Naomi Wolf

[BombusBombus]

She's completely self promoting and a bit nuts isn't she? I just saw her on Newsnight and I wanted to throw thing at the screen. Why talk about defined consent when we can talk about your book?

In answer to the OP, yes.

The reason the male media promote her brand of feminism, is because it doesn't threaten the status quo. That's why they like her. That's why they promote her. If all women stop at feminists like her and Caitlin Moran, then men can contain feminism and make sure women don't make any serious inroads into male power.

There's a reason certain feminists are promoted and called upon to comment even on stuff they know sweet FA about, and others who are far more radical, aren't. And it's about making sure that feminism is co-opted and neutred.

Agree with that Fastidia (though I have a bit more time for Caitlin), and would add that there's nothing the mainstream media like more than an attractive woman with bonkers ideas about sexual issues.

Good Suzanne Moore piece here:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/05/naomi-wolf-book-vagina-feminism

Yes it's slightly unfair of me to rope in Caitlin Moran with Naomi Wolf. She's much better. Still safe for patriarchy to promote though.

I liked that Moore piece, too.

There is a widespread tendency for the media to give huge platforms to people with very little expertise but a lot of marketability. Agree that there is the special dynamic with attractive women commentators with "safe" feminist perspectives, but it is broader than that too. The person that comes to mind (pretty much at random) is Giles Fraser, the cleric who shot to fame when he resigned his post at St Pauls during the Occupy protest and is now firmly anchored as part of the chatterati.

The tendency seems to be getting worse, and I guess this is because of several factors coming together: the cash poverty of newspapers, which means that can't train and deploy journalists of the highest standards and increasingly rely on personality columnists and such like; the fact that newspapers are competing with the huge culture of chat and blogging online, which seems to involve celebrating a kind of everyman/everywoman slapdash run at the truth in place of more difficult and cautious commentary; the increasing stranglehold of marketing priorities on publishing priorities, which means a pretty or famous or controversial author is selected for herself rather than her writing.

It is all very depressing.

Re Caitlin Moran, I haven't read her, but I was really disappointed when I heard her on the radio the other day. It did make me wonder whether she too had been massively oversold.

Oh yes she totally has Oaty.

The thing is, there has been such a dearth of feminist thinking in the mainstream for so long, that some young woman saying some of the same things feminists said 30 years ago comes along and women seize on her hungrily because she's saying such obviously commonsense stuff (on some issues) and it's presented as revolutionary but commonsense at the same time, so safe to embrace. They haven't heard the arguments before because the media has made damned sure they haven't been part of mainstream discourse.

And of course, she's also reassuring women that they don't have to earn male disapproval by having hairy pits or challenging them in any way. So she doesn't frighten the horses too much. There is a massive resurgence in interest in feminism so the media has to address it and channel it somehow. Good looking feminists who can be relied upon not to really rock the boat, are idea.

Ideal even

Youthink Wolf is derivative and lacking originality? Caitlin Moran makes Wolf look like Socrates.

Caitlin Moran is damn funny though.

Oh, yes, Caitlin is funny and personally I am not bothered about a new high profile feminist coming through in each generation and basically regurgitating the established femiist argument for a new set if readers. Certainly, I acceot that Wolf was not completely origonal in The Beauty Myth, but it was revelatory for me, as a 17 year old. I loved it and devoured it, and have reread it a few times over the years. It is really well researched (which you cannot say for Wolf's subsequent works, sadly).

So, the same for Caitlin...if she gets loads of teens laughing and reading and thinking about feminism and self identifying as feminists, great.

But I don't think Moran is hOlding herself out as an authority on feminism. She wrote a memoir which included her covering some aspects of feminism as they'd impacted her life.

It is nice to have someone saying, "of course I'm a feminist, duh!" rather than, "I'm not a feminist, but..." I think she's a writer who is a feminist more than a feminist writer.

Yes, good point. That's why Caitlin Moran is kind of OK in the great scheme of things isn't it, whereas Naomi W - oh dear.

so has Naomi always been like this?

I was obviously more impressed by the beauty myth than most of you, but it feels like a long time ago and she sounds like a completely different person now. Actually feel quite miserable after that webchat, how long before 'leading feminists' start to campaign against abortion now they are assailing the right to anonymity. I can't believe anyone who know anything about what's involved in reporting and seeing cases though to prosecution would even think it.

This is twice in one week I have been put off my afternoon wank. :(

Having followed the webchat (a proud day for the MN feminism section, may I say) I've come to the conclusion that Naomi W is incapable of abstract thought. She doesn't seem to be able to follow a train of reasoning through to its conclusion and answered all quibbles with 'oh but lots of people (men/women/trans/whatever) have written in to tell me that the book has CHANGED THEIR LIVES'.

Which is odd because the book has only just been published. It's been available in the UK for a few days and is not released in the US until next Monday. So, how can all these thousands of people have not only read the book but had their lives transformed AND written in to Naomi to tell her all about it?

Oh Alameda :( But surely you've learnt from Naomi always to prioritise your vagina's needs over any form of rational thought.

heh, but she can't take the credit. Have always been good at that.

Yeah that confused me too - it was almost like she was cutting and pasting some responses "the amazing research on blah blah" type stuff. Maybe some is American hyperbole writing style but it came across weirdly.

This is good and worth reading to the end...

m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/05/naomi-wolf-book-vagina-feminism?cat=commentisfree&type=article

Everyone was amazing on the chat thread
Ms Wolf just wanted to sell her book and her weird unoriginal ideas. I couldn't believe that letter about Assange-
I wonder if she will write an apology

That webchat was very odd, it was embarrassing to watch tbh.

I enjoyed The Beauty Myth when I read it as a teenager (haven't really revisited it since, but I seem to remember it made some good points and made an impression on me, changed the way I thought about some thing etc) but she really has lost the plot since then...

The webchat was odd. She obviously came prepared to promote her new book at all costs and she really cherry picked the questions which she could spin into a discussion of her book.

I can't complain, she answered loads of my questions, but that's because I did not focus on Assange.

I feel so, so conflicted. I used to love, love, love her and The Beauty Myth did change my life and so I was pretty excited to have the chance to ask her questions.....so I posted quite a few, which was totally against the rules of a webchat.

I am embarrassed to admit I have really not followed the Assange case closely. I could claim it's because I live abroad, but absolutely no excuse. Having read up on the Assange links this aft I do feel she has lost her way. Her subsequent books were all very mixed (polite way to put it) and I think I would have forgiven her that....but I am struggling now with her. Her crap subsequent books + Assange + weird webchat + this new book......

I also think she is extremely guilty of focussing on issues as and when they affect her, without looking at the wider world, feminist challenges. It is all very me, me, me:

I'm young and beautiful.....I'll write the Beauty Myth

I'm suddenly empowered and rich....I'll write Fire with Fire and be very critical of "victim feminism"

I am now married and trying to have a baby.....I'll write Misconceptions

Ooops, my vagina is broken....I'll write a book called Vagina

Just popping in to condole with Alameda's lost wank and to say "hear, hear" to Greythorne's last point.

Greythorne yours were good questions

It's helped me pinpoint further what I didn't like about her posts - people asked "what do you think of this or that?" And many answers were
Chapter X says this not I think this. I know she was promoting the book but the name was up at the top, we'd all know where to get it if required.

Seemed unnatural way of responding.
U

All marketing innit

She was just looking for marketing openings

V American aggressive style - she's here to sell.

Not answer impudent question about her horrible rape apology.

I hadn't see that Huffington Post open letter she did before the webchat. Was genuinely shocked by that, I just don't understand how anyone who has been a feminist and claims to understand rape issues, could adopt that sneery, mocking tone about rape allegations.

Vile.