Thank you for reviewing this book -- one of the best feminist books I'd read in a really long time. So much of writing that is currently labeled feminist has devolved into "we're making a revolution here" under- or non-research gibberish that sounds like a collection of Instagram memes. And it seems not to matter whether the authors have academic credentials or not.
Holly Lawford-Smith brings actual references, actually engages with the sources, and actually delves into possible solutions instead of handwringing or cheerleading. The book is worth reading for that alone. Your review explores the other reasons why it really, really is worth spending time with.
Her rundown of the (diversity) of the radfem thought is quite something. And she does admit that, yes, some of the women wanted to abolish the category of sex, and this is how they philosophized that, etc. Ann Snitow, member of the NY Rad Fems, famously said, "Woman is my slave name". There's a seed of the sex abolition fantasy in a good chunk of serious fem philosophy (Stock calls it in Beauvoir too), but I think the foremothers would have been shocked by what we have now where that argument used to live.
I know that it made quite a few feminists angry, and I do understand why -- it pulls an ideal off a pedestal. But the older I get, the more of my youthful idealism crumbles and falls away. And the more worried I get about the sacrifices many utopians are willing to make with the lives of others.
I would certainly agree "feminism of the wealthy anglo economies has reached a decadent phase and shares the nature-conquering monied hubris of its societies." Feminism is the battleground where "gender identity" is being contested. Thanks for the rec.
It's terrible that it's priced for academic markets.
Thank you for reviewing this book -- one of the best feminist books I'd read in a really long time. So much of writing that is currently labeled feminist has devolved into "we're making a revolution here" under- or non-research gibberish that sounds like a collection of Instagram memes. And it seems not to matter whether the authors have academic credentials or not.
Holly Lawford-Smith brings actual references, actually engages with the sources, and actually delves into possible solutions instead of handwringing or cheerleading. The book is worth reading for that alone. Your review explores the other reasons why it really, really is worth spending time with.
Her rundown of the (diversity) of the radfem thought is quite something. And she does admit that, yes, some of the women wanted to abolish the category of sex, and this is how they philosophized that, etc. Ann Snitow, member of the NY Rad Fems, famously said, "Woman is my slave name". There's a seed of the sex abolition fantasy in a good chunk of serious fem philosophy (Stock calls it in Beauvoir too), but I think the foremothers would have been shocked by what we have now where that argument used to live.
I will admit that I appreciate this controversial piece by Kathleen Stock: https://kathleenstock.substack.com/p/lets-abolish-the-dream-of-gender
I know that it made quite a few feminists angry, and I do understand why -- it pulls an ideal off a pedestal. But the older I get, the more of my youthful idealism crumbles and falls away. And the more worried I get about the sacrifices many utopians are willing to make with the lives of others.
I would certainly agree "feminism of the wealthy anglo economies has reached a decadent phase and shares the nature-conquering monied hubris of its societies." Feminism is the battleground where "gender identity" is being contested. Thanks for the rec.