Why "fun feminism" should be consigned to the rubbish bin

[Nyac]

article by Julie Bindel in the New Statesman.

www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/08/fun-feminism-women-feminist

Quote:

"We need to bring back the radical edge to feminism, and do away with any notion that slutwalking, lap dancing, sex working or Burkha-wearing is liberation for women. If men like a particular brand of feminism, it means it is not working. "Fun feminism" should be consigned to the rubbish bin along with the Lib Dem party."

Agree with Julie, that it's extremely irritating to see a bunch of interlopers attempting to elbow their way in and co-opt feminism, redefining it to suit patriarchy's needs. I've even seen people who support patriarchal institutions like marriage, BDSM or the sex industry calling themselves radical feminists. There is so much misunderstanding and misinformation about feminism out there that people feel like they can grab what they like without making an actual political commitment or any kind of challenge to the patriarchy.

Really liberal feminism (the old kind, not the sex industry supporting kind) and radical feminism are the only kinds of feminism that have ever effected any kind of positive change for women. They need to be reclaimed and supported, not erased by third wave non-feminist feminism.

She's right about the lib dems too. :D Or maybe they are in the same boat and need some classic liberals to reclaim their party from the Tory party's whipping boys.

[franke]

I agree. Sorry I can't be any more articulate - you've expressed it perfectly. And if I hear the word 'empower' one more time in relation to pole dancing....

[EatsBrainsAndLeaves]

Totally agree. Lap dancing, prostitution, etc are not empowering. And the slut walk was a travesty against feminism. I am really glad that this article was in the New Statesman. Whilst not very widely read, it reaches a more diverse audience than other radical feminist articles and blogs that I have read criticising fun feminism. This analysis deserves to be much more widely distributed.

[BasilEatsFoulEggs]

Agree. "Empowerment" is for people who are never going to have power - power-lite. Fuck that.

[AbigailAdams]

Totally agree. As usual Basil sums it up.neatly .

[WidowWadman]

What a load of illiberal women-hating codswallop.

[solidgoldbrass]

Except that Bindel is a classic example of the self-righteous bully school of feminism in that anythign she doesn't like is Wrong and other women should just Obey Bindel.

[Emphaticmaybe]

Julie does mention at the end of her piece that it is more difficult to get on board with radical feminism, ( as she sees it) if you are heterosexual. I certainly struggle with this.

[Nyac]

I like unapologetic feminism.

It's a shame how much people like to undermine it or its proponent. Radical feminism really is where it's at, if we want to end patriarchy and free women.

[Nyac]

proponents

[Greythorne]

Great article.

[WidowWadman]

I just wonder why post the link now? The article is a good nine months old.

[Portofino]

I liked it.

[WasabiTillyMinto]

nyac I like unapologetic feminism. yes

[KRITIQ]

I don't like the terms "fun fem" or "fem bot." Surely one can challenge or question ideas, suggest they are inconsistent and explain why without resorting to name-calling. It's like "lipstick lesbian" was in the early 90's. Silly names imho undermine what may otherwise be genuine arguments.

Having said that, I would like feminists of all kinds to focus more on what unites us rather than what divides us. Surely that creates more opportunity for engaging with those with whom we disagree, giving a better chance of changing hearts and minds than standing at the sides, calling them names and deriding them for not being "proper feminists." That doesn't mean going along with things you disagree with, but it means recognising that those who don't share your/our perspective may actually be just at a different stage of their "journey," and could actually become a genuine ally one day.

[Sausageeggbacon]

NYAC the more radical feminism may be for you but being new to the structure and concept of feminism as well as being happy in my marriage and as a mother what is radical and what isn't. I don't want to tell another women her concept of feminism is wrong just because her views are different to mine but I do want to see the stopping of FGM and Rape. I don't want to argue about which views are right.

And as I am new to feminism seen statements like the title is quite scary for those of us that are not fully committed yet.

[HopeForTheBest]

If men like a particular brand of feminism, it means it is not working

Wtaf?

[EclecticShock]

I'm new to this section of mn. I find it patronising that it seems some people on this board think that those that don't agree with them just haven't seen the light yet. It's like talking to a born again Christian. Radical feminism has really put me off this board to be honest.

What are you trying to achieve here? What is your ideology?

[BasilEatsFoulEggs]

I think the problem is that in any progressive or revolutionary movement, the bits the patriarchy/ capitalism likes, are seized upon and held up (by those who don't support it) as the real movement while the bits they don't like, they dump.

So if you are part of a movement and the establishment or the power structures appear to like bits of it, you need to examine why they like it - why are they promoting this bit and not that?

An example is governments encouraged women to enter the workplace and stay in it because a larger pool of workers lowers wages, while refusing to change the structural sexism within the workplace which means that anyone with ongoing caring responsibilities, finds it very difficult to function and is severely hampered in progressing to the top -hence the glass ceiling.

I agree that you can disagree with someone without name-calling, but "fun-femininsm" doesn't count as name calling in my book. You also have to be aware, that while you can support the individuals who are at that stage of their journey, the people who have most power, are absolutely intent on ensuring that that stage is absolutely the end point for most of us, if we get there at all, and they'd really rather we hadn't got quite that far, thank you very much.

[EclecticShock]

In fact, having read a few threads on this board, it generally smacks of female supremacy. This is not what I expected from feminism. I respected feminism but I was obviously very naive about the more fundamentalist side to it. I expect to be ignored as that's what seems to happen as people who disagree are seen as trouble makers or trolls. Or maybe you'll respond as you pity me being under the control of the patriarchal viewpoint. What a load of rubbish. Extremists are not healthy when they are dismissive of equality, the one thing they purport to seek. It's shame this board doesn't discuss topics which are actually useful in building a cohesive equality based society. What is wrong with the concept of humanism?

[EclecticShock]

Are any of the radical feminists on here, actually successfully integrating into male dominated professions?

[SinicalSanta]

No one can patronise you without your consent, to paraphrase the saying. They can try, sure, but you van shrug it off.
Loads of people know loads more than me on losds- well, every - topic. But if it chimes it chimes, the truth is the truth even if it's not packaged attractively.
It's like you are supposed to ne seduced into a particular political stance, when really it's there for the taking if you want it.
.

[EclecticShock]

Such psychological bullshit, pardon my expression. Do you really think you can win hearts and minds with this approach. It's akin to brainwashing IMO.

[EclecticShock]

Actually, I correct myself. You will win hearts and minds... Of the vulnerable.

[TunipTheVegemal]

female supremacy?
would you mind explaining? I've never seen any posts suggesting women should be in control over men - just stuff from feminists of all sorts, wanting equality.