Let me announce this, here and now. I meant to earlier, but it just kept getting lost in the tiny cracks of exhaustion emerging between exams and school, travel and revision.
Whilst preparing an oral presentation in French ('How to reconcile feminism and Islam in France?' Only, in French, naturellement.), it hit me that feminists, like Muslims, have to keep putting up with vicious and untrue attacks on our public image. Like Muslims, we face constant attack by unimaginative and self-serving opponents who would like to blame us for everything-they-possibly-can that is wrong with society today. EXAMPLE. All the different strands of feminism are handily grouped and dismissed, which allows for a very effective form of 'divide and conquer,' whereby feminists such as myself have to say that we're not in agreement with those who really do seem to hate men, and assumptions are made about our sexuality.
A lot of modern feminists find themselves in the position of having to distance themselves from second-wave feminism, because of the prominence and influence of lesbian feminism within it. Feminist-haters continually highlight the misandry that SOME (SOME, not ALL) lesbian and/or radical feminists have shown, using it as a way to shout down the many valid criticisms they make. In fact, they use that as a way to shout down almost any form of feminist critique that doesn't bend over backwards to please them (see most articles even vaguely pertaining to feminism on Cif...). Divide and conquer. It is divide and conquer. They turn on individuals en masse, conveniently displaying the very mob mentality that they ascribe to those same individuals. Those individuals find themselves stuck, or should I say: WE are stuck. We can't acknowledge the huge ideological debt that we owe to second-wave feminism. Like Muslims constantly being harassed as terrorists, we must distance ourselves and say 'Not in our name,' as if it is completely removed from us.
Yet as any fule kno, radical voices are useful and important (as long as they're not generating immediate danger, of course). They stand to inform us both of what we could have, and in the case of more conservative voices, what we could lose, if we remain idle. Let me just say that I am not trying to establish some sort of suffering equivalence with Muslims here. I am so NOT A FAN of the Oppression Olympics. All I am doing is drawing a parallel, one which is in some ways heavily ironic.
It must be said that the public image of feminism certainly isn't done any favours when people who claim to strongly identify with it promote exactly the kind of cartoonish stereotypes that fem-haters love and lap up. Here I must cease, and present you with this. Julie Bindel and Julie Burchill interviewing each other.
It is ghastly. It is so, utterly, ghastly. Yet it's also very clever, because ultimately neither of them gives away anything new in the least about themselves. Burchill's reputation as a giggling, bandwagon-jumping delusionary is confirmed, and Bindel once again comes across as the stereotypical lesbo-misandrist automaton.
Feminism wept. Feminism wept. There is a certain hollowly-humorous irony in Bindel saying:
I much prefer women to men. A lot of them are emotional cripples. Have you not found that? Are we such different feminists do you think?
after Burchill saying:
But part of what makes a man a man is that he never takes offence! When you see sad-sacks like, what was his name, Neil something [Lyndon, author of No More Sex War: the Failures of Feminism]. "Men's Lib" - that's the opposite of a man, to me. Just shut up and take your lumps. And then we can all have a laugh.
It's so lovely that even in prison, men who aren't touchy-feely have to be stopped from beating up rapists - not just child molesters, but rapists of grown women.
This too after Burchill cheerfully hypocritises (neologism alert!) her self-ascribed epithet of 'militant feminist' by saying:
I like men and get on much better with them one to one than I do women, who can be a bit emotional.
and
I don't want to hear about every last thing someone is feeling. I think most men have it about right. All men should be like my dad!
I'm sorry. What the FUUUUUUUCK are you talking about, you stupid bitch? She basically DID just confirm what Bindel said - that men are 'emotional cripples,' because they don't overshare like those annoying women - and then implied that that is how men should be.
Great, Burchill, you stupid fucking bitch. So, a kid who is being bullied should just 'take his lumps,' should he? The likes of you should be spared 'every last thing someone is feeling,' until they walk into a school and massacre a load of people in one go?
As for the men beating up rapists comment - I must reiterate my expletive-garnished question above. The justice system is supposed to deal with individuals, Burch. It's not the job of mobs, or single persons to decide what happens to criminals. Jesus wept, this time.
It is ironic though, this woman is a shamelessly Freudian stereotype herself. 'All men should be like my dad'? Bet you wish you could've married him!
I have revised my opinion on the Grauniad's decision here. I now think it was absolute genius. You have *ahem* an intelligent and dedicated campaigner who generally poses as 'professional lesbian' (I hope she's not really as virulently anti-men as she makes out...) alongside a showy and inexplicably well-paid professional contrarian (not a very good one, either). The latter indulges in a frankly breathtaking display of female misogyny, showing the very real need for conventional assumptions of gender ('masculinity' and 'femininity') to be challenged. The former, perhaps because of her own transphobia and misandry, smiles and lets it pass. Oh, the female friendship! Oh, the uniting nature of the sisterhood!
Truly, feminism wept. I leave you with this thread I found, discussing Bindel's transphobia, which is really interesting. Look out for the post by 'Forced Buy' - in fact, if you ignore all the rest, at the very least read that. It's really insightful, and Burchill enters the equation once again!
This interview with Susie Orbach, feminist author and Dolly Draper's mentor, is also good reading. Also: a thread about whether make-up is acceptable or not. P.S.: My heart bleeds for Kater Andron. It really does, but... I just can't force those tears out. It's sort of like when you want to take a shit, but you can't.
(Given that the 'article' is called 'Julie Bindel talks to fellow feminist Julie Burchill,' I'm starting to wonder if the Guardian, a paper that SHOULD be feminists' friend, doesn't have it in for us too...)
5 comments:
Good post. All groups suffer from this disease where society demands that one represents all. Apart from middle class white males. Because we are individuals you see. Unlike everyone else.
Hiya,
There's a new, allegedly revelatory, book out about Simone de Beauvoir and Sartre (can't recall the title right now). Apparently, de Beauvoir swinged both ways.
Yes, there's some odd feminists out there but funnily enough I actually like reading the weird ones, e.g., Scum Manifesto.
Have you read Man Made Language by Dale Spender?
I'm not sure if one could draw a palpable comparison between feminists (of whichever wave) and Muslims.
Rumbold:
Ha... ha... ha... No.
Muhamad:
Interesting. I can't say I have read the Spender book... what is it about?
'I'm not sure if one could draw a palpable comparison between feminists (of whichever wave) and Muslims.'
I just did.
Well, Spender points out how, e.g., the word "pro" evokes a different image for when it's applied to man than when it's applied to a woman ("she's a pro", "he's a pro"). In short, how we all use language to pin down women.
I know you did, and you've said it's something of a paralleled experience. What I was trying to say is that this corresponding experience of Muslims and feminists is rather a late arrival. By all means, you can do so, but the historical experience of feminists and the history Muslims isn't analogous just because of several years of vilification of Muslims. If I'm to be honest, I got that last bit from my mum on the phone today.
@ Muhamad:
Oooh, that does sound interesting! I shall have to keep my eyes peeled for it. Reading for leisure - it'll be good to do that this summer. Even for a little while.
'What I was trying to say is that this corresponding experience of Muslims and feminists is rather a late arrival'
Oh, absolutely. I do wonder if the reactions to both aren't also part of the modern tendency to be dissatisfied with having one ideology and belonging to a particular group with particular rules. Ideology generally has been slinking out of fashion for a while now, I think, especially if you consider the slow death of political parties.
Given the greater importance of men within Muslim history, no, there's not really an analogy with feminism historically! Islam's been very powerful in its time, and I certainly couldn't say that that's ever been the case for feminism.
Post a Comment