A Socialist-Feminist Discussion on Women’s Oppression: Circus Valentine as a Case Study

Yasemin Güniz Sertel

doi:10.37241/jatss.2025.131

Authors

Yasemin Güniz Sertel İstanbulÜniversity, Faculty of Letters, Department of American Culture and Literature, Istanbul/Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1249-7427

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37241/jatss.2025.131

Keywords:

socialist-feminism, capitalism, patriarchal system, class conflicts, ethnicity

Abstract

Introduction: Feminism focuses on the subordination of women within patriarchal societies. Socialist-feminism links women’s oppression to historical, social, and psychological factors. It states that a radical change is needed for liberation, which should begin with overthrowing capitalism. This study analyzes Circus Valentine by Norman from a socialist-feminist view. The play discusses that the suffering of women is connected to capitalism and patriarchy.

Method: This study employs socialist-feminism to examine Circus Valentine. The methodology combines textual analysis with socio-historical contextualization. Key characters, dialogues, and plot are examined to uncover how gender, class, and ethnic identities intersect with systemic oppression. Historical documents, feminism, and Marxism provide a framework to interpret social dynamics within the play. Particular attention is given to patterns of labor, authority, and family structures, as well as the ways capitalist and patriarchal systems shape individual and collective experiences. The analysis is conducted by mapping textual elements onto theoretical constructs, allowing for a nuanced understanding of oppression in fictional and broader socio-economic context.

Results or Findings: In Circus Valentine, victimization of women is rooted in history, culture, and society. Since women’s experiences reflect the struggles of workers, minority and ethnic groups, they remain controlled by capitalism and patriarchy.

Discussion or Conclusion: Circus Valentine highlights the oppression faced both by women and by certain social classes and groups. Capitalism cannot be eliminated by women alone. To challenge capitalism, a movement involving all oppressed groups is necessary. The solution for the suffering of people lies in creating a classless society.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Chafe, W.H. (1988). Women and American society. In L.S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making America: the society and the culture of the United States (pp. 258- 269), Forum Series.

Engels, F. (1982). The origin of the family, private property and the state. Penguin Classics.

Felski, R. (1989). Beyond feminist aesthetics: feminist literatüre and social change. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026327689006002003

Hareven, T.K. (1988). Continuity and change in the American family. In L.S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making America: the society and the culture of the United States (pp. 241- 257), Forum Series.

Hartman, H. (1997). The unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), The second wave – a reader in feminist theory (pp. 97-122), Routledge.

Hartman, H. (1984). The family as the locus of gender, class and political struggle: the example of housework. In A.M. Jaggar & P.S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Feminist frameworks alternative theoretical accounts of the relations between women and men (pp. 341-357), McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

Hartsock, N. (1984). Staying alive. In A.M. Jaggar & P.S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Feminist frameworks– alternative theoretical accounts of the relations between women and men (pp. 266-276), McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

Marx, K. (1972). Capital: A critique of political economy. (Vol. 1; S. Moore., & E. Aveling. Trans.). International Publishers. (Original work published 1867)

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1968). The german ideology. (T. Delaney., & B. Schwartz Trans.). Progress Publishers. (Original work published 1932)

Mindel, C.H. & Habenstein, R.W. (1976). Ethnic families in America : Patterns and variations. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company.

Norman, M. (1998). Circus Valentine. In M. Norman (Ed.), Collected works – contemporary playwright series. (pp. 109-162), A Smith and Kraus Book.

Reed, E. (1984). Women: caste, class or oppressed sex. In A.M. Jaggar & P.S. Rothenberg (Ed.), Feminist frameworks– alternative theoretical accounts of the relations between women and men (pp. 132-135), McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

Rowbotham, S. (1977). Hidden from history: 300 years of women’s oppression and the fight against it. Pluto Press.

Rubin, G. (1997). The traffic in women: notes on the political economy of sex. In L. Nicholson (Ed.), The second wave – a reader in feminist theory (pp.27-92), Routledge.

Sertel, Y.G. (2004). The problem of female autonomy: women in Marsha Norman’s plays. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. İstanbul University.

Warner, S.B.Jr. (1988). Urban America. In L.S. Luedtke (Ed.), Making America: the society and the culture of the United States (pp.105-120), Forum Series.