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.

That's because the focus of this board are issues that effect women, not how they effect people.
Also I've never seen a male poster being targeted for being male, I have seen them shot down in flames because they were attacking feminism.

I don't see where Nyac has done anything passive aggressive on this thread...

Instead of reading the threads logically, try it with your knickers in a twist fridakahlo and you might see things differently.

Rubbish, I read a post earlier, about how the OP ignores post from men and will respond to women who disagree with her, because she feels the need to educate them.

No you're right, NYAC has been subdued on this thread. Please read the transgender thread.

The world is full of discussions about men though, there should be space for conversations which don't 'naturally' drift man wards. There's space for everything.
I think sometimes that feminism is to human rights what what save the polar ice caps is to environmentalism.you can't keep getting side tracked into rain forest discussions, important as they are, or you'd.never solve the polar problem

I thought it was interesting when there was a thread a while back on AIBU about a woman who was asexual. People seem genuinely horrified by the idea. I'd like there to be a bit more of a balance rather than the way everything at the moment is about performative sexuality. It would be better if there was a context of women having a range of options that were viewed as equally acceptable.

I also hardly ever see people going into other areas of the board and posting on threads with irrelavancies to the actual topic. At least they never seem quite so targetted.

There's quite a lot of not overtly feminist material here eclectic. No surprise to you surely?

Anyway, this is getting out of hand, apologies. I am not personally attacking NYAC, as I have only encountered her on one thread. My point is that this board should do something about extremist views and not just let them run. It's not encouraging to women who want to participate and understand feminism.

lol

don't forget the fundamentalism etc

If fun feminism relates to those that are sex positive, although I think that is another contestable term. It seems that the idea that women who want to live a life that involves casual sex and many partners for pleasure or lifestyle choice, is a woman of value. Those that do the same for money are being oppressed and used by the patriarchy, hence to be treated as suspect especialy if they say that they are the ones making the decisions. Same with porn.

flatulette, I don't fully understand either of your last two posts, please expand.

Make that last three posts.

eclectic I don't think anything should be 'done' about extremist views, rather that the people who hold them should listen to others as well, rather than steamroller over less radical feminists. I don't get some of the hardcore stuff that's posted but it's all part of the discussion. I suppose it would be good to see less preaching and more talking. (She says, preachily :) )

You're addressing the wrong person Eclectic, SeaHouses said the thread was one long personal attack. Not me.

Kritiq, the quote "I'm a radical feminist, not the fun kind" was a remark that Dworkin made in a debate with Susie Bright and some other sex industry positive feminist. It's probably been repeated in quite a few books, maybe in Radically Speaking too, although I'll take your word for it, I can't remember. It's a long book.

I think it's a bit of a shame you've seized on that one phrase. Julie Bindel was a friend of Dworkin's, she knew what she'd suffered at the hands of the "fun fems", some of whom made careers out of attacking Dworkin. Careers that were much more lucrative than Dworkin herself ever had. Dworkin also used to have to take bodyguards to speaking engagements because of of the death threats she received because she did speak out against male cruelty against women, including sexual cruelty. She believed, pretty understandably, that she would be attacked one day for what she was saying, but she didn't stop. So in comparison to the sex positive feminists who don't face that level of hatred, she wasn't a fun fem.

Sex industry positive feminists should be held accountable for their defense of pimps, johns, voyeurs, pornographers and male sadists. That's Julie Bindel's argument, and the main point here.

When I say do something about them, I purely mean be bothered to challe be them, although I can see that would be time consuming.

Sorry, challenge them... Typo

fun Fems,does sound ghastly
like Jordan or the towie lassies,bein all empowered innit
empowered to get plastic tits,tans and agents

I like the point made about the feminist section being uncomfortable but challenging. Unfortunately, I don't get the impression that I would be a welcome regular poster although if I held radical feminist views I would be accepted?

How would you hold people to account, what would be the charge, what method of investigation would you use, who would make the judgement about the impact that those sex positve fems made.Lastly how could any reasoned argument be agreed by people who fundementaly disagree. What bidle et al said is her thinking backed by her reading and how she formed her ideas based on her reading. It is her argument nothing more. It is not truth as in her truth is not the truth that others share. so therefore it is only her truth.

I answered the question about female supremacy and no response. We're you interested in my answer?