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.

Jezebel is a good example of 'fun feminism'. They do have good articles and debates but quite a lot of the time I just go 'really and how is that relevant/helpful in the fight for womens lib.'

Sorry, amillion? This isn't AIBU. It is not about point scoring. I am not claiming to be SuperFeminist extraordinare. I said upthread that I am learning all the time. I said I would ask know why anyone thought these things were good. You are free to answer anything you like. Are you going to give your answer?

Will there be any examples of the promotion of female supremacy here or was that poster full of shit?

it was suggested fem topics was feminist space for feminists,with a feminist ethos and fem moderation
mnhq asserted fem topics are discussion topic about feminism in the mn domain but not a feminist board. all got heated, some flounced, felt mnhq unsupportive. I don't think mnhq unsupportive at all, pretty much asserted mn open to all discursive

IMO,necessary and cleared the air

Sorry Portofino.I forgot you were the one that said you were learning.

Open minded?

Pull the other one

Yet another thread about how narsty and bullying all the nasty feminists are.

By people accusing us of brainwashing, bullying etc.

Now you're using the word bullying when you've said all those horrible things about feminists Eclectic. I think that's totally outrageous.

psychological warfare forsooth

But you should expect some level of irritation at your pov if you march into fwr and say 'feminism is a load of shite' or some such thing. At the very least.

"Sorry Portofino.I forgot you were the one that said you were learning". Yep and happy to give you some tips on the journey into feminism if you want them.

I disagreed with slutwalk,the imagery,the casual use of slut.trying to be ironic and failing. and no I don't think media covered it and took photos as they were ideologically sympathetic,I think slut walk was some misguided women enacting a schlocky stereotype

I do dispute the notion that Jordan and glamour modeling et al is empowering as these women made choce and earn good money. hell no, that's not choice it's titillation dressed up as good business acumen

Any answers eclectic shock? Just so you know, being asked questions isn't the same as being bullied.
To be frank you did come bursting onto the thread with unpleasant hectoring remarks
Rback on them if you think not. I did engage with you in good faith before I realised you weren't here for engagement. But I always try to give my opinion in a reasonable polite way, on the assumption that people want a proper discussion. Sometimes disappointment makes me sharp. I feel.a bit of a fool for trying as I have been stung horribly in the past. But I do find the subject very interesting and helpful.

Feel free amillion, to give your feminist critique of Burlesque, if you have one.

IIRC, there was a big thread about whether the section was pro-feminist or just about feminism. The discussion got heated, as you might imagine.

In a follow-up thread, MNHQ declared that the section was about feminism, and that non-feminists were welcome to post.

That, along with a belief that MRAs were 'invading' the site and harassing users, drove a few posters off the site, the most notable being dittany. She came back a few months later, and possibly others did too, but hers is the most... 'memorable' posting style.

demanding answers is quite hectoring
who made you paxman in mn

I would question any feminists whose main focus is being 'sex positive', given the many other crucial issues involved in the women's rights movement. How common are they, though? I can't think of any serious feminist campaigners like this... only women like Brooke Magnanti who think all feminists are dried-up humourless old hags anyway. Someone above mentioned Jezebel - which is certainly full of tedious celebrity shit, but also mounts a sterling defence of Roe v. Wade. The attitudes attributed to fun feminists by Julie Bindel certainly exist, but mostly (in my experience) they're held by misogynistic twats, rather than self-identified feminists.

Is that at me sm?
Nope just asking. . Questions answers back and forth. Discursive. Not just flinging shite everywhere

I'm surprised so may people have take offense at this thread.

I didn't post this article with anybody on Mumsnet in mind. There is virtually no sex positive feminism on this site. It is not in evidence here.

Sadly it's been used as an excuse to bash people here. I don't think that's right. Let's keep this to a general discussion instead of having a go at other posters. Disagreeing is fine, even very robustly, but talking about female supremacy or brainwashing etc with regards to people here is really out of order.

I'm aware of the quote from Andrea Dworkin - I think it's from a chapter in Renate Klein's anthology on Radical Feminism. I lent out the book about 10 years ago and didn't get it back, so can't be sure! :-)

Still don't like the term "fun fem" and still think there's a risk it can be used just to dismiss and silence those who don't meet some arbitrary standard of feminist values. I'd rather see arguments against the perpetuation of specific beliefs and practices rather than a list of "things that aren't really feminist," which will probably get lots of things tacked on the end and there will never be any agreement on.

For what it's worth, discussion of sexual oppression IS going to be scary, regardless of how it's done. It's impossible to keep the political from being personal and vice versa, so people will have strong feelings and use strong language in articulating these. Perhaps one needs a strong stomach to engage in discussions here and elsewhere on feminism. Being just a textual medium, perhaps we would all benefit from remembering how easy it is to misunderstand and be misunderstood. But, I would never want folks to feel they need to sanitise their experience or views to be more palatable. The experience of being at the sharp end of misogyny, whether individually or collectively, isn't something that should be sugar-coated, imho.

Why is this thread now just one long personal attack?

Back to the op and 'if men like [it] . . . it's not working' of strands of feminism, very useful. Or: if it makes men shriek hysterically about female supremacy it must be doing something right. Thanks op.

Sorry, what questions do you want answering? The female supremacy thing! How about every thread on this board that talks about ignoring male posters or excluding how topics affect them.