"Sex and Feminism: Who Is Being Silenced?"

Sex and Feminism: Who Is Being Silenced?

by Adriene Sere

Leftist publications have a problem with radical feminism. They have long maintained an informal ban against publishing radical feminist writers. They refuse to grapple with radical feminism's critique of male supremacist sexuality as a system of oppression of women. They generally pretend radical feminists don't exist, except for Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon, whose names they try to weld into keywords for "censorship," "anti-sex," and "bad kind of feminist."

Leftist publications do publish liberal feminists and leftist women, thanks in part to the pressures of the feminist movement. There's a tiny bit of space given to women in the Nation, a little bit more in Z Magazine, and a generous bit more in the Progressive. But whatever the ratio, all publishing access comes under the provisions of an underlying contract: "We will publish your writing. We will even allow you to be stars. Just don't go there -- where Catherine MacKinnon, Andrea Dworkin, and those nameless radical feminists go. That's taboo territory. Don't even think about respectfully engaging with these feminists. If you join their ranks, we will treat you the way we treat them. If you even look like their friend, you will no longer be welcome here. We will reward you, so long as you don't cross that line."

After decades of this divide-and-conquer strategy, radical feminists might hope that sexist men on the left would simply tire themselves out. After all, how can they keep pummeling those who are made invisible? How can they both bash and erase, year after year? How can they keep getting liberal and leftist women to follow their rules, almost without exception?

Unfortunately, no one is getting tired -- except perhaps radical feminists. Women who move in leftist and liberal publishing circles know the rules of the contract, and more and more of them make these rules their own. Many of them take the initiative to bash and erase the "bad feminists" (the two that exist) as a pledge of allegiance to the men and the system around them....

http://www.saidit.org/archives/jul01/mediaglance.html

"Pro-sex" writers such as Hollibaugh and Allison have written extensively on the shame they were made to feel by "rigid" feminists because of their enjoyment of hierarchical and "taboo" sexuality. No doubt, there were many feminists who failed to make the distinction that Douglas makes, and carried their politics into others' personal territory -- judging, condemning, even excommunicating. By exposing and criticising such behavior, Allison and Hollibaugh have made an important contribution to the feminist movement. However, the legitimate objection to inappropriate peer pressures should not be used as an excuse to eliminate feminist analyses of the history, context, and larger meaning of what is called "pro-sex" from public debate.

On one hand, I can’t help but lend at least some support to any movement where women are encouraged to embrace our sexuality and bring it out into the open on our terms. I’m fucking fed up living in a culture that regards a woman’s desire and willingness to have sex as some kind of failure of moral character. Think about the way the words “slut” and “whore” are used so flippantly in casual conversation. How often have we all heard someone (usually a man) utter the words “that dirty whore” or “that stupid slut” to indicate he is angry with a woman or dislikes her, regardless of how many men that woman has actually had sex with or whether that woman has ever taken money in exchange for sex? Intimating that a woman is promiscuous is one of the most aggregious insults you can bestow upon her. She is damaged. She is impure....

I can’t say I blame fuck me feminists for being pissed off about all of this. I myself am extraordinarily pissed off and tired of it. A big part of FMF is about saying “whoa, hold on a second. This ain’t cool. We want sex just as much as men and moreover, we demand the right to enjoy our sexuality in any way we deem fit without being made to feel fucking guilty and shameful about it. We’re claiming that right whether you like it or not, so you can fuck me or you can fuck off.” And I fully support that.

One of the big problems I have with FMF is the fact that, when all is said and done, it still frames female empowerment through sex in terms of the male standard and allows the sexual objectification of women and the valuation of women based on their worth as sexual objects to remain an accepted cultural imperative. For example, it has become widely fashionable for women to proclaim their love of pornography and to use pornography with their partners as part of their sex life. I’m sure some of them do honestly like it, but I’m sure there are also plenty who say they like it or convince themselves they like it despite a nagging voice inside screaming “this is fucked up” just to prove to their man how cool and liberated they are. A lot of people refute the feminist critique of porn by saying “but I know tons of women who love porn!”, as if the fact that some women like it or use it somehow nullifies any possible feminist objection to it. I find it difficult to accept the idea that reclaiming the use of pornography so that we are active consumers of it instead of just passive objects in it in any way lessens or justifies the degradation and subjugation of women it promotes. To draw an analogy, just because somebody is a prison kingpin who has the most influence over all the other prisoners, special consideration from the guards and has accrued personal gain by exploiting the micro-society inside prison walls doesn’t make him free.

I also generally think that the FMF movement is doing more to make the idea of feminism less threatening to men than it is to promote the sexual empowerment of women. It’s convenient not to have to voice any of the very unpleasant truths about sexual politics in this society because you’ve embraced them in the name of your own empowerment. After all, how can the face of feminism be scary to men when instead of trying to stop the consumption of women as a commodity, it’s telling men “carry on consuming, carry on objectifying, carry on degrading and I’ll just tag along for the ride because it’s so EMPOWERING.” Are FMFs embracing the short skirts and high heels, the strip clubs and porn videos, the one night stands and meaningless trysts because these things are truly expressions of their own sexuality, or because those particular expressions of sexuality satisfy male need and mens’ idea of what female sexuality is, and helps men drop the distinction between feminist and fuckable piece of ass? Are the women who proudly proclaim themselves fuck me feminists more interested in promoting acceptance of their sexuality or in gaining male acceptance?