The Paradox of Powerlessness

Abstract

Feminist critics have largely argued Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) is oppressive, male dominated, and places women in yet another patriarchal institution. However, one third of AA's membership is made up of women. Despite the feminist criticisms, women find healing, recovery, and empowerment within AA. Through in-depth interviews with 10 diverse women, this qualitative study seeks to bring academic discourse around AA into conversation with the voices and experiences of women in AA. The goal of this study is not to refute prior feminist criticisms but to question how women in AA navigate and negotiate the contradictions found within a male-dominated and male-centered program.

KEYWORDS:

• Alcoholics Anonymous
• 12-step recovery
• women
• empowerment
• feminism

NOTE

Notes

1. Feminist theologies offer a variety of theological perspectives developed to focus on the experiences, needs, and concerns of women. According to feminist theologian Rosemary Radford Ruether (1983), in Sexism and God-Talk, “The critical principle of feminist theology is the promotion of the full humanity of women. Whatever denies, diminishes, or distorts the full humanity of women is, therefore, appraised as not redemptive. Theologically speaking, whatever diminishes or denies the full humanity of women must be presumed not to reflect the divine or an authentic relation to the divine, or to reflect the authentic nature of things, or to be the message or work of an authentic redeemer or a community of redemption” (pp. 18–19).

2. In Women For Sobriety, the program comprises 13 Statements and not Steps as in AA.

3. In accord with how these women talked, note that Covington (1994, p. 12) defines empowerment as finding and using an inner power, Sanders (2009) uses multiple definitions of empowerment including self-development, improved self-esteem, self-respect, confidence, and enriched relationships.

4. This is reminiscent of Sara Coakley's (2002) question about power: “Must it necessarily involve intentionality, imply resistance, suppress freedom, or assume a ‘hierarchy’? (p. xv).