fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3484 ]

[ SECRET POST #3484 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3484 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 52 secrets from Secret Submission Post #498.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I started reading 2nd wave feminist literature because I thought it'd be good for a laugh, but the more I read the more I found myself agreeing with the ideologies of the 2nd wave and now I might be turning into a radfem.

Oops?

Gross.

I'm unfamiliar with what fits into each wave. What did you like about the second one? I'm not trying to argue. I just really don't know anything about it specifically.

There's a lot about modern sex-positive feminism that I find very hypocritical and alienating, and second wave or "radical" feminists seem to be the only people who will actually address the problems I have with the sex-positive movements in a way that doesn't strike me as "bitter male Christians Republicans angry that women like to have sex and want to make abortion safe and legal".

Do you mind if I ask what (in brief) your issues with sex-positivity are?

Not sure if it's possible to summarize in brief, but these are the major ones:

- The tendency of sex-positive feminists to romanticize sex work and ignore or shout down actual sex workers and former sex works who point out the serious problems in the porn and prostitution industries, or heaven forbid, say that they think porn/prostitution is wrong. There's no interest in real discourse, just screaming at the opposition for having experiences that don't fit with the favoured narrative.

- The concept of "lipstick feminism" or "weaponized femininity" - everything a woman does is empowering, nothing a woman does can ever be degrading or play into patriarchal expectations! Like, seriously? If you wanna wear lipstick and heels, whatever, do what makes you happy, but if you think doing that is somehow making a feminist statement you're delusional.

- Related to the above: Supporting and encouraging sexual objectification of women because they want to "reclaim" it. Also, "reclaiming" the word slut. It always rubbed me the wrong way, and I was never able to pinpoint why until I discovered older feminist literature about the matter.

- The double standard with regards to "friendzoning" - when straight men talk about the friendzone it's because they're being entitled, but it's ok for fat women and trans people to harass others for not wanting to have sex with them. So turning down a straight man is exerting your bodily autonomy and right to not be treated as an object for sexual gratification, but turning down a fat woman or a trans person is fatphobia/transphobia? How does that make sense?

- The idea of "monosexual privilege", or that gay people are somehow privileged over bisexuals because... I don't even know what the logic here is. Furthermore, I've seen sex-positive feminists and queer theorists talk about how "monosexuality" is so shallow and wrong and everyone should be bisexual/pansexual, or that everyone secretly IS bisexual/pansexual and in denial. It's an attitude I find troubling and homophobic.

Probably a few more that I'm missing, too. IDK, there's a lot about sex-positivity in it's current state that skeeves me out.

My biggest problem with any branch of "social justice" is picking fights with some of the people who should be on the same side. It sounds like you're recognizing some of today's pointless fights, in which case I support you.

I agree with some of this more than others but I rarely see this "double standard when it comes to friendzoning" and it makes me wonder where you're hanging out and seeing it

Google the "Cotton Ceiling" or check out any fat activism blog. You'll see it then.

I mean, it seems to me that you don't just have a few issues with sex-positivity, and it's more that you... pretty much just totally disagree with the underlying theoretical arguments?

Which, you know, fair enough. Don't agree with you but fair enough. But it seems to be a pretty thorough rejection here.

I'd like to think it's not a thorough rejection, because in theory I agree with the basic principle that women should not be afraid or ashamed of their own sexuality, and so many people have tried to convince me that that basic principle is what sex-positivity is fundamentally about.

I think it is possible to be critical of topics relating to sexuality WITHOUT creating an environment where women feel like they shouldn't be sexual at all, but that doesn't seem to be what most sex-positive feminists want. They don't want to be critical of anything, ever.

Re: let it all out

(Anonymous) - 2016-07-19 02:20 (UTC) - Expand

Can you explain this more?

My problem with the Second Wave is that too many of them seemed to pretend that men and women could be split into two warring camps, as if the sexes were like ethnic groups in a nationalist / counter-imperialist struggle. And that's neither remotely desirable nor remotely feasible. It's either counterproductive hyperbole or embarrassingly shallow thinking.

Edited 2016-07-19 00:12 (UTC)

My response to the anon above you:

http://fandomsecrets.dreamwidth.org/1451350.html?thread=921973078#cmt921973078

What you're describing is definitely one of the aspects of second wave feminism that I am critical of.

2nd wave is a lot like the current wave. It hates female agency.

How so?

Depending on what you're agreeing with, I don't see anything wrong with that. The 2nd wave isn't made up exclusively of the insulting parodies people think of when they think of it. There's good and bad in every era of feminism.

Hide your shame, anon. HIDE YOUR SHAME!

I feel no shame over this. Perplexment, yes, but shame? Nah.

No shame?

Goodbye anon. It was nice knowing you. Tell us all how the weather is down in radfem hell.

This is wonderful for you! I'm so proud! :D

There is some nauseatingly hypocritical bullshit in the 3rd wave, to be sure, but I think the answer is going forward, not back >>

Besides which: the second wave was dealing with very different problems than we are today. That more vehement reaction was in response to shit like: legal wage discrimination, restrictive divorce/abortion laws, a virulently misogynistic work culture a la Mad Men, etc.

What problems are we dealing with today?

There's still the tendency to blame/shame/ridicule rape victims (both male and female), damaging stereotypes about women/girls in engineering technology jobs that contribute to low representation in those professions (and that influence those hiring them, as evidenced by multiple studies showing that changing a name on a resume was enough for an applicant to be hired/not hired, or offered less money in those fields, or for a paper to be accepted/rejected for publication), the last few professions to which women are denied access (e.g. combat roles in the military, which has literally just changed in the US, but remain exclusive in most of the world), and the encroaching infringements on a woman's right to choose through political back-channels.

But compared to what our foremothers dealt with, it's peanuts. Heck, compared to what women in the developing world deal with, it's utterly trivial too.

But our problems could change - are changing - what with the developing world migrating en masse into the West. Modern feminism has nothing to say about that, though.

That is an excellent point. Two of the biggest problems remaining: bringing more men into the fold (the ultimate consequence of intersectionality) and the fact that more dire circumstances exist outside First World nations, and you're... kind of forbidden to do or say anything about them.

Because for 1) WHAT?! YOU WANT TO MAKE FEMINISM MORE ABOUT THE MEN?! (more or less verbatim comment from this comm)

For 2) You dirty imperialist cis white woman, hdu you impugn our culture.

Idk at least some countries are instituting mandatory courses in feminism for immigrants. That's an idea.

Re: let it all out

ill_omened - 2016-07-19 01:59 (UTC) - Expand

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only