|
|
|
||||||
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Review Aimee Mann Lyrics and Gendered Language Patterns Policy Reflections
on Our Wounded
Identities in Law
Holy Trouble To Make a Dragon Move To Rescue or Research Pornography: Subjectivity and Gender-Identity in Cyberspace GWU Resources
|
The following
paragraphs are an excerpt from a paper written about the political and
social theories of bell hooks. These
sections focus specifically on her newest book, Feminism
is for Everybody. Throughout her works, hooks maintains a firm belief in the accessibility of the theory she seeks to situate within society. To that end, hooks’ latest work, Feminism is for Everybody, is an accessible book that outlines the basic tenants of a radical feminist theory. More inclusive than many of her other works, this book attempts to address an audience that is completely unfamiliar with feminist thought. In the introduction, hooks discusses the rampant misconceptions surrounding the movement. In her encounters with people on a daily basis, she finds that: “When I ask these same folks about the feminist books or magazines they read, when I ask them about the feminist talks they have heard, about the feminist activists they know, they respond by letting me know that everything they know about feminism has come into their lives thirdhand [sic], that they really have not come close enough to the feminist movement to know what really happens, what it’s really about. Mostly they think feminism is a bunch of angry women who want to be like men. (vii). It is these misconceptions that hooks feels must be corrected. Only in this way will the everyday relevance of feminism become clear. Hooks goes on to explain that this book is an effort to answer the question “what is feminism” in a clear, concise way that is not reductive to her readers (viii). She stressed the failure of the feminist movement to produce a multitude of works that are accessible and useful in many arenas. Many of the chapters in Feminism is for Everybody recapitulate and simplify the arguments put forth in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. Hooks attempts to diffuse common myths surrounding the feminist movement, and to that end, she suggests ways the movement may become all-inclusive. In the section entitled “Feminist Masculinity” hooks discusses the dichotomy perpetuated by Second Wave feminists who sought to classify the male as the “enemy”. The polarization of men as the “oppressor” and woman as the “oppressed” propelled the women’s movement initially, but it was not long before women were able to step back and realize that the system itself was flawed (68). This was difficult, as it forced women to recognize their own complicit behavior. “It was difficult to face the reality that the problem did not just lie with men. Facing that reality required more complex theorizing; it required acknowledging the role women play in maintaining and perpetuating sexism” (67). Hooks calls for a new ideal of feminist masculinity--one that is informed by feminist ideals rather than the ideals of the patriarchy on which masculinity rests presently (70). While this seems utopian, and avoids the negative implications in contemporary society of anything “feminized”, hooks employs this strategy to demonstrate the need for an inclusive movement. It is only through an all-encompassing movement, the benefits of which are apparent to all, that change can be erected. In Feminism is for Everybody, hooks attempts to integrate a myriad of people into a theory of feminism. While this seems useful, it is limited in some ways. In an effort to cover a multitude of important issues, hooks must necessarily minimize the dimensions of her theoretical base. In the section discussed above, hooks closes with “A feminist vision which embraces feminist masculinity, which loves boys and men and demands on their behalf every right that we desire for girls and women, can renew the American male” (71). While it is obviously important to integrate and even recruit men into theories of feminism, when did it become the woman’s job to rejuvenate the American male? This sweeping statement seems to harbor some dangerous implications about the role of women and their obligation to men. Reductive statements such as these, which do not completely relay the message intended, may send conflicting ideas to a man or a woman unfamiliar with the basic tenants of feminism. This book, in an effort to resist alienating her intended audience, is also strikingly less oppositional than her previous works. This policy of tolerance seems a betrayal of the force of these earlier statements, and does not demand the reader to self reflect. If feminism is an all-inclusive, come-as-you-are free for all, and no one is forced to negotiate their exclusionary tendencies, or evaluate their position(s) of privilege, wherein lies the revolution? While these are legitimate concerns, hooks is correct in her insistence that these types of works be produced in an on-going effort to educate.
|
|
 |