When I think of the book that way, it makes a lot more sense. Thinking of the book as written for other feminists, I can see how E F-G would expect her audience to care about why people do not care about feminism. I can also understand E F-G's tone better. Why would she exclude the stories of women who *do* see feminism as relevant unless she is following the pattern of arguing only one side in a group of women who all argue one side (in the same way that lawyers do) rather than with careful noting of exceptions (in the way that I am used to professors and other academics writing for those who do not specialize in their subject). It seems as if E F-G has lived a life very similar to that of the feminists of organizations such as NOW, and so she takes the same all-or-nothing perspective.
And viewed that way, the book seems quite helpful. Instead of wondering why E F-G ignores this or that, I am busy wondering how her book actually influenced her peers including those who taught me. I took a class with one of the women she mentions in the preface, a woman who is quite different from E F-G, and who is quite aware that many American women do not identify as feminists. She was quite a balanced professor (though obviously liberal & open about her life and work with the ACLU etc) and talked a lot about the differences among American women in their fight to better women's lives. She fought against the ERA and never considered that one must support it in order to be a feminist as E F-G implied.
Now I realize that the very inclusiveness which I associate with uber-academic feminism may very well have been shaped by books such as this which provided a wake-up call to feminists. I do not think that the book (so far) works as important material for those not already engaged with feminism, but it may actually have been a part of what shaped those who gave me such a positive view of feminism.
Do you think that I am wrong in thinking that this book was written for other feminists (albeit unintentionally)? Would you give this book to a typical friend who did not think that feminism had any relevance to her life, or do you also see it as more relevant to those who already care about studying feminism?
**So I think that a lot of us owe our reading of this to Elizabeth and Sarah. Thanks for broadening my horizons and getting me to read something which I found vaguely interesting but would not have otherwise made the time for!
Would you give this book to a typical friend who did not think that feminism had any relevance to her life, or do you also see it as more relevant to those who already care about studying feminism?
ReplyDeleteThis book is clearly written to a feminist audience. I know, in my own life, I have claimed to be a feminist while I have failed to fully challenge the foundational elements of feminism. Yes, I've always considered myself pro-life, but outside of that, I have progressively accepted the challenge to break through the glass ceiling with an advanced degree.
You're right. This book really does serve as a wake-up call to feminists.
Interesting point, Rae. I think you're right that the only people who would read this book would be interested in feminism, though I have to say I think more "anti-feminists" than feminists would initially pick it up. So those who have tasted feminism and been disenchanted would be more likely to read it, you know? And it does seem more likely that an academic would pick it up than one of the women she interviewed.
ReplyDeleteAcademics usually do (should?) note exceptions, though. Perhaps that will come later? Or perhaps it truly happened that none of the women she interviewed were able to completely identify with women? Remember, EFG is a former founding feminist, so I imagine she avoided talking to her ex-patriots about this.
And how cool that you know someone influenced by and referenced in the book!
Rae, I'm glad you brought this up. I was kind of having a hard time understanding what the general thrust of the chapter was trying to get at. I don't have anything to add to what has been said, but it has helped me to clarify better what she was talking about.
ReplyDeleteRae, I 2nd CM, I am glad you brought this up. There were parts of this first Chapter that I thought were just going in circles and it was hard to follow, but by taking the approach that it was actually written FOR feminists to understand those of us who have not identified ourselves as a Feminist makes a bit more sense.
ReplyDelete