wrote a long essay about my thoughts on this but goodreads (predictably) ate it so I'm just going to summarise:
A lot of what this book talks about ranwrote a long essay about my thoughts on this but goodreads (predictably) ate it so I'm just going to summarise:
A lot of what this book talks about rang true to me - the deep, unexamined misogny in feminist and left-learning spaces, the willingness of younger feminists to throw out the work of second-wave feminists to avoid being cast as 'problematic', the lazy way 'karen' has been co-opted to mean 'women', the downplaying of sex-based oppression in favour of a more confusing, perpetrator-less idea of patriarchy.
My issue is the framing of all feminist debate as a generational conflict - Dutchman-Smith tries to frame the 'gender debate' as older, more 'experienced-laden' feminists who, by virtue of hitting female milestones e.g menopause, birth, have a more wordly understanding of sex and gender than 'naive', 'accomodating' younger feminists, who do not have the grasp on their own politics or feelings because they're too afraid of being called bigoted, or they're too foolish to understand they're aiding the patriarchy, or at one point Dutchman-Smith implies that women who call older women transphobic are simply trying to steal their careers - a suggestion that is awful, patronising and frankly misogynistic. My thoughts is that it would be hugely reductive to frame other feminist debates - e.g, the sex wars - in this way, but that is exactly what the author does. It seems intellectually lazy to not consider the actual ideas that are being debated - that in fact, the trans-inclusive feminists may have their own ideas and politics that are fully formed and cannot be attributed to naivety or ignorance. The book talks a bit about the sex wars, but barely touches on the gender debate - which in some ways is fair, since it's not what the book is about, but it becomes increasingly distracting in it's efforts to talk "around" what the issue even is!
The book is also bizarrely approving of Mumsnet as this supportive haven of middle aged women, talking about their issues with other women, which is strange to me as it's probably one of the most vitrolic websites I've ever been on.
It's a strange one so I'm not going to rate it, but it's worth reading if only to disagree....more
"Across the decades, white feminists’ overwhelming insistence that sex oppression is the most prominent and widespread form of oppression ironically e"Across the decades, white feminists’ overwhelming insistence that sex oppression is the most prominent and widespread form of oppression ironically enshrines the identity of Woman as the sine qua non of feminism while minimizing the force of sexism itself. [...] In fact, fetishizing the identity of Woman as the basis of feminist politics actually makes it more difficult to recognize sexism as a structure of exploitation and extraction."
i have no idea why anyone attempts to take it as a legitimate attempt at theory but it's very funny, nevertheless.i have no idea why anyone attempts to take it as a legitimate attempt at theory but it's very funny, nevertheless....more
the premise is uhhh unconvincing but you have got to be impressed with andrea long chu's commitment to the bitthe premise is uhhh unconvincing but you have got to be impressed with andrea long chu's commitment to the bit...more
Good Valentines Day read! I'm never, ever having kids with a man.
Would've liked to see more emphasis on non-heterosexual couples, single parents, famiGood Valentines Day read! I'm never, ever having kids with a man.
Would've liked to see more emphasis on non-heterosexual couples, single parents, family structures in different cultures etc. Still a 5/5 read imo....more
Loading...
