Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

What are your thoughts on this Andrea Dworkin quote?

66 replies

EatsBrainsAndLeaves · 13/09/2012 09:17

I love this quote. Wondered what women here thought about it?

""It is not in becoming a whore that a woman becomes an outlaw in this man's world; it is in the possession of herself, the ownership and effective control of her own body, her seperateness and distinctness, the integrity of her body as hers, not his.

Prostitution may be against the written law, but no prostitute has defied the prerogatives or power of men as a class through prostitution. No prostitute provides any model for freedom or action in a world of freedom that can be used with intelligence and integrity by a woman; the [happy hooker] model exists to entice counterfeit female sexual revolutionaries, gullible liberated girls, and to serve the men who enjoy them" ~ Andrea Dworkin, 'Right-Wing Women'"

OP posts:
TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 13/09/2012 11:02

NCG if you have an issue with Eats, you have am issue with Eats. Why describe that as an issue with basic feminism?

MisogynistToolMagnet · 13/09/2012 11:00

Hully, please don't pick on people's spelling. I struggle with separate, thanks to dyslexia. It's really most unpleasant.

namechangeguy · 13/09/2012 10:59

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

MisogynistToolMagnet · 13/09/2012 10:59

You mean the possibility that they had real life to deal with, NCG? Hmm

She's right, to an extent. However, I'd argue that being a woman, in a man's world, makes you an outlaw. They set impossible goals for women to reach, and chastise us when we miss the post, even by a margin.

Leithlurker · 13/09/2012 10:58

No Idea what NCG is on, waiting with baited breath to find out as it sounds like good stuff and I am hoping I can have some!

So to my class thing, I would still like some reference to where that notion comes from, if it is one that she has coined herself (Dwarkin) then I think it is as useful as using the the "The Disabled". It lumps many different experiences, points of view, politicle, social, and economic factors together and then reduces them to the lowest common denominator. This is symptomatic of something that is not just confined to feminism, but is actually reflective of neo liberal and even right wing thinking. Akin to the argument that right wingers espouse that we are all selfish and that we will always put ourselves first. Hence the ability of Thatcher to claim that "no such thing as society exists".

I am not saying that feminists are neo liberal, but see that's my point I am not saying that because I I know that we cannot reduce women, people in to easy fit categories. So why then as a constructive criticism of power do "some" feminists want to do that when it comes to calling men a separate class?

Hullygully · 13/09/2012 10:58

Is it her or you who can't spell sepArate?

My consideration of the quote's merit is marred by this appalling faux pas.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 13/09/2012 10:55

Which question?

The thread was started less than two hours ago, how can anyone have been said to have abandoned it?

namechangeguy · 13/09/2012 10:51

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 13/09/2012 10:45

What the actual fuck does that post mean, NCG?

namechangeguy · 13/09/2012 10:43

Basic feminism seems to run away as soon as it is posed a difficult question, so I wonder how useful it really is?

seeker · 13/09/2012 09:33

Isn't she using "class" to mean "group of similar organisms"? In a biological sense?

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 13/09/2012 09:32

I think she is using class in the sense of group. How do you interpret it, LL?

Original poster
EatsBrainsAndLeaves · 13/09/2012 09:32

Feminists talk about class of men as a political class. It is men as a class who oppress women as a class. This is basic feminism leithlurker.

OP posts:
Leithlurker · 13/09/2012 09:31

Sorry my apologise to Dworkin (She should be in the slightest worried ha!) and to you Eats I mis read what Callina said. As you were!

Leithlurker · 13/09/2012 09:28

It is flawed in the sense that calling men a "class" is not a valid statement. So the sense that she is trying to convay that of power and the use of power is lost. It can easily be replaced by other descriptions but it is interesting that she uses class.

I would be interested to see the whole text to see if she has a source for using that description.

CailinDana · 13/09/2012 09:20

It's spot on IMO.

But are there those who claim prostitution is a way of defying "the prerogatives or power of men as a class"?