think freedom from reproductive responsibility will have the desired consequences? I would argue both yes and no. From what I’ve read, Firestone’s argument is based in redefining a woman's biological character by introducing technological equivalents of ‘defining’ components (e.g. reproduction) in hopes of phasing out social class. I unfortunately don’t think this will prevent the social stigma of women defending their right to not reproduce or seek alternative routes in having children. There will always be voices in opposition to change that requires radical shifts for the arrangement of equal treatment. That said, with Firestone’s end goal in mind - that gender roles will end along with class distinctions and struggles with freedom from reproductive requirement - it’s probable, but public discourse needs to be steered very carefully to amass support and understanding for such a movement.