Both of these readings described what happened during the woman's movement of the 70's, and attempt to postulate as to what effects the woman's movement of the 70's has had on women today. Ariel Levy goes into detail about the sexual revolution of the 70's and the repercussions its had on women today.
Specifically, in the 70's, a number of factions developed within the woman's movement regarding the role of sexuality, femininity and feminism. The faction led and exemplified by Dworkin viewed pornography and sex in general as a male oppression and exploitation. While they maintained that they were not anti-sex, their views were very interesting to me as a male. Dworkin's asserts that the allure of sex for men is the feeling of dominance men get when partaking in sexual intercourse. If you asked most men what they allure of sex is, I do not think that dominance over a woman would be high on the list of of leading factors which lead men to want to have sex. In fact, many young men today prefer confident and independent women who know what they like, not submissive, passive and unintelligent women, characteristics which Dowrkin's seems to think men like.
In contrast to Dwarkins, another faction in the feminism movement advocated the liberilzation of woman's sexuality, promoting the acceptance of sexuality as a means of empowering women through acceptance of their bodies and removing the stigmas, inequalities, and taboo associated with sexuality in conservative culture. These women clashed extensively with the anti-sexual groups over the role of sexuality in the woman's movement.
Levy believes that since this conflict was never formally resolved during the height of the woman's movement in the 70's, it has tangible effects of the woman's movement today as exemplified by CAKE and perhaps Raunch culture. She argues that feminists express a large scope of perspectives regarding sexuality and feminism, mainly due to the conflict in the woman's movement in the 70's and as such the issue has not been resolved today, perhaps leading to the effects she noted in her previous chapter, such as women who participate in raunch culture describing themselves as feminists. This seems to be a believable conclusion as unresolved issues within the movement would clearly have impacts on women today.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You've all done a nice job of articulating some of the major points in these readings, although I notice that Echols is conspicuously absent; including her history of the second wave as offshoot of the New Left might inflect your description of the second wave in important ways. For instance, one of you notes that the main struggle for second wave feminists was between sex-positive and anti-porn feminists. In reality, this was one of many debates and disagreements that occurred.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most interesting points in this set of posts is the idea that it is precisely to avoid Friedan-esque womanhood that may drive some women to engage in raunch culture. I think you're onto something here: as Levy points out, raunch culture might be understood as both a rebellion against and a development out of the ideas of earlier feminists.