Loading...

"So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?"

"So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?" - Hallo friendsINFO TODAY, In the article you read this time with the title "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?", We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article economy, Article health, Article hobby, Article News, Article politics, Article sports, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title : "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?"
link : "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?"

Read too


"So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?"

"Perhaps it’s simply because we’re in a moment of crisis, when people seeking solutions are dusting off all sorts of radical ideas. But I think it’s more than that... Dworkin was unapologetically angry, as so many women today are. Even before 2016, you could see this anger building in the emergence of new words to describe maddening male behaviors that had once gone unnamed — manspreading, mansplaining. Then came the obscene insult of Donald Trump’s victory. It seems like something sprung from Dworkin’s cataclysmic imagination, that America’s most overtly fascistic president would also be the first, as far as we know, to have appeared in soft-core porn films. I think Trump’s victory marked a shift in feminism’s relationship to sexual liberation; as long as he’s in power, it’s hard to associate libertinism with progress. And so Dworkin, so profoundly out of fashion just a few years ago, suddenly seems prophetic."

Suddenly, suddenly.

The assertions of suddenness come from Michelle Goldberg, writing at the NYT in "Not the Fun Kind of Feminist/How Trump helped make Andrea Dworkin relevant again."

For the record, I read Andrea Dworkin when she was alive and kicking and her books were relevant the first time around. I read "Intercourse," "Pornography: Men Possessing Women," "Right Wing Women," "Woman Hating," and even "Mercy: A Novel."

So I don't need "Last Days at Hot Slit: The Radical Feminism of Andrea Dworkin," the new collection of Dworkin writings that seems to prompt Goldberg.

Now, why exactly was Dworkin "so profoundly out of fashion"? I think the answer is that women want to be sex-positive. They didn't want to have to give up sex to be feminists. Dworkin's analysis was very unsettling and provocative, and it was always easier to leave her book shut and not have to deal with the arguments she raised. I'm not impressed by the women who go into these books now because they seem to synchronize with hating Trump. To impress me, you have to put feminism first, and that means you should have cared about this stuff when Bill Clinton ruled the roost.

Goldberg quotes one of the editors of the newly published collection of Dworkin writings:
“Me and my peers, we believed in this sort of fairy tale, that there was a line of demarcation that was very clear between rape and nonconsensual acts, and consent,” said Fateman. “We knew where the line was, and everything on the side of consent was great, and it was an expression of our freedom. But that’s not the experience of sex that a lot of people are having.”
Is that even true? You and your friends all believed there was a clear line and everything on one side was great and on the other side was rape? So all that "great sex" you were having, you never had any qualms about how bad it might actually be? In the interest of giving you credit for having something of an intellect, I've got to say I don't believe you.

From my 2005 post, "Andrea Dworkin has died":
Feminism was only a means to an end for a lot of people who positioned themselves as the voices of feminism. Their abjectly partisan goals came to light when they supported Clinton and (especially) smeared Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky. It was an appalling spectacle. I care a lot about feminism, but I have not trusted the self-appointed voices of feminism since then. Dworkin, for all her overstatements and wackiness, was truly devoted to feminism as an end. She didn't care enough about free speech and she was over-the-top in her aversion to heterosexual sex, but I mean to honor her with this post.
Criticized for that post, I responded in "Have I been too kind to the late Andrea Dworkin?"


Thus Article "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?"

That's an article "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?" This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article "So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?" with the link address https://infotodays1.blogspot.com/2019/02/so-what-it-is-in-andrea-dworkins-long.html

Subscribe to receive free email updates:

Related Posts :

0 Response to ""So what it is in [Andrea] Dworkin’s long-neglected oeuvre that has suddenly become resonant?""

Post a Comment

Loading...