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.

EclecticShock, see the post that ecclesvet kindly put on here at 22.22pm
What she did not do was tell us that the page we needed was page 40 out of 41!after I scrolled through most of them!

No comments on the transgender thread either. What a surprise. Can e bothered to defend and agree but not challenge and disagree? Or am I mistaken?

A lot of women share the truth that pornography, prostitution, BDSM and the sex industry are harmful to women, and agree it's outrageous that anybody calling themselves a feminist would be promoting them as a route to women's liberation.

I think the charge against sex positive feminsits is that their actions are harmful to women and that they are also getting in the way of the actual fight against male supremacy.

Mind you, I think this is watertight:

"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."

in fairness no one needs to agree and no one can confer acceptance to another
I do expect these topics to become name calling spats
it's just they way it seems to go
however,despite the aggro I do like reading and participating. and after all it's words on the screen and heated riposte

Sorry, amillionyears! I thought the hash with the post ID number after it would direct you straight there, but now I guess that only works if you have the whole thread on one page like I do.

Can't find page 40, on phone. What was the gist?

Fyi, MN hates sites to be limited.It likes as much debate as possible.It likes money and advertising so wants things to be lively!!Getting rid of posters is counterproductive!

NYAC, please explain how that is "water tight"?

Just out of interest, does anyone believe I'm a troll?

lol no idea
if I want to be called troll I post on fem topics
troll
MRA
ant feminist
derailer
...you need to accumulate those too. oft used put downs of choice

I suspect that those "other" feminists would disagree with your water tight test NYAC. I do not say that you are wrong or they are wrong I ask how do each find a way to move forward, if they do not then the entire movement is forever split, and even if you want to argue that it is the work of mra it wont change the fact that women cannot be strong enough to agree on the vast majority of the commonalites.

Folks selectively quote from Dworkin's writings and speeches, just as they tend to do from other great thinkers who are no longer with us. They aren't around to corroborate or refute what is attributed to them and those who knew them in life rarely share identical experiences or interpretations of their engagement with them. Many of those who despised her views (and extended that to hatred of her as a person,) in life continue to misquote and wrongly attribute ideas and beliefs to her even now, (well, not surprisingly, really.)

Regardless of the origins of the term "fun fem," or the context in which which you say (and I also think) Julie Bindel chose to use it, I still don't think it's a helpful term. That was the point I was making. It's too porous to have a useful definition and like "politically correct" can be easily used as or experienced as just a throw away "slur." I'd prefer to get beyond what could be seen as just name calling to actually challenging and questioning people about those specific points about prostitution, sexualisation of children, pornography, collusion with rape, etc.

Equally, I despise the term "sex positive feminism." It suggests that those who don't think prostitution, porn, stripping, etc. are tickity boo are "negative" about sex, which ain't the case. Similarly, I don't like the term "pro life" for those who oppose a woman's right to choose. Advocates of reproductive rights and choice aren't anti-life, fgs.

NTFS, do you think that there is a troubling split in feminism?

fem topic bingo has someone been called troll?
clickety click
nowt like a good bit of youse this and dat to enrich a thread

I don't know or care who is troll
but you know what accusation of troll is equally lame and distracting

porto I'm beginning to warm to radical feminist humour :)

Julie Bindel was a friend of Dworkin's. I think it's unlikely that she's taking Dworkin's words out of context. They shared the same politics. Julie Bindel even got Dworkin her contract with the Guardian here in the UK.

Anyway I think you're missing the point. Seizing on the term "fun fem" to take issue with, rather than addressing the substance of Julie Bindel's argument that the people who are espousing those views are doing real harm to women and to feminism, seems a little bit of a derail. It's not her who can't get past the namecalling it seems.

It really is time that feminism was reclaimed by actual feminists. Radically Speaking which you mentioned earlier, argues the very same thing, although they are talking about postmodernists who decided to claim they were feminists, rather than the sex positives (although they are closely connected).

Maybe I should just quote a bit more of the article, and it might tempt people to engage. We'll see I guess:

"I am tired of being told by so-called third-wavers that my feminism is fascist, old hat, irrelevant and man hating. It is nothing personal to me; just that feminism is something that has been central to my life since I was a teenager. I do not want to see its radical edge co-opted by over-privileged, self-serving faux feminists.

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."

Interesting thread. Too late for me as I have womanly duties to attend to in the morning ;)

Seahouses Yes the evidence for that is on this thread and others on this site.

She's right, making your politics so dilute that they appeal to the class that oppresses you, or even turning your politics around so they represent the oppressor class's interests, is a huge mistake.

It's important for feminists to examine our strategies.

I hope people do look at the trans thread, because despite the claims, I did not make any personal attacks on there.

I did have some posts deleted for apparent "transphobia". Although it appears that any radical feminist view on trans is "transphobic" so it's surprising that they weren't all deleted.

lol nyac people are engaging just not on your terms maybe
you see thats how threads go, we all interject,discuss etc.
we don't necessarily need guided back to your op and more c&p quotes. why don't you actively go with flow see where convo goes

NTFS, for some reason I don't think of this site as being indicative of what is going on in feminism.

Nyac, I do think that there are some issues where all feminists do tend to come together - reproductive rights for example.

"I am tired of being told by so-called third-wavers that my feminism is fascist, old hat, irrelevant and man hating. It is nothing personal to me; just that feminism is something that has been central to my life since I was a teenager. I do not want to see its radical edge co-opted by over-privileged, self-serving faux feminists.

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."

This is exactly the part I have a problem with. Just because other women who believe in feminism do not agree with you doesn't mean we weep when men disagree with our views. How ridiculous and patronising.