§ The tyranny of structurelessness

• THE TYRANNY of STRUCTURELESSNESS by Jo Freeman aka Joreen

"Elitist" is probably the most abused word in the women's liberation movement.
It is used as frequently, and for the same reasons, as "pinko" was used in the
fifties. It is rarely used correctly. Within the movement it commonly refers to
individuals, though the personal characteristics and activities of those to
whom it is directed may differ widely: An individual, as an individual can
never be an elitist, because the only proper application of the term "elite" is
to groups. Any individual, regardless of how well-known that person may be, can
never be an elite.

The inevitably elitist and exclusive nature of informal communication
networks of friends is neither a new phenomenon characteristic of the women's
movement nor a phenomenon new to women. Such informal relationships have
excluded women for centuries from participating in integrated groups of which
they were a part. In any profession or organization these networks have
created the "locker room" mentality and the "old school" ties which have
effectively prevented women as a group (as well as some men individually)
from having equal access to the sources of power or social reward.

Although this dissection of the process of elite formation within small groups
has been critical in perspective, it is not made in the belief that these
informal structures are inevitably bad -- merely inevitable. All groups create
informal structures as a result of interaction patterns among the members of
the group. Such informal structures can do very useful things But only
Unstructured groups are totally governed by them. When informal elites are
combined with a myth of "structurelessness," there can be no attempt to put
limits on the use of power. It becomes capricious.