Review of 'Feminism's Dependency Trap' on Quillette
I don't agree with this article. The article is written by a woman raising issues about how feminists define themselves in the negative against their issues with men and saying that's a problem.
That is how the world changes its ideas. Oh gosh, I hate the capitalism stuff - it's greedy, it prevents creative solutions, it tends to the lowest common denominator... What would world look like without it? People would would work because they want to, they would be paid within an equity scale. That is how ideas happen. They examine what is wrong with the world and come up with alternate ideas. And the people with power and things to lose resist the ideas and the changes. And then there's a revolution.
I don't think the author understands the process of world change.
She sneers at women driving cars their fathers bought and receiving education from the pockets of their fathers' savings. And sneers at women defining themselves in victim status as under the thumb of men who don't feel they are oppressing women. And sneers at women expressing sexuality in the same way as men.
It's devisive. I'll take the same free pass on everything that I do, in the same way men get a free pass on what they do. I'm moaning about how I don't get the same free pass, and when I do everything, it's illustrative that everything doesn't get the free pass from men... and it doesn't get the free pass from this woman either. I wanna do it all and not have anyone have anything to say about it. Let's highlight that part of feminism for her. She obviously missed it.
"Victim status holds its own form of power, of course, but this nurtures resentment which is always utterly joyless. Curiously, mainstream feminism seems designed to perpetuate the story of male power and oppression: feminists seem to need it as an antagonist against which to define themselves."
"If feminism is, in part, about women being seen as independent and free sexual agents—adults, in other words—then why is it so frightening to them when a man treats them as just that? If women want to be seen as sexual free agents then we should stop acting like scared and helpless children when men treat us as such."
And eyerollingly, she thinks corporate structures will not have anything to say about women claiming their right to be treated like human beings without the guidance of legislature… like we were before feminism (sarcasm). And, hello, this is WHY feminism started in the first place, because men will pettily not relinquish their 'right' to behave in vile ways towards women's bodies, definitely not without implying that we're 'uptight' for not wanting them pawing us, blackmailing us, and coercing us at work by demanding sexual favors.
"But if a co-worker lets a woman know she looks hot in her skirt this can reasonably be dealt with by a woman on her own, rather than by corporate structures of authority."
This woman is an anti-feminist. She should go hang out with the men's rights activists in their mother's basements, watch child Porn all day, and be served food by an indentured slave they call 'wife'. #Aargh
Thanks for the post. As a response to an article, it is your take on it, and that's great. This is part of mine
ReplyDeleteI read the article, and it is by a scholar who rather scholarly (predictably) takes a very defined view on a very particular aspect of the phenomena she addresses.
Written for mass consumption causes the creep of generalisation. Terms like "women" or "corporations" or "society", to name a few used, are very, very broad. This is hinted at by the author in statements like:
"This is part of the lack of respect for other individuals as individuals that characterizes modern culture."
I think she makes some astute points within the context she indicated. Perhaps you read it too broadly? Perhaps ther is no right or wrong and we need to acknowledge the baffling scope of complexity involved in deceptively simple terms.
Either way:
- Good to see people read and consider the text.
- I don't see how wish/sending the author to the "basement and child porn, etc." critiques the article. It seems unbecoming and as divisive as you allege her to be, and certainly not the kind of solution likely to help anyone.
-In a sense anti-feminism is just a position defined against feminism, another position. It is not a sin, a crime or cause for hate. If it causes hate perhaps one looks to who performs the verb (hate, or disdain or eye-rolling).
Finally, This is not a declaration of war. Thanks again for the post. Keep it up
Thanks for your considered reply. I can tell how much effort you put into wording your dissent considerately. That was not wasted on me. I too don't want to fight.
DeleteI think I mentioned several points that critique the article, thank you for noting those.
I do deeply believe that all points should be presented at length.
However, your response is a critique of my response. I would much prefer to hear your thoughts on her broad constructions. Please contextualise them from within your implied defence of her points. If there is something you feel I have missed, please clarify my implied myopia.