Happy Birthday, Ms. Andrea
September 26, 2016 6:39 AM Subscribe
Today, Andrea Dworkin, "radical feminist" would have turned 70 years old.
(Trigger Warning: written depictions of rape, assault)
Full PDF of her writings can be found here
"When most people think of Andrea Dworkin, they think of two things: overalls and the idea that all sex is rape" – Ariel Levy, New York magazine
She was anti-pornography but it was also said that
She Never Hated Men... - Kathy Viner, The Guardian
One version of her Legacy: : “Without Andrea, generations of feminists would be wilfully ignorant about the meaning and effect of pornography, as well as how to overcome a desire for male approval in order to tell the truth about women’s lives. That is not all that today’s feminists could learn from Andrea. There is the respect she had for the human rights defenders who came before her, and her loyalty to other women in the struggle who were attacked by those antagonistic to our aims and beliefs. There was her sheer courage, in never backing down or renouncing her principles because it would make life easier or pay dividends; that was a defining characteristic of Andrea, as was daring to hate the men who hated women.” – Julie Bindel, The Guardian
Alternatively: “Dworkin's true legacy has been that far too many young women today would rather be bitten by a rabid dog than be considered a feminist.” – Havana Marking, The Guardian
But although the battle was lost, perhaps the war can yet be won:
“Her analysis is clear and essential, and though it was rejected, it has never been comprehensively answered. ... Even if you believe that prostitution and pornography are fundamentally acceptable, the challenge of Dworkin is to explain why they should exist – rather than merely accepting their current existence as an argument for their continuation. We are creatures of culture and Intercourse is the promise that we are not doomed to the endless replication of misogyny, but can reinvent that culture in new and better shapes.” – Sarah Dictum, the New Statesman
Maybe the answer lies in engaging with her work in 2016
Maybe she was a feminist out of her time when she wrote in Intercourse in 1987:
“Life can be better for women—economic and political conditions improved—and at the same time the status of women can remain resistant, indeed impervious, to change: so far in history this is precisely the paradigm for social change as it relates to the condition of women. Reforms are made, important ones; but the status to women relative to men does not change. Women are still less significant, have less privacy, less integrity, less self-determination. This means that women have less freedom. Freedom is not an abstraction, nor is a little of it enough. A little more of it is not enough either. Having less, being less, impoverished in freedom and rights, women then inevitably have less self-respect: less self-respect than men have and less self-respect than any human being needs to live a brave and honest life. Intercourse as domination battens on that awful absence of self-respect. It expands to fill the near vacuum. The uses of women, now, in intercourse—not the abuses to the extent that they can be separated out—are absolutely permeated by the reality of male power over women.
We are poorer than men in money so we have to barter sex or sell it outright (which is why they keep us poorer in money).
We are poorer than men in psychological well-being because for us self-esteem depends on the approval—frequently expressed through sexual desire—of those who have an exercise power over us.
Male power may be arrogant arrogant or elegant; it can be churlish or refined: but we exist as persons to the extent that men in power recognize us.”
Previously on Metafilter
Full PDF of her writings can be found here
"When most people think of Andrea Dworkin, they think of two things: overalls and the idea that all sex is rape" – Ariel Levy, New York magazine
She was anti-pornography but it was also said that
She Never Hated Men... - Kathy Viner, The Guardian
One version of her Legacy: : “Without Andrea, generations of feminists would be wilfully ignorant about the meaning and effect of pornography, as well as how to overcome a desire for male approval in order to tell the truth about women’s lives. That is not all that today’s feminists could learn from Andrea. There is the respect she had for the human rights defenders who came before her, and her loyalty to other women in the struggle who were attacked by those antagonistic to our aims and beliefs. There was her sheer courage, in never backing down or renouncing her principles because it would make life easier or pay dividends; that was a defining characteristic of Andrea, as was daring to hate the men who hated women.” – Julie Bindel, The Guardian
Alternatively: “Dworkin's true legacy has been that far too many young women today would rather be bitten by a rabid dog than be considered a feminist.” – Havana Marking, The Guardian
But although the battle was lost, perhaps the war can yet be won:
“Her analysis is clear and essential, and though it was rejected, it has never been comprehensively answered. ... Even if you believe that prostitution and pornography are fundamentally acceptable, the challenge of Dworkin is to explain why they should exist – rather than merely accepting their current existence as an argument for their continuation. We are creatures of culture and Intercourse is the promise that we are not doomed to the endless replication of misogyny, but can reinvent that culture in new and better shapes.” – Sarah Dictum, the New Statesman
Maybe the answer lies in engaging with her work in 2016
Maybe she was a feminist out of her time when she wrote in Intercourse in 1987:
“Life can be better for women—economic and political conditions improved—and at the same time the status of women can remain resistant, indeed impervious, to change: so far in history this is precisely the paradigm for social change as it relates to the condition of women. Reforms are made, important ones; but the status to women relative to men does not change. Women are still less significant, have less privacy, less integrity, less self-determination. This means that women have less freedom. Freedom is not an abstraction, nor is a little of it enough. A little more of it is not enough either. Having less, being less, impoverished in freedom and rights, women then inevitably have less self-respect: less self-respect than men have and less self-respect than any human being needs to live a brave and honest life. Intercourse as domination battens on that awful absence of self-respect. It expands to fill the near vacuum. The uses of women, now, in intercourse—not the abuses to the extent that they can be separated out—are absolutely permeated by the reality of male power over women.
We are poorer than men in money so we have to barter sex or sell it outright (which is why they keep us poorer in money).
We are poorer than men in psychological well-being because for us self-esteem depends on the approval—frequently expressed through sexual desire—of those who have an exercise power over us.
Male power may be arrogant arrogant or elegant; it can be churlish or refined: but we exist as persons to the extent that men in power recognize us.”
Previously on Metafilter
Oh, thank you for this amazing post in tribute to an amazing woman! When I was an impressionable youth scouring the early radical feminist interwebs, armed with nothing but my dog-eared hard copy of the SCUM Manifesto, I came across one of Dworkin's many explicit challenges to men as a class -- a 24-hour truce during which there would be no rape -- and was completely blown away. It was written 32 years ago and still resonates in the pit of my bones:
♀
posted by amnesia and magnets at 7:18 AM on September 26, 2016 [32 favorites]
We do not want to do the work of helping you to believe in your humanity. We cannot do it anymore. We have always tried. We have been repaid with systematic exploitation and systematic abuse. You are going to have to do this yourselves from now on and you know it.She was incisive, insightful, and a serious force to be reckoned with -- just too damn scary, I think, to fit in anywhere near today's singularly individual-focused, class-allergic feminism. I love that she unsettles so many women and offends the hell out of so many men, and I love that so many people find her ideology to be extreme and threatening to the status quo, just like it's supposed to be. I and so many women owe her an enormous debt of gratitude for her unflinching bravery in pursuit of female liberation. May her legacy ring out for generations to come.
The shame of men in front of women is, I think, an appropriate response both to what men do do and to what men do not do. I think you should be ashamed. But what you do with that shame is to use it as an excuse to keep doing what you want and to keep not doing anything else; and you've got to stop. You've got to stop. Your psychology doesn't matter. How much you hurt doesn't matter in the end any more than how much we hurt matters. If we sat around and only talked about how much rape hurt us, do you think there would have been one of the changes that you have seen in this country in the last fifteen years? There wouldn't have been.
It is true that we had to talk to each other. How else, after all, were we supposed to find out that each of us was not the only woman in the world not asking for it to whom rape or battery had ever happened? We couldn't read it in the newspapers, not then. We couldn't find a book about it. But you do know and now the question is what you are going to do; and so your shame and your guilt are very much beside the point. They don't matter to us at all, in any way. They're not good enough. They don't do anything.
♀
posted by amnesia and magnets at 7:18 AM on September 26, 2016 [32 favorites]
I saw her speak a few times. At the time, I worked in the rape crisis field - and she pushed the analysis on violence against women, that really moved us forward. I don't remember her being so 'anti-pornography', but more pro-woman. She deeply cared about women - and she certainly viewed violence against women as a primary weapon of patriarchy. She even referred to women living under patriarchy as living with terrorism everyday. She made us warriors - and put energy into our movement that I haven't seen since.
At one of her speaks, there was a rise of the right wing here in Canada. Right wing women were noisy and pestering our feminist centres. Someone asked her about 'how to respond to these women?' and her answer was along the line: never turn your back on any women - especially right wing women. One day - they will need your services. Your rape crisis centres, your women centres, your shelters.... That thought impacts to me to this day. I still work with women & violence - and I have met some very difficult (and sometimes violent) women. But I have never turned my back against any woman who has asked for help from our services.
What's so sad - is very little has changed in violence against women (and children). Our feminist services are at greater demand than ever.
I remember having some of her art prints. Will look through the post for some mention of her art.
Thanks for the post!
posted by what's her name at 7:57 AM on September 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
At one of her speaks, there was a rise of the right wing here in Canada. Right wing women were noisy and pestering our feminist centres. Someone asked her about 'how to respond to these women?' and her answer was along the line: never turn your back on any women - especially right wing women. One day - they will need your services. Your rape crisis centres, your women centres, your shelters.... That thought impacts to me to this day. I still work with women & violence - and I have met some very difficult (and sometimes violent) women. But I have never turned my back against any woman who has asked for help from our services.
What's so sad - is very little has changed in violence against women (and children). Our feminist services are at greater demand than ever.
I remember having some of her art prints. Will look through the post for some mention of her art.
Thanks for the post!
posted by what's her name at 7:57 AM on September 26, 2016 [9 favorites]
I'm fond of Susie Bright's obituary:
It was Andrea’s take-no-prisoners attitude toward patriarchy that I always liked the best. Bourgeois feminists were so BORING. They wanted to keep their maiden name and have it listed in the white pages; they wanted to get a nice corner office in the skyscraper. When I was a teenager in the 70s I couldn't relate to those concerns. It was Dworkin's heyday.
Andrea presented herself as a street fighter intellectual, a bohemian freedom fighter, and someone who wanted to get to the bottom of things. That quote about Malcolm X is apt. Malcolm pointed out “The problem is WHITE PEOPLE.” Dworkin said, “The problem is MEN.” And for all the holes that can be poked in that cloth, there is something about that grain that is absolutely true, when you are the short end of the bolt.
I loved that she dared attack the very notion of intercourse. It was the pie aimed right in the crotch of Mr. Big Stuff. It was an impossible theory, but it wasn’t absurd. There is something about literally being fucked that colors your world, pretty or ugly, and it was about time someone said so.
posted by zabuni at 8:04 AM on September 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
It was Andrea’s take-no-prisoners attitude toward patriarchy that I always liked the best. Bourgeois feminists were so BORING. They wanted to keep their maiden name and have it listed in the white pages; they wanted to get a nice corner office in the skyscraper. When I was a teenager in the 70s I couldn't relate to those concerns. It was Dworkin's heyday.
Andrea presented herself as a street fighter intellectual, a bohemian freedom fighter, and someone who wanted to get to the bottom of things. That quote about Malcolm X is apt. Malcolm pointed out “The problem is WHITE PEOPLE.” Dworkin said, “The problem is MEN.” And for all the holes that can be poked in that cloth, there is something about that grain that is absolutely true, when you are the short end of the bolt.
I loved that she dared attack the very notion of intercourse. It was the pie aimed right in the crotch of Mr. Big Stuff. It was an impossible theory, but it wasn’t absurd. There is something about literally being fucked that colors your world, pretty or ugly, and it was about time someone said so.
posted by zabuni at 8:04 AM on September 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
Give it another 20 years and the establishment will insist that Dworkin was necessary to allow Gloria Steinem to be seen as the more moderate voice, and that's why feminism won and there's no more discrimination against women in America so why don't these radical feminists of 2036 shut up about the patriarchy and be nice like Steinem and Dworkin were.
posted by Etrigan at 8:08 AM on September 26, 2016 [19 favorites]
posted by Etrigan at 8:08 AM on September 26, 2016 [19 favorites]
Oh, would I love to hear Dworkin's critique on Trump running for president.
Where is she when we need her now?
.
posted by BlueHorse at 8:41 AM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Where is she when we need her now?
.
posted by BlueHorse at 8:41 AM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
From the last paragraph of the well-balanced Guardian article comes this statistic: only 5.6 of reported rapes result in conviction. (Italics mine.)
Given this, it's impossible to dismiss even the most extreme positions Dworkin took. Or to put it another way, it's easy to understand how she came to be the woman she was (I spent close to an hour looking through the material in the FPP.)
What Etrigan said above is more than hypothetical; I heard it said, back when she was an active voice in the feminist movement, that she was to figures like Steinem like Malcolm X was to Martin Luther King Jr.: an extremist voice that made the latter seem more moderate. (Although Malcolm X's positions were not that much radical than King's; he seldom spoke in terms as shocking as Dworkin's.)
Oddly, given some of Dworkin's more outrageous positions, this is the one that bothered me the most: that all male bonding is based on the destruction of women. This bothers me personally because I have three (cis het white) best friends of three or four decades, and each one of them treats women as equals and would call themselves feminists (although I know a lot of third wave feminists would prefer that we identify as "allies.")
posted by kozad at 8:51 AM on September 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Given this, it's impossible to dismiss even the most extreme positions Dworkin took. Or to put it another way, it's easy to understand how she came to be the woman she was (I spent close to an hour looking through the material in the FPP.)
What Etrigan said above is more than hypothetical; I heard it said, back when she was an active voice in the feminist movement, that she was to figures like Steinem like Malcolm X was to Martin Luther King Jr.: an extremist voice that made the latter seem more moderate. (Although Malcolm X's positions were not that much radical than King's; he seldom spoke in terms as shocking as Dworkin's.)
Oddly, given some of Dworkin's more outrageous positions, this is the one that bothered me the most: that all male bonding is based on the destruction of women. This bothers me personally because I have three (cis het white) best friends of three or four decades, and each one of them treats women as equals and would call themselves feminists (although I know a lot of third wave feminists would prefer that we identify as "allies.")
posted by kozad at 8:51 AM on September 26, 2016 [2 favorites]
Something Dworkin said in Pornography Is A Civil Rights Issue is one of the milestones for me 'getting it' (and that's been a long road):
posted by fatbird at 8:51 AM on September 26, 2016 [29 favorites]
[Pornographers] have convinced many of us that the standard for speech is what I would call a repulsion standard. That is to say we find the most repulsive person in the society and we defend him. I say we find the most powerless people in this society, and we defend them. That's the way we increase rights of speech in this society.That small assertion forever changed my comprehension of what rights actually mean, and I still find myself today applying that lesson and that argument.
posted by fatbird at 8:51 AM on September 26, 2016 [29 favorites]
I ask "where are you when I need you, Dworkin!?" About 4-5 times per day. I miss her voice and clarity of vision terribly.
I hope her writing seems less scary to people now, 11 years after death, because despite all the work she did and the flak she faced, she left a ton of unfinished feminist business.
Thank you all for your thoughtful comments.
posted by Dressed to Kill at 8:54 AM on September 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I hope her writing seems less scary to people now, 11 years after death, because despite all the work she did and the flak she faced, she left a ton of unfinished feminist business.
Thank you all for your thoughtful comments.
posted by Dressed to Kill at 8:54 AM on September 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I remember reading her in law school (some time after her greatest notoriety) and realizing that she was far more insightful and nuanced than I had thought at one remove. Her analysis isn't fully satisfactory because it isn't fully comprehensive (and it's hard to imagine how anyone's, in the vast field of gender, could be), but she unquestionably foregrounded a dynamic that is real and powerful and that is constantly in danger of being submerged again.
This kind of thing drives me nuts:
“Dworkin's true legacy has been that far too many young women today would rather be bitten by a rabid dog than be considered a feminist.”
As if this was not the result--and has not been the result for generations--of the operation of sexism itself. Patriarchy has never needed any excuses. If she hadn't existed, someone else would have become the boogey-woman. How do I know? These boogey-women have miraculously come into being in every generation where women have fought for more power.
posted by praemunire at 9:34 AM on September 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
This kind of thing drives me nuts:
“Dworkin's true legacy has been that far too many young women today would rather be bitten by a rabid dog than be considered a feminist.”
As if this was not the result--and has not been the result for generations--of the operation of sexism itself. Patriarchy has never needed any excuses. If she hadn't existed, someone else would have become the boogey-woman. How do I know? These boogey-women have miraculously come into being in every generation where women have fought for more power.
posted by praemunire at 9:34 AM on September 26, 2016 [13 favorites]
My favorite summation of Dworkin's oeuvre is in her own quip: "I'm a radical feminist, not the fun kind." Because seriously, building a philosophy around a hard-hitting sociopolitical analysis of The Way It Is isn't fun. Women's repeated attempts to proclaim ourselves as worthy of personhood in the face of our ongoing dehumanization are not fun. Recognizing the hollowness and ultimate futility of "equality" is not fun. Living in a world where a full array of individual aesthetic pursuits and life choices must be winnowed down to only those deemed sufficiently conducive to the continuation of patriarchy, and worse, being told it's all for our own good? NOT FUN.
When it comes to ideas and theories that reflect on practices in which we ourselves engage, most people prefer our ideological investigations to be superficial at best. But Dworkin never let any of us off light or easy, and to me, it seems like the deep discomfort she and her work elicit -- reminding us of our complicity and complacency in the face of unspeakable horror, among other things -- ensure the ongoing marginalization of her many, many profound truths. Her politics strike at the very foundation of heterosexuality itself. That's some scary shit!
She even referred to women living under patriarchy as living with terrorism everyday.
This is still such a profound truth. We have no idea what women's lives would look like under conditions of freedom rather than captivity -- that's a paraphrase from a book that (imo) owes a great deal to Dworkin, the praises of which I will sing from here to eternity: Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men's Violence, and Women's Lives [PDF] by Dee L.R. Graham. Among other things, Graham theorizes the existence of so-called "societal Stockholm syndrome," which takes a kamikaze dive into the idea that the sort of servile, appeasing behaviors and traits most cultures paint as mere manifestations of innate "femininity" are in fact utterly unnatural, having been developed and honed as a line of defense against male terror.
And I think the overarching thesis Dworkin and Graham share, that men as a class are deeply and perhaps axiomatically invested in the ongoing subjugation of women as a class, is what often gets snipped down to and misread as "all sex is rape." The idea that it is OK to dissuade people from examining the political implications and ramifications of (f'rex) heterosexuality and especially pornography simply because they are exceedingly common practices... that's one of the most effective and poisonous tentacles of male supremacy. Her insights and criticisms must be painted as so unreasonable as to be ignored altogether, because their promulgation is antithetical to the status quo, and the powers that be will never let that slide. But when we're still so roundly discouraged from questioning the most basic conditions of our captivity-- when we're raised from birth to experience confinement as materially identical to empowerment-- how on earth can we ever even dream of escape? Oh, Andrea, a nation of women is still turning its lonely eyes to you...
posted by amnesia and magnets at 9:43 AM on September 26, 2016 [23 favorites]
When it comes to ideas and theories that reflect on practices in which we ourselves engage, most people prefer our ideological investigations to be superficial at best. But Dworkin never let any of us off light or easy, and to me, it seems like the deep discomfort she and her work elicit -- reminding us of our complicity and complacency in the face of unspeakable horror, among other things -- ensure the ongoing marginalization of her many, many profound truths. Her politics strike at the very foundation of heterosexuality itself. That's some scary shit!
She even referred to women living under patriarchy as living with terrorism everyday.
This is still such a profound truth. We have no idea what women's lives would look like under conditions of freedom rather than captivity -- that's a paraphrase from a book that (imo) owes a great deal to Dworkin, the praises of which I will sing from here to eternity: Loving to Survive: Sexual Terror, Men's Violence, and Women's Lives [PDF] by Dee L.R. Graham. Among other things, Graham theorizes the existence of so-called "societal Stockholm syndrome," which takes a kamikaze dive into the idea that the sort of servile, appeasing behaviors and traits most cultures paint as mere manifestations of innate "femininity" are in fact utterly unnatural, having been developed and honed as a line of defense against male terror.
And I think the overarching thesis Dworkin and Graham share, that men as a class are deeply and perhaps axiomatically invested in the ongoing subjugation of women as a class, is what often gets snipped down to and misread as "all sex is rape." The idea that it is OK to dissuade people from examining the political implications and ramifications of (f'rex) heterosexuality and especially pornography simply because they are exceedingly common practices... that's one of the most effective and poisonous tentacles of male supremacy. Her insights and criticisms must be painted as so unreasonable as to be ignored altogether, because their promulgation is antithetical to the status quo, and the powers that be will never let that slide. But when we're still so roundly discouraged from questioning the most basic conditions of our captivity-- when we're raised from birth to experience confinement as materially identical to empowerment-- how on earth can we ever even dream of escape? Oh, Andrea, a nation of women is still turning its lonely eyes to you...
posted by amnesia and magnets at 9:43 AM on September 26, 2016 [23 favorites]
Dressed to Kill, this is a really good and deep and informative FPP. MetaFilter at its best!
posted by Guy Smiley at 10:24 AM on September 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Guy Smiley at 10:24 AM on September 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
I'm always a little bit sad and frustrated whenever I see Dworkin brought up at the proto-typical punching-bag feminist, since her work shows someone who is consistently a deeply insightful, intelligent, and investigative thinker. Quite literally the opposite of the dull, dogmatic caricature for which she is far too often used as a stand-in. And she's no slouch stylistically as a writer either; even if judged simply on a literary criteria she's someone who had a compelling and distinct voice.
A old professor of mine said something to the effect that the way to discern between a "liberal" and "radical" feminist is that the former thinks you can use existing structures of power to build a more equal society. The latter believes that no equality can be achieved until the underlying cultural assumptions of a society have been addressed, which may include destroying those existing frameworks of power. It's a shame that "radical feminist" is often used as an epithet to mean "feminist I don't agree with,"rather than a approach which takes a more holistic approach to eliminating gender roles and achieving true parity among women and men.
In that sense, Dworkin is the epitome of the radical feminist (and was happy to be so!). She often had as much criticism for, and achieved much criticism from, more classically liberal feminists, for her willingness to unapologetically and bluntly point out that the world operates on a foundation of women as secondary to men, such that to change society requires questioning some fundamental beliefs. I think that is where she loses a lot of people, unfortunately, since it's easier to get people on board with some new law or change existing policy to incrementally creep towards equality than it is to get people to agree with the fact that they are active participants in an exploitative system from which they benefit.
Really it's through that lens -- no system being able achieve equality if built on a foundation of exploitation -- that Dworkin's anti-pornography stance makes the most sense. She was so much more than a single issue woman though. Even in her first book, Woman Hating, she was writing about notions that laid that foundation for the more diverse stance of 3rd Wave Feminism. Fifteen years before Crenshaw gave us the term "intersectionality," Dworkin had this to say:
She was also a great deal more optimistic in her ideals than most people give her credit for. The Awl had a nose-tweaker of an article a couple years ago titled, "Andrea Dworkin, Men’s Rights Advocate," which focused on her book, Right-wing Women. The article shows how radical Dworkin's commitment to equality was, and even quotes one of my favorite definitions of feminism:
posted by Panjandrum at 11:11 AM on September 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
A old professor of mine said something to the effect that the way to discern between a "liberal" and "radical" feminist is that the former thinks you can use existing structures of power to build a more equal society. The latter believes that no equality can be achieved until the underlying cultural assumptions of a society have been addressed, which may include destroying those existing frameworks of power. It's a shame that "radical feminist" is often used as an epithet to mean "feminist I don't agree with,"rather than a approach which takes a more holistic approach to eliminating gender roles and achieving true parity among women and men.
In that sense, Dworkin is the epitome of the radical feminist (and was happy to be so!). She often had as much criticism for, and achieved much criticism from, more classically liberal feminists, for her willingness to unapologetically and bluntly point out that the world operates on a foundation of women as secondary to men, such that to change society requires questioning some fundamental beliefs. I think that is where she loses a lot of people, unfortunately, since it's easier to get people on board with some new law or change existing policy to incrementally creep towards equality than it is to get people to agree with the fact that they are active participants in an exploitative system from which they benefit.
Really it's through that lens -- no system being able achieve equality if built on a foundation of exploitation -- that Dworkin's anti-pornography stance makes the most sense. She was so much more than a single issue woman though. Even in her first book, Woman Hating, she was writing about notions that laid that foundation for the more diverse stance of 3rd Wave Feminism. Fifteen years before Crenshaw gave us the term "intersectionality," Dworkin had this to say:
Most of the women involved in articulating the oppression of women were white and middle class. We spent, even if we did not earn or control, enormous sums of money. Because o f our participation in the middle-class lifestyle we were the oppressors of other people, our poor white sisters, our Black sisters, our Chicana sisters —and the men who in turn oppressed them. This closely interwoven fabric of oppression, which is the racist class structure of Amerika today, assured that wherever one stood, it was with at least one foot heavy on the belly of another human being.Mostly I find blithe dismissal of Dworkin to either be from ignorance (if I had a dollar for every person who attacks her without having read a line of her work...) or from that fact that she writes with a voice that is strong, confident, and committed to her position. Dworkin didn't coddle shit, and some people get turned off by that, which is a failing on their part, because Dworkin's positions are well-considered and well-argued (even if they sometimes feel a bit dated, decades later).
She was also a great deal more optimistic in her ideals than most people give her credit for. The Awl had a nose-tweaker of an article a couple years ago titled, "Andrea Dworkin, Men’s Rights Advocate," which focused on her book, Right-wing Women. The article shows how radical Dworkin's commitment to equality was, and even quotes one of my favorite definitions of feminism:
Feminism as the liberation movement of women proposes one absolute standard of human dignity, indivisible by sex. In this sense, feminism does propose... that men and women be treated the same. Feminism is a radical stance against double standards in rights and responsibilities, and feminism is a revolutionary advocacy of a single standard of human freedom.Really though, the next paragraph in that book gets to why Dworkin was radical:
To achieve a single standard of human freedom and one absolute standard of human dignity, the sex-class system has to be dismembered. The reason is pragmatic, not philosophical: nothing less will work. However much everyone wants to do less, less will not free women. Liberal men and women ask, Why can’t we just be ourselves, all human beings, begin now and not dwell in past injustices, wouldn’t that subvert the sex-class system, change it from the inside out? The answer is no. The sex-class system has a structure; it has deep roots in religion and culture; it is fundamental to the economy; sexuality is its creature; to be “just human beings” in it, women have to hide what happens to them as women because they are women— happenings like forced sex and forced reproduction, happenings that continue as long as the sex-class system operates. The liberation of women requires facing the real condition of women in order to change it. “We’re all just people” is a stance that prohibits recognition of the systematic cruelties visited on women because of sex oppression.I hope the rehabilitation of Dworkin continues as I think it has in the past several years. Her's is a voice that deserves to be heard.
posted by Panjandrum at 11:11 AM on September 26, 2016 [16 favorites]
Give it another 20 years and the establishment will insist that Dworkin was necessary to allow Gloria Steinem to be seen as the more moderate voice
I also took this as an intended comparison to the Black Civil Rights Movement and it strikes me that in my experience even (the analogous version of) the argument you're describing is hardly mainstream.
posted by atoxyl at 11:42 AM on September 26, 2016
I also took this as an intended comparison to the Black Civil Rights Movement and it strikes me that in my experience even (the analogous version of) the argument you're describing is hardly mainstream.
posted by atoxyl at 11:42 AM on September 26, 2016
A lot of people will not admit to a role for radical voices at all.
posted by atoxyl at 11:43 AM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 11:43 AM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
In the early 90s when I worked with volunteers at the UC Davis rape prevention education program & we were talking about things like the Antioch protocol, Dworkin's feminism still felt like a step too far and somewhat alienating to me with her rather harsh assessment of the ramifications of consent in a culture where women are so disempowered. Much, much later I started to appreciate her points, but as much as she energized some, she polarized others. I'm still conflicted over her influence.
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:16 PM on September 26, 2016
posted by BrotherCaine at 2:16 PM on September 26, 2016
I WOULD STRONGLY ADVISE NO ONE READ THE 'PREVIOUSLY' LINK
posted by beerperson at 2:56 PM on September 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
posted by beerperson at 2:56 PM on September 26, 2016 [6 favorites]
I WOULD STRONGLY ADVISE NO ONE READ THE 'PREVIOUSLY' LINK
How bad could it be, I thought.
Oh.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:10 PM on September 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
How bad could it be, I thought.
Oh.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:10 PM on September 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
I WOULD STRONGLY ADVISE NO ONE READ THE 'PREVIOUSLY' LINK
holy shit
posted by ominous_paws at 4:16 PM on September 26, 2016
holy shit
posted by ominous_paws at 4:16 PM on September 26, 2016
She deserves commendation for being a rare -- and strong -- supporter of trans people within the radical feminism of her day. Others weren't as reasonable. Others still aren't.
posted by lilies.lilies at 4:32 PM on September 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by lilies.lilies at 4:32 PM on September 26, 2016 [4 favorites]
The "previously on metafilter" should make us happy for how far we've come (I hope?)
posted by Dressed to Kill at 7:16 PM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Dressed to Kill at 7:16 PM on September 26, 2016 [3 favorites]
Wow, that's maybe the most personally nasty obit thread I've ever seen on Mefi. But I didn't read Osama bin Laden's. Maybe his was almost as bad.
posted by praemunire at 9:12 PM on September 26, 2016
posted by praemunire at 9:12 PM on September 26, 2016
But on the positive side, there's referenced (previously) an Andrea Dworkin online library http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/why.html put on the web old-style by the feminist activist Nikki Craft
Dworkin: I wanted instead to write books that were fire and ice, wind sweeping the earth. I wanted to write books that, once experienced, could not be forgotten, books that would be cherished as we cherish the most exquisite light we have ever seen.
I think she brought that light to bear; I have never forgotten the writing ...
posted by lathrop at 9:30 PM on September 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
Dworkin: I wanted instead to write books that were fire and ice, wind sweeping the earth. I wanted to write books that, once experienced, could not be forgotten, books that would be cherished as we cherish the most exquisite light we have ever seen.
I think she brought that light to bear; I have never forgotten the writing ...
posted by lathrop at 9:30 PM on September 26, 2016 [1 favorite]
The problem, unfortunately for the vast majority of people casting about for something to cling to in this ghastly science fiction horrorshow we call life, isn't white people, or men, or even the love of money (which is closer than the others to the problem).
The problem is death and the manifold immortality ideologies that have powered every human activity from the moment we humans became aware we were no better than the other creatures we killed to survive.
Dworkin was, indeed, important. And being on the receiving end of power's impersonal-or personal-excesses is certainly nothing to belittle. But until all of us get off the individual cars on the train identifying our take on life, be it political, economic or religious, we will always be dog-paddling in the kiddie pool, instead of swimming the English Channel.
That rape is still a popular rite of passage for so many men is merely a sign of the limitations of imagination-possession of a penis isn't even necessary, but it seems to be the common badge, although the true horror of the most squalid expression of power lies in the activities of serial killers, who submit their victims to much the same treatment common to the unluckiest participants of wars. The failure of imagination lies in believing someone else's take on life. As Diderot is claimed to have said, "Mankind will never know peace until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.".
posted by girdyerloins at 5:35 AM on September 27, 2016
The problem is death and the manifold immortality ideologies that have powered every human activity from the moment we humans became aware we were no better than the other creatures we killed to survive.
Dworkin was, indeed, important. And being on the receiving end of power's impersonal-or personal-excesses is certainly nothing to belittle. But until all of us get off the individual cars on the train identifying our take on life, be it political, economic or religious, we will always be dog-paddling in the kiddie pool, instead of swimming the English Channel.
That rape is still a popular rite of passage for so many men is merely a sign of the limitations of imagination-possession of a penis isn't even necessary, but it seems to be the common badge, although the true horror of the most squalid expression of power lies in the activities of serial killers, who submit their victims to much the same treatment common to the unluckiest participants of wars. The failure of imagination lies in believing someone else's take on life. As Diderot is claimed to have said, "Mankind will never know peace until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.".
posted by girdyerloins at 5:35 AM on September 27, 2016
Yeah, that's pretty much what people said in the "Previously" thread.
posted by The corpse in the library at 7:21 PM on September 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by The corpse in the library at 7:21 PM on September 27, 2016 [3 favorites]
How hard would it troll the right for Hillary to quote Dworkin at a debate with Trump?
posted by spitbull at 5:06 AM on September 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by spitbull at 5:06 AM on September 28, 2016 [1 favorite]
The "previously on metafilter" should make us happy for how far we've come (I hope?)
I joined MetaFilter about a month after that thread, and I simply can't imagine joining a site like that, these days. But, reflecting on the last 11 years, it's clear to me that MetaFilter's own development has helped me become a less egregiously shitty person. I don't think I ever said anything as appalling as the worst stuff in that thread, but I know there are comments lurking in my history that would give me cold sweats of shame to read today. So, I guess I'm glad we've come a long way and nervous about what I'll have realised about myself in another 11 years.
posted by howfar at 3:20 PM on September 30, 2016 [3 favorites]
I joined MetaFilter about a month after that thread, and I simply can't imagine joining a site like that, these days. But, reflecting on the last 11 years, it's clear to me that MetaFilter's own development has helped me become a less egregiously shitty person. I don't think I ever said anything as appalling as the worst stuff in that thread, but I know there are comments lurking in my history that would give me cold sweats of shame to read today. So, I guess I'm glad we've come a long way and nervous about what I'll have realised about myself in another 11 years.
posted by howfar at 3:20 PM on September 30, 2016 [3 favorites]
« Older Calligraphy ・Fashion ・Travel | This garbage of demolishing a record has turned... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
.
posted by clockzero at 6:58 AM on September 26, 2016 [16 favorites]