free counter with statistics 'The Female Thing' by Laura Kipnis and 'Full Frontal Feminism' by Jessica Valenti | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

JessicaAtBookParty-thumb.jpg
The Female Thing by Laura Kipnis and Full Frontal Feminism by Jessica Valenti


Cannonball Read / fff

Book Reviews | September 11, 2009 | Comments (19)


I just have to admit it: I am not good at picking non-fiction books. I picked up The Female Thing: Dirt, Sex, Envy, Vulnerability and Full Frontal Feminism mostly because I thought, why not? The Female Thing interested me because the author, Laura Kipnis, wrote another book that was a polemic against romantic love and attachment, which I find intriguing. Full Frontal Feminism is by Feministing’s Jessica Valenti, and like the blog, is an attempt to talk about feminist issues to a young audience; unfortunately, that ‘young’ audience doesn’t include me.

Let’s start with the worst. The Female Thing uses the four topics of the subtitle — dirt, sex, envy, and vulnerability — as a ‘map’ to the female psyche. And, already, it’s got points against it, because I really hate anything that pigeonholes men or women into certain boxes. Sure, we can talk about general patterns, but anytime anyone says ‘guys are just like x’ or ‘women are just like x’ their generalizations are severely limited by their own self-fulfilling perceptions. If you’re a woman who thinks that all women love shopping, high heels and makeup, and those things are their greatest concerns, you’re probably not going to have many women friends who hate those things, thus, you have no counter examples from your own life to disprove your shitty thesis. If you’re a man who thinks that all men talk negatively about women and call them ‘bitches’ and ‘cunts,’ men who find that abhorrent aren’t really going to strike up a friendship with you — so you can look around at your troglodyte drinking buddies and say ‘See, that’s just the way men are,’ despite the many men who are not like that.

Not that Laura Kipnis is interested in actually investigating ideas with an open mind — no, she’d rather just ramble her way through a book that reads like intellectual bulimia — she overstuffed herself on Camille Paglia and had to regurgitate something ugly onto her computer screen. Flip to almost any page, and you’ll get some eye-roll inducing ridiculous anti-woman myth repackaged as ‘just telling it like it is.’ Penis envy, women being obsessed with cleanliness (and men as incompetent oafs), women as constant naggers, women only interested in sex to control men, women as catty bitches towards other women — all this crap, pretending to be edgy and new instead of the same old turds.

Now, on to the not-so-great: Full Frontal Feminism might be useful to a young person just starting to acknowledge sexism and misogyny in our society. It’s certainly more useful in that regards than the overly glib It’s a Jungle Out There. Yet, it still seems to concern itself too much with sex — specifically that young women know that it’s OK for them to enjoy sex, that a double standard exists, and that they’re not sluts or whores for wanting to hook up. Yes, that’s true, and it’s an important message for women to hear — but it’s just part of the picture. What about women who feel pressured to be sexual all the time? I’m not just talking about sexual assault or rape, but the increasing pressure on young women and girls to be sexxxayyy in every situation. What about women who aren’t straight? Oh, they get a bone thrown to them — a lip service sentence at the end of pages about straight sex. What about women who don’t want to be women, or weren’t born as women? They don’t really exist in the world of this book. I’m not saying that everything written about gender has to acknowledge every person’s experience of it, but at least acknowledge the fact that you’re talking about a specific segment of women — middle-class, U.S., straight, pretty, young women.

The only other thing I have to say about this book is that I pretty much forgot it the moment I put it into the book drop. Maybe it will be useful to some young women, and it’s surely better than the self-impressed Kipnis’ verbal diarrhea, but I was not impressed. I’m done with this pop feminism crap — I’m either staying away from feminist books, or going back to the big texts - de Beouvoir, Firestone, Wollstonecraft. They may not be light reads, but they won’t make me want to throw something.

Well fucking said, fff. — DR

This review is part of the Cannonball Read series. For more of fff’s reviews, check the blog.


Pajiba After Dark 9/10/09 | Judge Dredd Writer Announced



Comments

Well fucking said, indeed.

Posted by: coryo at September 11, 2009 8:51 AM

I'm not sure what an "fff" is, but you write like awesome. Go thinking person, Go!

Posted by: Sbrown at September 11, 2009 9:04 AM

she’d rather just ramble her way through a book that reads like intellectual bulimia — she overstuffed herself on Camille Paglia and had to regurgitate something ugly onto her computer screen.

Oh, snap!

Posted by: Marra at September 11, 2009 9:05 AM

Yes, I love how personality traits get boiled down into "gender identities".

Posted by: Recondite at September 11, 2009 9:24 AM

I really appreciated this review, and I think it hits on many aspects of new-feminism's problems. In particular, I think current feminist thinkers overlook the pressure for women to be sexualised, having somehow gained a message of empowerment from their you-can-wear-a-bra-and-be-a-feminist rejection of, say, Andrea Dworkin. The act of owning one's sexuality seems to have taken over so much from owning one's mind and ideas.

I'm still astounded by the vitriol directed by women at other women (and I might bring up Katherine Heigl here, and the trash-talk she's sometimes subjected to on these pages), and the fury that women seem to occasion: I'm thinking of people like Sarah Palin, for instance, and the disgust people had towards her. Sure, she was an awful person, but somehow I don't see male politicians earning that sort of scorn and condescension. Isn't this something that needs to be addressed?

I like the sign-off about going back to Wollstonecraft etc, but we do still need thinkers to get to grips with issues of gender-politics affecting women in modern society. And although Valenti's website is sometimes too diet-Coke for my tastes, Feministing does still do a good job of calling people out on their Freudian-slip hatred, their demeaning behaviours etc.

Posted by: Caspar at September 11, 2009 10:16 AM

I had disgust for Sarah Palin because she was biting the hand that fed her. A simple "hockey mom" my ass. She publicly advocates a return to the type of society that would NEVER have elected a female governor, much less a woman vice president. That's where my vitriol comes, from that and from her rampant, prideful display of ignorance...which she then has the gall to claim is criticized because she's a woman. She doesn't want equal opportunity for women, she wants preferential treatment for Sarah Palin, now and forever.

And I don't think Heigl, who I personally don't watch, follow in the news, or have any real opinion of, gets any special disrespect here out of proportion to the number of times she opens her mouth, inserts a foot, and makes an entertainment news clip. Stupid men get the same treatment...read any mention of Pete Doherty or Spencer whatever-the-fuck-his-name-is. The scathing bitchiness is there, you don't have to hunt for it.

Posted by: Wednesday at September 11, 2009 10:44 AM

but somehow I don't see male politicians earning that sort of scorn and condescension.
---
Perhaps you slept through the eight years of Bush II.

Posted by: , (TCFKAB) at September 11, 2009 10:45 AM

I've thought about getting Full Frontal Feminism for my 14 year old sister, except that from the sounds of it she's pretty much got the bases covered just from having me as an older sister. And doing things like reading Feministing on her own, because she heard me mention it. Whoops.

I appreciate what Valenti does, even if she can't address everyone's concerns. I am a feminist but I happen to identify as heterosexual and I know that if I were to write advice for homosexual women it would probably come off very trite and "equality, yay!" because I don't have that experience. I've never had to bring a girl home to my parents and explain that she's not just a friend. I've never been told I'm going to hell for being in love with someone. I'm not saying that Valenti shouldn't have addressed the issue, but maybe she decided to stick to what she knew rather than writing about gender/sexuality issues she didn't have firsthand experience with and therefore couldn't accurately describe or offer advice on.

Posted by: Rusty (formerly Genny) at September 11, 2009 10:52 AM

Thank you for saving me the trouble of having to read these books.

I have been looking for a compelling voice post- Butler, Moraga, and others among that generation. I have been woefully disappointed so far; at least I'll escape these disappointments.

Posted by: jack at September 11, 2009 10:55 AM

I really like Jessica Valenti and Feministing.com, and I admire what she's trying to do, but I wound up feeling insulted by Full Frontal Feminism. Yes, I know I'm a feminist. That's why I read the book. A good deal of her argument is centred around reclaiming the word feminist for the younger generation, women who often see it as a dirty word. At 22, I'm her target audience but if I wasn't a feminist I wouldn't be reading a book with feminism in the title now, would I? Assuming that I'm uneasy with calling myself one insults my intelligence.

I'm still eager to read The Purity Myth and I hope it doesn't seem so ... obvious.

Posted by: Sarah at September 11, 2009 10:55 AM

Nicely written, fff. I agree with Sbrown: "You write like awesome."

Posted by: Anna von Beaverplatz at September 11, 2009 11:00 AM

OK, well what I meant was something else, about the personal levels of disgust that are aimed at women. I think actually Wednesday's mentioning of Pete Doherty is a fairly good rebuttal, but I still find that for every Pete Doherty there's an Amy Winehouse, a Kate Moss, a Heigl, a Roberts, a Clinton or a - you know, whoever - that people aren't content to shrug away, but want to pillory. These people are attacked in very injurious, personal ways. The point about Bush is exactly that he was disliked and humoured, but actually never totally reviled and attacked - and I think that situation would have been different if he were a woman.

Posted by: Caspar at September 11, 2009 1:32 PM

Feministing pretty much lost me at the argument over kinky sex.

Short version: They had a male chastity device ad that they ripped apart. It was the opinion of many people that this ad was clearly playing into a sexualized fantasy regarding control, but the original poster wrote about how men can joke about control because they don't suffer the actual opression blah blah fishcakes. At that point, I disagreed and politely responded explaining how I found the post offensive to kinky people. As did many other people. Absolutely zero response from feministing acknowledging my post or the many that followed.

Basically, what it taught me about feministing is what fff complains about in the book. It's targeted to a very narrow demographic, and it is uninterested in acknowledging that feminists exist outside that arena. I rejected that idea, and I welcome your review as another way for me to discourage people from visiting that site until they start being more inclusive. At the very least, I want acknowledgement that they represent a very small group of feminists, and I'm not a bad feminist because I disagree.

Posted by: ashleigh at September 11, 2009 2:21 PM

Sarah, do you think at 22 you were the audience? I think 16, 17- that's the target audience. At least that's what I got out of Full Frontal Feminism. '

1 minor issue with the review- it's called Full Frontal Feminism with a big pic of a nude-ish lady on it; odd are it's gonna be a bit more about sex than other issues. At least, i expected it to.

That said, it was definitely not written for the scholarly, which was on purpose IMO, but also part of the reason why I think most of us who are already there with feminist ideals can give-or-take this book. I found "She's a Slut, He's a Stud..." to be better aimed towards 20-something and "the purity myth" to be more 30-40-something moms with girls.

Posted by: lilianna28 at September 11, 2009 3:23 PM

Here's what I did - I stopped reading feminist books by white women. Modern day feminism anyway. A consistent criticism of feminism has been that it is for middle class white women and I think that there is some validity to that. I'm concerned with women as a whole and I've found that I get a more well rounded understanding of the issues women face from books written by women of color.

Posted by: lil at September 11, 2009 3:48 PM

but actually never totally reviled and attacked
---
Wow, you don't live in a blue state, do you?

Posted by: , (the commenter formerly known as bucdaddy) at September 11, 2009 5:05 PM

Here's what I did - I stopped reading feminist books by white women. Modern day feminism anyway.

That is great advice.

Posted by: Rebecca (fff) at September 11, 2009 6:07 PM

Ashleigh, I do still read feministing, and I do get some great information, but I had similar experiences to you which made me realize it wasn't really a great community or a place for healthy discussion. There have been many posts that seemed one sided or missing the point, and when I've politely and respectfully voiced a dissenting opinion, I been deemed a troll. I've seen other commenters, treated the same way, particularly if they acknowledged being male. How do you build community or really tackle any issues if you only listen to the people who agree with you?

The vegan

Posted by: Christina at September 11, 2009 11:09 PM

Blargh, please disregard those last two words. Cursor got away from me while the page was loading after submitting my comment.

Posted by: Christina at September 11, 2009 11:11 PM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment: