In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Daily Feminist Reads

Lots of feminist-y stuff out there today, good and bad. Check it out:

1. Gloria Steinem on “chick flicks.” And damn is she good:

After all, if you think back to your school days, much of what you were assigned as great literature could have been dismissed as “chick lit.” Indeed, the books you read probably only survived because they were written by famous guys.

Think about it: If Anna Karenina had been written by Leah Tolstoy, or The Scarlet Letter by Nancy Hawthorne, or Madame Bovary by Greta Flaubert, or A Doll’s House by Henrietta Ibsen, or The Glass Menagerie by (a female) Tennessee Williams, would they have been hailed as universal? Suppose Shakespeare had really been The Dark Lady some people supposed. I bet most of her plays and all of her sonnets would have been dismissed as some Elizabethan version of ye olde “chick lit,” only to be resurrected centuries later by stubborn feminist scholars.

Indeed, as long men are taken seriously when they write about the female half of the world — and women aren’t taken seriously when writing about themselves much less about men or male affairs — the list of Great Authors will be more about power than about talent.


2. Amanda on how Details magazine hates men. And women. I would say they hate women a whole lot more. Amanda is more optimistic than I am, as she seems to think that Details is insulting men by assuming that many of them get off on controlling, violating and otherwise injuring women. But as far as I can tell, a whole lot of men do get off on controlling, violating and otherwise injuring women (see: the pro-life movement; most pornography; sexual assault and intimate partner violence rates and laws around the world). Call my cynical, but I suspect that pro-feminist dudes are a distinct minority. Hence articles like “Is it OK to Demand Anal Sex?” Amanda is right on:

They paint a dreary picture of how terrible men are in such vivid detail I had to pinch myself and remind myself that I know plenty of men who don’t exhibit the behavior portrayed in this article. The ostensible subject is anal sex, but it’s really more about men who see sex primarily as a way to abuse women and shore up their own egos through domination. As you can imagine from the use of the word “demand”. No, it’s not really okay to “demand” any sex act. The very idea of demanding in ostensibly consensual relationships between adults is loathsome. As you can imagine, the rest of the article posits that women are alternately games of “Whack-A-Mole”, and men who penetrate the most orifices somehow win and that women are essentially restaurants where men can order off a menu, except you know, they don’t pay.

(…)

Straight men who are into kinky stuff on any level, pay attention. Guys like the ones described in this article are The Enemy. They value kinky acts only because they think those things degrade women and they want to see women degraded because their own weak egos depend on it. Because there are so many guys like this, it’s hard for women not to wonder if a guy wants to do kinky things so he can lose respect for you and start treating you like dirt. So women are reluctant to do a lot of stuff they might otherwise want to do—like anal sex—because all they can think is, “Is he laughing at me and thinking I’m a dirty whore because I did this? Does he think he ‘won’? Is he going to treat me like shit?” So not only are these guys assholes to women, they’re assholes to guys who are not assholes to women.

3. Violet Socks on why ECT is a feminist issue — and why women who undergo it are often ignored. A New York woman is being forced to undergo electroconvulsive therapy against her will, and her story is getting almost no play. Head over there, read about it, contact state officials, and spread the word.

4. Now that Jane has gone under, there’s a still-not-as-good-as-Sassy magazine void to fill. Missbehave is trying to do that. Unfortunately, they make me want to hit something:

“We’ve got the illest troop of girls together,” Samantha said, a gold “MISSBEHAVE” nameplate necklace hanging from her neck. “And we like, let it rip. We speak our fuckin’ mind. But we are not fuckin’ feminist by any means.”

Indeed, Missbehave is fairly unabashed in both its hipsterdom and its seeming viewpoint that girls — its writers and its audience, presumably — are obsessed with getting boys to like them and don’t really want to read anything else advising them otherwise.

Wow! Sounds so edgy and different! Thank God there’s finally a woman’s magazine that tells me how much I need a boyfriend and what I can do to get one! And thank God they aren’t all feminist about it.

5. North Carolina GOP representative David Almond has demonstrated his Moral Majority values by exposing himself to a female employee, chasing her around the room, and yelling “suck it, baby, suck it.”

6. Jesselyn at Daily Kos tells the story of how she got pregnant after taking Plan B — something she may have been able to avoid if she had been able to access the drug earlier.

7. Brownfemipower has a post up about connecting communities at a time where divisiveness runs through even like-minded groups and traditional activist organizations seem shockingly out of touch. She ends with a question:

And so in the spirit of using media to empower our own, I ask this question–what are the most pressing issues in YOUR community? What are the issues that fall under the radar of the politicians, the policy pushers, the money makers, the fundraisers? Be real here–sure the war in Iraq is huge and important–but in your specific community maybe the issue is not so much the war, but the fact that men are coming home brutalized and ripped from their humanity, and for some reason, the incidences of spousal abuse have sky rocketed since the war began.

Or, maybe as a commenter noted on a different thread–sure, poverty is a big deal, but what really is driving the community insane is that there’s no speed bumps on the local roads and the kids have no place to play because cars are going to fast through the community.

Or maybe spousal abuse is a huge problem, but the real issue is that housing costs so much in the area that women can’t afford to escape the abuse.

Or maybe, like my community, your community is a sister city of a largely rich white city and that rich white city drives the cost of living in your community through the roof while at the same time stealing all of the local investment and jobs.

Tell it like it is–big or small, complicated or easy–put it out there.

Let’s figure out for ourselves what’s really going on.

Head over there and join the discussion.


8 thoughts on Daily Feminist Reads

  1. Ghu, that “MISSBEHAVE” magazine sounds atrocious … I went through to that link, and there initially people that rightly noticed the “but we’re not feminist” comment and then the defenders launched in saying the first posters were obviously hateful (and particularly in a manner whereby you could tell even a passing acquaintance with a grammar text hadn’t occurred).

    I have absolutely no tolerance for anyone that says ” … but I’m not a feminist” or the like … because, you think men and women are equal? Then you’re a fucking feminist.

  2. the MISSBEHAVE writers sound like the kind of rebels who imagine casual sex acts are actually layaway payments on a nice big engagement ring…

    Gloria Steinem kind of rocks but there is a lot of mediocre formulaic literature out there whether it be chick lit or crime novels or Clancyesque spy crap. I doubt the Devil Wears Prada and the like qualify as great literature anymore than The Bourne Identity does. The derisive way in which the term chick lit is used is quite objectionable but that concern does not raise the quality of much of the work in the category itself.

  3. I struggle every time I see that most porn is degrading to women. While I agree that there’s a lot of crappy porn out there that is, there’s also a lot of better porn out there that isn’t. If anything, why not protest certain companies like Extreme Associates that make a point out of treating their employees poorly, and insist that porn companies treat their porn stars as employees or independent contractors, thus giving them more rights, instead of pornography itself? I feel like it’s not a question of degrading people sexually in pornography as much as it’s the fact that sex work of any kind is treated as less than other work, and people are being degraded as workers.

  4. Gloria Steinem kind of rocks but there is a lot of mediocre formulaic literature out there whether it be chick lit or crime novels or Clancyesque spy crap. I doubt the Devil Wears Prada and the like qualify as great literature anymore than The Bourne Identity does. The derisive way in which the term chick lit is used is quite objectionable but that concern does not raise the quality of much of the work in the category itself.

    If you ask me, the trouble is great writers like Jane Austen are being called “chick lit” and lumped in with writing like The Devil Wears Prada, like it’s all just mushy “girl’s stuff.”

  5. “I doubt the Devil Wears Prada and the like qualify as great literature anymore than The Bourne Identity does.”

    The one anecdote I really love that encapsulates the attitude toward “chick lit” so well was from a woman who was reading something like Devil Wears Prada on a plane. A dude sitting near her sort of sneered at the cover, shook his head, and asked her how she could read that chick-lit crap before returning to his own book: the latest from John Grisham, master of the definite article.

    What gets me isn’t that people roll their eyes and point out that something like 95% of it has little enduring literary merit. It’s that it being for and by women manages to automatically knock it several rungs down the literary ladder than it really deserves to be. Pulpy mindless potboiler geared toward a “general” (read, male) audience? Meh. It’s a potboiler, and it’s okay so long as you don’t expect much more than that. Market it to a female audience? Ridiculous, mind-rotting drivel that makes whoever taught you to read regret having bothered. It doesn’t matter if the book is actually a heartbreaking work of staggering genius–you can tell by the art and color scheme that it’s about women, ergo it’s the text equivalent of a Barbie makeover party and nobody with a penis in their right mind could ever give a rat’s ass about what’s inside that pink cover.

    There’s also been a really annoying tendency lately for reviewers to specifically point out an author’s gender if she’s female and include some stupid remark about how the book is totally not chick lit. One of The Onion’s AV Club reviews actually went so far as to say it would have been better if the female author had used her first initial rather than her identifiably female first name (you know, like female journalists were frequently asked to do in the ’70s), because her book was actually well-written and interesting, and it would be a crying shame if something with such “muscular, masculine” prose was consigned to the chick-lit ghetto. Never mind that the only thing it appeared to have in common with that genre was the gender of the author.

Comments are currently closed.