escritoireazul (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
escritoireazul) wrote2008-03-28 09:32 pm
escritoireazul) wrote2008-03-28 09:32 pm
Entry tags:
[fandom] feminism
There has been a lot of talk lately about fandom and feminism.
(To sum up the major links I've seen: "In the Tradition of the Wickedary, Part Two by Dissenter [basically, slash is not a radical feminist rewriting of the text, and though there are lots of things I don't agree with in this, there are lots of things I do - however, it looks like only comments agreeing with the poster are being allowed, because otherwise I can't fathom there being no contradictory responses]; "To Feminist(s) Criticizing Slash as a Tool of the Patriarchy" [slash is problematic but what isn't, also mentions BDSM]; "If It Happened to Me and My Two White Girlfriends, It's For Reals!" [a direct response to the first link]; "A Rapist's View of the World: Joss Whedon and Firefly" [Joss Whedon is a rapist and all the problems in Firefly]; "Credo, ergo Sum: What I Call Radical Feminism" [also has great discussions in the comments]; "I Haz Comment!" [short post talking about the disconnect between disliking Firefly and slash and liking The Little Mermaid - again, the comments are interesting, and brings up the whole intercourse as rape from Dworkin's "Intercourse"]; "comment discussion of the whole sex = rape argument".)
I just have a few small comments to add to the above discussions. (If they can actually be called discussions. What with all the comment deleting some of the posters are doing, I'm not sure they can.)
First is that across the board, many people seemed shocked by the idea of people saying heterosexual sex = rape and there is no ability for a woman to consent in a patriarchal society. I was surprised that people hadn't heard about this line of thought. (I'm actually debating on taking a class with a professor who believes that. It will make for interesting [and frustrating] discussions.)
Second, I've seen lots of throwaway comments about how the people who are anti slash or Firefly or Joss or whatever just aren't feminists. This really bothers me, because whether you agree with them or not, they have the right to call themselves feminists. It's like the anti-porn people saying the pro-porn people (or the at least not anti-porn, if not pro-porn) aren't feminists just because they don't hate on porn. Or like saying women who choose to stay at home to take care of the house/the family/themselves, whatever, aren't feminists just because they choose to stay at home. Feminism is broad, and covers a lot of ideas which don't agree. That doesn't mean you or I have the right to say anyone isn't a feminist.
Third, I can't wait for Wiscon.
(To sum up the major links I've seen: "In the Tradition of the Wickedary, Part Two by Dissenter [basically, slash is not a radical feminist rewriting of the text, and though there are lots of things I don't agree with in this, there are lots of things I do - however, it looks like only comments agreeing with the poster are being allowed, because otherwise I can't fathom there being no contradictory responses]; "To Feminist(s) Criticizing Slash as a Tool of the Patriarchy" [slash is problematic but what isn't, also mentions BDSM]; "If It Happened to Me and My Two White Girlfriends, It's For Reals!" [a direct response to the first link]; "A Rapist's View of the World: Joss Whedon and Firefly" [Joss Whedon is a rapist and all the problems in Firefly]; "Credo, ergo Sum: What I Call Radical Feminism" [also has great discussions in the comments]; "I Haz Comment!" [short post talking about the disconnect between disliking Firefly and slash and liking The Little Mermaid - again, the comments are interesting, and brings up the whole intercourse as rape from Dworkin's "Intercourse"]; "comment discussion of the whole sex = rape argument".)
I just have a few small comments to add to the above discussions. (If they can actually be called discussions. What with all the comment deleting some of the posters are doing, I'm not sure they can.)
First is that across the board, many people seemed shocked by the idea of people saying heterosexual sex = rape and there is no ability for a woman to consent in a patriarchal society. I was surprised that people hadn't heard about this line of thought. (I'm actually debating on taking a class with a professor who believes that. It will make for interesting [and frustrating] discussions.)
Second, I've seen lots of throwaway comments about how the people who are anti slash or Firefly or Joss or whatever just aren't feminists. This really bothers me, because whether you agree with them or not, they have the right to call themselves feminists. It's like the anti-porn people saying the pro-porn people (or the at least not anti-porn, if not pro-porn) aren't feminists just because they don't hate on porn. Or like saying women who choose to stay at home to take care of the house/the family/themselves, whatever, aren't feminists just because they choose to stay at home. Feminism is broad, and covers a lot of ideas which don't agree. That doesn't mean you or I have the right to say anyone isn't a feminist.
Third, I can't wait for Wiscon.
no subject
Hee. I hadn't, as I haven't been exposed to much in the way of radical feminism. But I could totally jive with it. Reading up on it, I understand totally what Andrea Dworkin was trying to say and I think it's a lot different than what a few people (namely, the anti-Firefly/Joss girl) was saying.
From wiki: Such descriptions are often cited by Dworkin's critics, interpreting (sometimes even falsely quoting) the book as claiming that "All heterosexual intercourse is rape," or more generally that the anatomical machinations of sexual intercourse make it intrinsically harmful to women's equality. Dworkin rejected that interpretation of her argument,[41] stating in a later interview[42]that "I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality," and suggesting that the misunderstanding came about because of the very sexual ideology she was criticizing: "Since the paradigm for sex has been one of conquest, possession, and violation, I think many men believe they need an unfair advantage, which at its extreme would be called rape. I do not think they need it."
Which, maybe I'm wrong? But seems to be Dworkin herself is rejecting the POV that is depicted in the Firefly essay.