[fandom] feminism

[escritoireazul]

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.

Comments

Part 2 historical contexts

[ithiliana.livejournal.com]

Sexual harassment was "life" (as Gloria Steinem said); the first time a male faculty member made a pass at me was when I was 14 at a party in my father's house (and my father was a Dean), and everybody laughed at how cute it was, and my brother (2 years younger) was told to protect me. My mother has said how the women (secretaries, and wives of graduate students, no women faculty or graduate students) banded together to warn each other about the men who preyed on women because there were no policies against men demanding sex of women who were all, by definition, in subordinate positions.

The flaws in some of the radical feminist's arguments include the fact that nobody, especially in the U.S., wants to be told they are not totally capable of making their own decisions, by golly! OTOH, internalized sexiam and racism do exist, and are hard to work through.

And the fact that one of my classmates refused to attend our 20th high school reunion because she knew she'd be the only one not married (it wasn't true btw) is just one little point about how much marriage was shoved down women's throats (oddly enough, although men had to marry as well, my brother's experience and that of men I know, was totally different: they could spend all their time runnig around yelling about being trapped by evol women) as the ONLY destiny for a woman. If education was denied one (and the quotes on admission of women to universities were real in the 1970s, as well as being racist since minority women weren't even considered at white institutions), and jobs were pretty crappy (and one was expected to put out for the boss as well), well, then is "marriage" really that much of a choice?

I never married. But remembering the 1970s (I graduated high school in 1973), I can say that marriage as a social institution was incredibly coercive (and as soon as divorce became easier to get, look at what happened!).

So the problem is assuming that any argument is somehow universal or a-historical, and not taking context into account, but the other problem is the lack of knowledge about the past, meaning anything before one was born!

Erm, sorry! But I've been rolling my eyes a lot these days seeing all the same debates occur, and I just want to give everybody a reading list. And I really wanted to ask diss-senter if she'd read Joanna Russ on slash fic (but I figured she'd delete that post, as she was deleting others).