People who have read this blog will know that I have a problem not with feminism itself but with a particular type of feminism: Radical Feminism or Revolutionary Feminism. I don't accept the beliefs of Catharine MacKinnon, Andrea Dworkin, Sheila Jeffreys and Julie Bindel. Especially when it comes to prostitution and pornography.
I was looking through the feminism section in a library and I came across two books by feminist authors that interested me greatly. They don't like MacKinnon and Dworkin either. The books are Feminism (A Very Short Introduction) by Margaret Walters and Difficult Women (A History of Feminism in 11 Fights) by Helen Lewis.
Before I quote from both books I want to point out that although MacKinnon and Dworkin don't seem to have changed their native America much, they are responsible for a big change in Sweden. According to Prohibiting sex purchasing and ending trafficking: the Swedish prostitution law by Max Waltman they are responsible for the law there that criminalises men like me.
Feminism by Margaret Walters page 115
Unfortunately, this legitimate, urgently necessary insistence that rape is, indeed, a serious and violent crime, was distorted by some later feminists. For another American, Catherine MacKinnon, woman is always, indeed almost by definition, a victim. 'To be about to be raped is to be gender female in the process of going about life as usual', she insists.
You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs. When you are older, your husband ties you to a bed and drips hot wax on your nipples and brings in other men to watch and makes you suck his penis ... In this thousand years of silence, the camera is invented and pictures are made of you while these things are being done ...
Her friend Andrea Dworkin argued that 'pornography is the law for women', and flatly, without any qualification, equated rape and sexual intercourse. As, indeed, did MacKinnon, who from the opening paragraph of Only Words (1995) offers a terrible paradigm of what she sees as female experience: a primal paternal rape that freezes us in a state of permanent terror. She constantly evokes the image of a once-violated child who can never grow up, who, she insists, lives on in most women, even those who claim to enjoy consensual sex: 'the aggressor gets an erection; the victim screams and struggles and bleeds and blisters and becomes five years old'. This is melodrama masquerading as feminism.
Difficult Women by Helen Lewis page 312
It is a mistake for 'gender critical' feminists, who question aspects of transgender ideology, to form alliances with right-wing Christian fundamentalists in the US who believe that changing your legal gender should not be permitted. A similar error was made by anti-porn feminists in the 1980s, whose efforts to point out the misogyny of the porn industry and its products were co-opted by religious conservatives into a broader reactionary agenda.* One shared goal does not cancel out such a fundamental divergence in world view.
*'In 1984 antiporn legislation devised by Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon, defining pornography as a violation of women's civil rights, was introduced in the Indianapolis city council by an anti-ERA [equal rights amendment] activist, passed with the support of the right, and signed into law by the Republican mayor, William Hudnut,' reported the Atlantic in 1992.
page 185
Like Pizzey, though, Bindel has found herself at odds with the rest of the feminist movement. She is on the unfashionable side of two of the most divisive and heated subjects in modern feminism: transgender issues and prostitution. She believes that the latter is violence against women, and that sex-buyers should be prosecuted. The current generation of student activists take a more liberal position, stressing individual choice and agency. They argue that decriminalising both sellers and buyers would make the transaction safer.
