Women Don't Owe you Pretty

[Itsagiven]

This book has been on my radar as it's being heavily promoted and has a bright, eye-catching cover and title. It's by 21 year old illustrator and a 'Cosmopolitan Influencer of the Year 2019', Florence Given.

I had a quick look through the book in Waterstones to see if it would be a good Christmas present for my teenage DD but soon realised her definition of woman didn't match my own and there was a definite emphasis on the campus brand of intersectional feminism so I gave it a swerve.

There is now a rather public row going on between Given and another of the Diving Bell Group's authors Chidera Eggerue aka theslumflower. Eggerue has accused Given of plagiarising her book 'What a time to be Alone' (2018) and exploiting and appropriating the work of black women writers and activists. I haven't read either book so I don't think it's fair of me to get into this issue here (though from what I've read, Eggerue has some justification although the publishers must take some of the blame). The Diving Bell Group are no longer representing Eggerue, so it would appear that they have taken the side of Given in the argument which hasn't gone down well at all.

My reason for starting this thread is because while reading some of the email/insta statements exchanged between Eggerue and Given, there was mention of Given hiring a 'Diversity' reader. I've heard of these before, probably from MN-netters on here who work in publishing. Eggerue was scathing about Given having to hire a Diversity reader in the first place - she seemed to imply that anyone writing such a book shouldn't need one and should be suitably aware of the issues and write accordingly.

Given's response was what interested me. So, she's 21 year old woman, who has written this book on Feminism for other young women, but felt she had to hire a Diversity reader, for the following reasons:

'The diversity reader I hired was actually to ensure that I wasn't missing any blind spots with language when discussing sex/genitals, as I didn't want my book to unintentionally perpetuate transphobic rhetoric! I also didn't want to accidentally make sweeping statements about womanhood that only pertain to my experience as a cis white woman, and accidentally ignore the identities of trans people, disabled people or women of colour"

I just find it very telling that Given's priorities were, in the first instance, based around trans women and writing in a way that would appease them. I find that quite a sad and telling prioritisation in a book about Feminisim. She admits that she was told by her diversity reader to write 'more and more about Black women' but she chose to ignore that (apart from using many quotes and slogans from black women activists in the body of her book) For this she has been majorly criticised.

The Diving Bell Group only had 8 writers/activists on their roster, (including Munroe Bergdorf) so Given and Eggerue were close colleagues and friends. Ironically there is even a gushing quote on the cover of 'Women Don't Owe you Pretty' BY Eggerue.

It seems that Given is being castigated for skewing her intersectional feminism in the wrong direction. By choosing to centre trans women in her brand of feminism, she's neglected those black women feminists who's work she has seemingly appropriated.

The whole incident seems to encapsulate the state of intersectional feminism. Somewhere along the line, they've lost sight of who is important. Women.

Here's a report about the row - it's one of many if you Google it
news.yahoo.com/chidera-eggerue-accuses-florence-given-134024412.html

Erin McKean in her blog in 2006, apparently, with an image of Vreeland which confused some people into thinking it was a quote when it wasn't.

Interesting to not that NcKean addresses women - "YOU don't owe anyone pretty..." while the latest iteration speaks to men, or so I infer, with its "Women don't owe YOU pretty..."

Different audience.

"The book you write at 21 is likely to prove as embarrassing as the poems you wrote at 14."

That's a quote straight from me!

I think there are wholesale chunks of quotations from other sources. Given does illustrations which mainly consist of slogans and quotes in chunky, retro typeface. I think she then sells these as 'artwork'. So I think we can ascribe the 'look' of her book very much to her.

But the fact that she felt insecure enough to need a Diversity reader to basically 'check' her language in case she 'wasn't missing any blind spots with language when discussing sex/genitals, as I didn't want my book to unintentionally perpetuate transphobic rhetoric!'??

I wonder what the 'transphobic rhetoric' would have looked like? 'Woman' instead of 'those who identify as a woman'? Awful phrases like a 'man's penis' or a 'woman's vagina'? I remember now why I shied away from the book after leafing through it in Waterstones - I think I saw the use of Cis woman and thought 'oh it's THAT kind of Feminism'.

It's sad because we should be celebrating young women 'discovering' feminism and many of its messages are what young women need to hear. As has been said, it's a shame the publishers are seemingly more concerned with capitalising on Instagram influencers and producing 'eye-catching'', rather than 'thought provoking' content.

It's not any kind of Feminsim really. Intersected into meaninglessness.

I think its also a bit unfair to castigate the writer on the cover or even the title, its likely she had very little say in it

That's a pathetic excuse. I don't believe the writer had no say in the appearance or the title.

Even if it were true that she signed up for a contract which gave her no control she had a say inasmuch as she agreed to relinquish control- in which case she can't escape criticism for entering into such a contract if the end result looks like a coffee table book for 10 year old.

You wouldn't want 10yo exposed to that kind of non-geminism, and by 15 most kids would see through it, so the target demographic is pretty narrow.

I think I'll hang on and browse (not buy) a copy in my high street remaindered bookshop early in the New Year. 🙄

Non-feminism!

well the end result sold 100,000 copies so i imagine her and her publisher were very pleased- and i cant see whats wrong with the title either - they can prove its a popular phrase and idea.

and yeah, first-time authors dont generally get much say in these things.

yeah the use of diversity readers is a bad trend, again, some publishers are pushing for them...

Just want to add that very rarely do authors have much say in cover design/title or other marketing decisions. Publishers don't give advertising control to authors - it's too risky.

However, as happy as I am that young women ostensibly care about feminism, I really wish this had some scholarly teeth behind it rather than a mishmash of other people's ideas.

Thanks to terryleather and NewlyGranny for identifying the likely source of this book's title. However, I still don't understand why this title made floisme assume the author was black?

Just to reiterate, the ‘author’ is more known for being an ‘illustrator, and by ‘illustrator’ I mean someone who ‘draws’ mostly other people’s slogans, in chunky eye-catching colours and typography, probably on an IPad possibly using Procreate. So the bright typographic image on the cover of her book is very much down to her. I imagine there has been design input to translate the grid-friendly Instagram image into a wrap-around cover though. Eggerue’s books are similarly graphic/typography-heavy with bright colours but in a different graphic style.

I imagine there is a lot to criticise about the content of the book, but I'm not really getting the problem with either title or cover - the cover is just like a mash-up between rebel girls and austin powers - and this is what publishers do - mash-ups of what worked before - and as we've seen here the title is from an old idea, from an older idea - The Beauty Myth - which was probably from an older idea too...

It sounds irrelevant to older women, but maybe very revolutionary to younger women. As for the centring of transwomen - well, she's young, she's not as bright as she thinks and she'll regret it in a few years.

@Falleninwiththewrongcrowd

Thanks to terryleather and NewlyGranny for identifying the likely source of this book's title. However, I still don't understand why this title made floisme assume the author was black?

Yeah I think I hit 'post' before I'd finished - sorry. It was in the context of the cultural appropriation accusations and I had wondered - mistakenly by the sound of things - whether Given had coined a black writer - I had Maya Angelou in my head - for her book title without acknowledging her source.

Interesting to not that NcKean addresses women - "YOU don't owe anyone pretty..." while the latest iteration speaks to men, or so I infer, with its "Women don't owe YOU pretty..."

Interesting observation about the change of emphasis there - and yes, the later incarnation is addressed to fellas...(who presumably aren't the target audience...)