text: I have written a lengthier review of this work elsewhere. But I did want to say to potential readers that the Peggy Antrobus book is a brief and welcome introduction to the global women's movement, that as such it fills a long-felt-want, and that it is to be recommended to those new to, unfamiliar with, or who feel they should be allied with, the women's movement. It would - it will - make an excellent text for those doing women's studies, as to those doing social movement studies, whether globally or more locally. 
  
  Summarising, Antrobus shows the women's movement as political, as recognising women's relationship to social conditions, as processal, as posed against patriarchal privilege, as beginning where and when women recognise their separateness and even their alienation, marginalisation, isolation or abandonment within wider movements for social justice or transformation.
  
  One complaint, but which is much more widely spread than in this book alone. This is the avoidance of the word `capitalism' - even by feminists who are or were once socialists. Capitalism does not even get an index reference in Antrobus. Capitalists, mostly after all male, white and patriarchal, call it capitalism, and are proud of it. So why cannot it not be so named by feminists, who could and surely should condemn it?  This cannot be solely because of their justified criticism of the archaic political-economic determinism of patriarchal socialists. So it has to be due to either a desire to be salonf?ig (acceptable in the salons within which they have been speaking, to the funders they are dependent upon), or a restriction of their utopia to a kinder, gentler global capitalism, a global neo-Keynesian order - for which no convincing feminist case has been made. Pity
  