Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

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

562 replies

Nyac · 07/05/2012 18:43

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.

OP posts:
minimathsmouse · 09/05/2012 21:41

Electic, its a two way dialectical process, if you read back over the thread, go away do some more reading, do some more thinking, hey that's what it's all about. I don't know how others feel but it's fine to be challenged and that can change peoples opinions, I've listened to what you have said and whilst I disagree I will still respect and I will reflect on what others have said (can't speak for others)! but personal attacks are not on.

EclecticShock · 09/05/2012 21:40

As far as I can see, I'm engaging. Engaging doesn't mean agreeing. It means listening and thinking through other pooled arguments. I didn't know anything about rad fem until this week. I have read and sought to understood viewpoints, even through outside sources. Do how am I not engaging?

scottishmummy · 09/05/2012 21:37

a more global feminism turn off expressed on mn is the stridency and radical pov.it can be very didactic. there have been numerous mn threads that many find the fem topics too shouty,too much name calling

EclecticShock · 09/05/2012 21:37

So have I misunderstood that this board is open to all
people? Even if it's only open to feminists, I would count myself as believing in equality for men and women. Or do I have to be assessed by the people already on this board and accepted or rejected as they see fit?

LRDtheFeministDragon · 09/05/2012 21:36

Cross-posted.

Eclectic, you are not allowed to post personal attacks on this site. To be honest, if your are trying to say that the only argument you can think of is a personal attack ... why bother?

It would be better to engage with the arguments people post, no?

minimathsmouse · 09/05/2012 21:35

We have moved from competitive feminism to competitive "I have a better education" and could write this standing on my head, so dismiss dismiss dismiss. Is that the same way in which middle class liberals dismiss the disadvantaged or those who end up working in the sex industry or getting into BDSM and concede they are just a little bargain to be had with the patriarchy, a way of protecting your own freedoms.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 09/05/2012 21:33

eclectic - I agree being rude is subjective ... but that, I would imagine, is why MNHQ felt the need to explain that lots of people found you rude.

EclecticShock · 09/05/2012 21:32

So now, I can't direct my posts at one person, as that's personal attack, but I can't direct it at "some people" as that's not acceptable either. I get the impression I'm not allowed to lost at all because I have strong views. However, other people with strong views can post?

Original poster
Nyac · 09/05/2012 21:31

I know of people who have turned away from feminism because they thought that all it had to offer them was empowerment through pole-dancing or wearing lipstick. The fun fems have offered an image of feminsim (the unchallenging kind) which the media have lapped up - hence the massive coverage of slutwalks, compared to the complete radio silence on Take Back the Night or Million Women Rise. They have distorted our movement, and it's time to get it back.

OP posts:
LRDtheFeministDragon · 09/05/2012 21:31

I don't know, catgirl - I thought she was pretty clear, but I do see what you're saying that it would also be good to see articles defining different feminist movements and talking more about the same issues.

There are a fair few links to such articles and books in this section - shall I dig some out?

I think it's fair to remember that although she's not writing in a specialist feminist context, lots of papers have sections on special interests. I am not all that clued up on cars, but if you read a car column in a national paper, it won't stop to explain what is a 'good' time to go 1-60, or what torque means. It'll assume you know. I think that it is fair to assume a certain level of knowledge and/or ability to google?

EclecticShock · 09/05/2012 21:29

I'm so confused hmm, I don't even know if you're being sarcastic blush

Original poster
Nyac · 09/05/2012 21:28

I don't think there's anything wrong with the writing, I think wittering on about it is a bit of a distraction really. I mean who cares? As I said it's the political points she's making that are what are important. I'm sure JB would rather be remembered for what she said and did than how she said it. There are plenty of stylish writers out there with terrible misogynistic politics.

What someone is saying is more important than how they say it. I realise that that's not an idea that sits well with many here, but from a political point of view it's true.

OP posts:
scottishmummy · 09/05/2012 21:28

I don't see it as a crucial point
I see low level sniping, and competitive feminism who is most rad and/or worthy

EclecticShock · 09/05/2012 21:27

Being rude is subjective surely.

minimathsmouse · 09/05/2012 21:26

Does it matter how well or otherwise Bindel has written this, she still raises a really crucial point, there is an obvious implosion in modern mainstream feminism which is likely to set back women's rights and not advance them.

scottishmummy · 09/05/2012 21:24

you clearly hold the writing in some regard?you keep asking us to return to article , keep c&p it in case we missed any pertinent points

Original poster
Nyac · 09/05/2012 21:23

Well it's not the writing that's the main issue catgirl, especially given that it's a matter of taste, it's the politics.

Are her politics correct? I'd say they are. She's right that sex positive feminsim (fun feminism) has had a malign influence on feminism. For example people like Caitlin Moran who go around saying that porn is fine, and claiming that they are doing it from a feminist perspective and that theirs is a feminsit position need to stop it right now.

OP posts:
scottishmummy · 09/05/2012 21:23

yes dreadful article it would flunk higher english

catgirl1976 · 09/05/2012 21:21

But she does not expand on how she believes fun feminism is damaging feminism. So how would a reader assess the point she is making? How would they be able to understand this? She also makes silly statements about women "weeping" when men dissapprove of thier views.

Appallling writing I am afraid

BasilEatsFoulEggs · 09/05/2012 21:21

"Welcome to the home of extremists who like propaganda"

Don't you think that comes across as very rude?

It is a very aggressive thing to post.

Did you mean it to be?

scottishmummy · 09/05/2012 21:21

and habitual c&p adds little to discussion
other than battering home points already made

Original poster
Nyac · 09/05/2012 21:19

How could you submit SM. It's just words on a screen. I'm just making my points and arguments, same as you're making yours. Surely you don't object to that?

OP posts:
minimathsmouse · 09/05/2012 21:19

Scittish, that isn't at all helpful.

Just reading that paragraph it strikes me that if lipstick wearing and pole dancing were our greatest gains some younger women surely would see through that and would give up. Radical feminism and indeed from my point of view marxist feminism has been sidelined. It isn't that accessible to women. Is it because the media has promoted this one strand to use to dismiss all feminism?

catgirl1976 · 09/05/2012 21:19

She at no point makes reference to "sex positive" feminism - which is lay uf that is what she means by fun fem - nor does she define what ff or spf are (given she is not writing in a feminist publication this is poor). She does ascribe a focus only on indviduality to "fum fem" which is not entirely accurate and is in no way explained or explored

Very poor writing

Original poster
Nyac · 09/05/2012 21:18

The point that they are damaging feminism certainly is Catgirl:

"These "fun feminists", who have little or no idea about the theory or practice of this movement, take advantage of the benefits that radicals have fought long and hard for, whilst contributing nothing. In fact, they are damaging to other women, and are destroying progress won by those of us who do not weep when men disapprove of our views."

OP posts:
Swipe left for the next trending thread