Consumer friendly feminism is all about things women can do to "empower" themselves, whether it's self-care, self-knowledge, self-esteem.
Radical feminism, in many ways, is about changing behavior beyond the self: changing how men relate to women, changing laws that apply to everyone, changing institutions and traditions. It's saying the way women are treated in the world is not right and we have the capability to call it out and change.
I think Dworkin has a bad rap in some circles is because she was polemicist ( I also agree with you that her appearance plays a role; Gloria Steinem is the flip side of that.) She didn't pull any punches when describing mistreatment of women and who was responsible for the mistreatment. I think she saw herself as a writer first and foremost, even before a woman or a radical. She wanted to write how she felt, not necessarily to be politically palatable. Her writing is electric. Sharp, focused and smart. Her clear almost sermonizing style is not meant to give quarter to anyone, I think, who is not already feeling the way she feels: hence its resonance/renaissance with people who are feeling the emptiness of consumer feminism.
I'm glad that some young people are reconsidering the merits of second wave feminist theorists--I agree they've acquired an overly negative reputation in contemporary feminist circles. I hope that the burgeoning feminists of the 2020s can return to some of the anti-patriarchal cultural radicalism of the 1960s with necessary critical interventions considering how women of color and trans women experience a womanhood that is constructed differently from that of their cis and/or white sisters.
This is a complicated one because the relationship between radical feminism and transphobia is fraught, especially in the cases of Dworkin and Mackinnon (sp?). I believe I read an article about this in TSQ a few years back that I'll have to find, but, of course, reading that womanhood is defined by the experience of penetration or even that it's uniquely kind of confirmed or experienced in that context is...always a bit alarming.
From what I understand about Dworkin, she has a "sex class" argument, in which actually what she's saying about radical feminism and refusal of patriarchy should liberate us from the medical pressures on trans women. But it's always something I've had trouble understanding or, I guess, reconciling?
Thanks for this! I agree that Dworkin and that whole wave of feminism's relationship to trans women and transphobia is quite fraught and difficult to navigate. I think that there is a way to interpret Dworkin as a trans ally, such as in this Boston Review article (especially the excerpt from Woman Hating which I feel like is the most direct she gets on the issue) (https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/john-stoltenberg-andrew-dworkin-was-trans-ally/). That being said, a lot of second wave feminism does rely on a sort of biological essentialism and that is always tricky territory. I think there is a place for analysing the physical and biological implications of a 'typical' womanhood of cis(het) women, but it's about finding a way to explore that while still accounting for trans and queer womanhoods. My reading of Dworkin both in her work and personal life has always been as at the very least sympathetic to trans struggles but as a cis woman I am not exactly an authority and would love to hear from trans women on this!
Totally agree on all of this. I do think you’re right; there is a way to reconcile second-wave feminist thought structures with trans-inclusive theory, while at the same time acknowledging the very tangible harm second-wave feminism has done to trans communities. The lack of explicitness of Dworkin on her trans position is troubling, but you’re so right, there is a reading of her that is more sympathetic. I’ll take a look at that BR article!! Thank you.
It has been a constant conversation among my young college aged girlfriends and I, how much we loath interacting with our male peers, let alone pursuing them romantically. There is a kind of psychic unrest that has permeated our culture, but it seems men and young men have faced it with the least grace. Young men are angry and far more patriarchal than one would expect. We need a reinvigoration of potent cultural philosophers like Andrea Dworkin desperately. Great writing here, loved it!
This is great. Made me want to read Dworkin in depth beyond the few bits on porn I read at school/uni - and that quote on sex is wonderful, deeply felt.
Overall I agree with and like this piece- and I see you wrote it last summer, but I have to admit not seeing the very valid criticisms of Dworkin's SWERF and TERF rhetoric not mentioned feels a little glaring- especially in light of everything happening in regards to trans people right now. Sure, some of her teachings are cool- and yeah I kind of agree some good ol' fashioned second wave mentality wouldn't hurt but so long as we don't lose the intersectionality we learned with the latest wave.
thanks! very much hear this especially about sex work but i would push back on the idea that dworkin is a terf. i addressed this in a different comment somewhere but there isn’t really evidence of transphobia in her work and in fact plenty more evidence towards her being trans inclusive, including the testimony of those who knew her. open to being proved wrong but i think it’s an unfair characterisation from my research!
Fair! I remember hearing it from a trans content creator so I took it at face value, but I have also seen the passage where she talks about sympathy for trans women. I will just say: it may be enough a part of Dworkin's and the second wave's legacy that even if it's not like super clear how transphobic she was or wasn't- the fact that there is some consistent and believable suspicion... idk I'd put a disclaimer if I were to ever bring her up. Feminism simply isn't useful if lgbt people aren't properly considered. Second Wave is building blocks at best atp.
What do you think of the "return" to "traditional femininity" (i.e., elevation of reproductive labor)? Is this the "reactionary" face of the turning away from sex positivity?
Absolutely, couldn't have put it better myself. I talk about this a bit in my latest podcast in terms of 'tradwives' and in relation to Dworkin's book Right Wing Women. Very crucial observation, thank you!
Thank you for this defense! I love Dworkin. She is one of my favourite writers. She combines unflinching analysis of what men are doing to women with truly beautiful prose. I quote her all the time, in my real life and in my writing. I love seeing other women appreciate her genius too.
I only started reading dworkin about three years ago and for some reason thought she was still alive. (likely because she pops up so consistently in feminist literature and apparently disqualifies from the hesitation to not speak ill of the dead that other authors enjoy before they are critically dissected.) I wept my damn eyes out when I found out lol
Interesting I haven't read much of Dworkin, I have had a pretty negative perception of her but she is an important feminist writer so I think I should consider what she has to say.
This essay has made me realize I need to read Dworkin again. My question is what can be done about young men to move beyond this moment and have a functional, equitable society? I feel like so much of what’s driving things like bimbo feminism and trad wives alike is nihilism about ever seeing men as equals instead of aggressors.
This is the first time I’ve heard about people not liking Andrea dworkin, she has been my favorite feminist author since I’ve read „pornography: men controlling women“
Consumer friendly feminism is all about things women can do to "empower" themselves, whether it's self-care, self-knowledge, self-esteem.
Radical feminism, in many ways, is about changing behavior beyond the self: changing how men relate to women, changing laws that apply to everyone, changing institutions and traditions. It's saying the way women are treated in the world is not right and we have the capability to call it out and change.
I think Dworkin has a bad rap in some circles is because she was polemicist ( I also agree with you that her appearance plays a role; Gloria Steinem is the flip side of that.) She didn't pull any punches when describing mistreatment of women and who was responsible for the mistreatment. I think she saw herself as a writer first and foremost, even before a woman or a radical. She wanted to write how she felt, not necessarily to be politically palatable. Her writing is electric. Sharp, focused and smart. Her clear almost sermonizing style is not meant to give quarter to anyone, I think, who is not already feeling the way she feels: hence its resonance/renaissance with people who are feeling the emptiness of consumer feminism.
Absolutely agree! Her refusing to be politically palatable is so important and something modern feminism can and should learn from.
I'm glad that some young people are reconsidering the merits of second wave feminist theorists--I agree they've acquired an overly negative reputation in contemporary feminist circles. I hope that the burgeoning feminists of the 2020s can return to some of the anti-patriarchal cultural radicalism of the 1960s with necessary critical interventions considering how women of color and trans women experience a womanhood that is constructed differently from that of their cis and/or white sisters.
This is a complicated one because the relationship between radical feminism and transphobia is fraught, especially in the cases of Dworkin and Mackinnon (sp?). I believe I read an article about this in TSQ a few years back that I'll have to find, but, of course, reading that womanhood is defined by the experience of penetration or even that it's uniquely kind of confirmed or experienced in that context is...always a bit alarming.
From what I understand about Dworkin, she has a "sex class" argument, in which actually what she's saying about radical feminism and refusal of patriarchy should liberate us from the medical pressures on trans women. But it's always something I've had trouble understanding or, I guess, reconciling?
All this to say, thanks for the food for thought.
Thanks for this! I agree that Dworkin and that whole wave of feminism's relationship to trans women and transphobia is quite fraught and difficult to navigate. I think that there is a way to interpret Dworkin as a trans ally, such as in this Boston Review article (especially the excerpt from Woman Hating which I feel like is the most direct she gets on the issue) (https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/john-stoltenberg-andrew-dworkin-was-trans-ally/). That being said, a lot of second wave feminism does rely on a sort of biological essentialism and that is always tricky territory. I think there is a place for analysing the physical and biological implications of a 'typical' womanhood of cis(het) women, but it's about finding a way to explore that while still accounting for trans and queer womanhoods. My reading of Dworkin both in her work and personal life has always been as at the very least sympathetic to trans struggles but as a cis woman I am not exactly an authority and would love to hear from trans women on this!
Totally agree on all of this. I do think you’re right; there is a way to reconcile second-wave feminist thought structures with trans-inclusive theory, while at the same time acknowledging the very tangible harm second-wave feminism has done to trans communities. The lack of explicitness of Dworkin on her trans position is troubling, but you’re so right, there is a reading of her that is more sympathetic. I’ll take a look at that BR article!! Thank you.
It has been a constant conversation among my young college aged girlfriends and I, how much we loath interacting with our male peers, let alone pursuing them romantically. There is a kind of psychic unrest that has permeated our culture, but it seems men and young men have faced it with the least grace. Young men are angry and far more patriarchal than one would expect. We need a reinvigoration of potent cultural philosophers like Andrea Dworkin desperately. Great writing here, loved it!
thank you! <3
This is great. Made me want to read Dworkin in depth beyond the few bits on porn I read at school/uni - and that quote on sex is wonderful, deeply felt.
Dworkin is worth every read you can do. There's an online library of a lot of her work for free.
!!!!! loved this so much and will be showing all my friends
thank you!! glad it resonated 😊
Great piece from the 70s that you may enjoy: https://www.jstor.org/stable/466537
Thank you! Will definitely check it out.
Overall I agree with and like this piece- and I see you wrote it last summer, but I have to admit not seeing the very valid criticisms of Dworkin's SWERF and TERF rhetoric not mentioned feels a little glaring- especially in light of everything happening in regards to trans people right now. Sure, some of her teachings are cool- and yeah I kind of agree some good ol' fashioned second wave mentality wouldn't hurt but so long as we don't lose the intersectionality we learned with the latest wave.
thanks! very much hear this especially about sex work but i would push back on the idea that dworkin is a terf. i addressed this in a different comment somewhere but there isn’t really evidence of transphobia in her work and in fact plenty more evidence towards her being trans inclusive, including the testimony of those who knew her. open to being proved wrong but i think it’s an unfair characterisation from my research!
Fair! I remember hearing it from a trans content creator so I took it at face value, but I have also seen the passage where she talks about sympathy for trans women. I will just say: it may be enough a part of Dworkin's and the second wave's legacy that even if it's not like super clear how transphobic she was or wasn't- the fact that there is some consistent and believable suspicion... idk I'd put a disclaimer if I were to ever bring her up. Feminism simply isn't useful if lgbt people aren't properly considered. Second Wave is building blocks at best atp.
What do you think of the "return" to "traditional femininity" (i.e., elevation of reproductive labor)? Is this the "reactionary" face of the turning away from sex positivity?
Absolutely, couldn't have put it better myself. I talk about this a bit in my latest podcast in terms of 'tradwives' and in relation to Dworkin's book Right Wing Women. Very crucial observation, thank you!
Grateful I stumbled across this piece
Thank you for this defense! I love Dworkin. She is one of my favourite writers. She combines unflinching analysis of what men are doing to women with truly beautiful prose. I quote her all the time, in my real life and in my writing. I love seeing other women appreciate her genius too.
I only started reading dworkin about three years ago and for some reason thought she was still alive. (likely because she pops up so consistently in feminist literature and apparently disqualifies from the hesitation to not speak ill of the dead that other authors enjoy before they are critically dissected.) I wept my damn eyes out when I found out lol
Everything has fallen apart
Interesting I haven't read much of Dworkin, I have had a pretty negative perception of her but she is an important feminist writer so I think I should consider what she has to say.
This essay has made me realize I need to read Dworkin again. My question is what can be done about young men to move beyond this moment and have a functional, equitable society? I feel like so much of what’s driving things like bimbo feminism and trad wives alike is nihilism about ever seeing men as equals instead of aggressors.
This is the first time I’ve heard about people not liking Andrea dworkin, she has been my favorite feminist author since I’ve read „pornography: men controlling women“