The Saturday interview: Caitlin Moran(156 Posts)
Does she not know the figures about trafficking and abuse in porn? Can she not see that if feminists started making it it wouldn't undo that? Not to mention have little effect on the objectification argument.
Lenin, like you I think she has completely missed the point about women's achievements. The 'fact' that male achievements have outnumbered women's in the past is because women WERE NOT ALLOWED to do anything in these fields and what they did was often co-opted by men who took all the glory for it. Grrrr.
She goes into more detail in the book on both topics and it makes much more sense when you read the whole thing. To be honest, I don't really recognise a lot of what she wrote from the way it is presented in that write-up.
Does she clarify this bit?
'"I don't think that women being seen as inferior is a prejudice based on male hatred of women. When you look at history" achievements in arts, science, exploration, for instance "it's a prejudice based on simple fact."'
She does seem to be saying that women are creatively/intellectually inferior... please tell me she has been misquoted??
Nothing here to make the average male reader feel challenged or uncomfortable
Yes, she does, Mooncup. I think that is a misrepresention of what she says.
What I didn't understand was this bit:
'[Feminism as] A conversation in which anything can be said, as long as it's civil, and kind, and where the guiding principles are, "Does this apply to men, too?" and "is it polite?" if not, call time on it. '
Is she saying that feminist issues can only be discussed if they apply to men too, or that it's not a feminist issue if it applies to men too? The latter, I hope!
That bit is very over-simplified too. Honestly, just get the book- it's very cheap on kindle.
Yes, I've already ordered it! I decided to get the paper copy as I'm sure I'll want to pass it on.
I think that's a shame, Prolesworth. It is very good, and very accessible.
Oh, I dont come on mumsnet to identify myself as a mother. I do it to get away from the kids!
Yes, I do. I barely recognise the book from that article.
I doubt it, Lenin- I'm still not well. But if I perk up...
I can't précis it really- that article shows that when you take the humour out, it all comes across as a bit flat and over-simplified
plus I can't be arsed and am MNing while having my dinner. I will say though that I'd encourage my teenage daughter to read it, and although there are bits and bobs I disagree with, I'm delighted somebody is raising the topic in what is probably going to be a bestseller this week. It is partly a personal memoir too, and I enjoy that kind of writing.
So this is where the "modern feminism" label has come from. I have been wondering since last weekend when there were quite a few threads that mentioned it. I get a feeling in the air that the pendulum swung hard from second wave to third wave and there is an attempt now to settle it somewhere in between. Personally, I think it needs to be nudged over more towards the former if it is not to be an appeasement to the status-quo. Focussing on women and smashing down the imposed social constraints is brilliant. Glossing over the nitty gritty of the actual harm that comes to women at the hands of men, as in porn, is a mistake.
As Mr D says, there doesn't seem to be anything that is at all worrisome for men, let alone the Patriarchy. It's not that I want men to be on the run, but at least produce something that will make them take a blind bit of notice, for crying out loud.
Isn't/wasn't CM a mner?
Join the discussion
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.