Notes from a feminist book tour: it's alright to want everything
Somewhere along the line women seem to have forgotten how far we’ve got to go.
By Laurie Penny Published 31 October 2012 15:35
The man in the audience is calling me a liar. He sits a few rows back, behind the women and the handful of men who have come to hear me do my talk about anti-capitalism and feminism, about sexual politics and the backlash against women's freedom in the west. He speaks with dull rage. He calls me a fantasist and a lunatic, tells me that men and women are as equal as they're ever going to be or need to be, that I’m hysterical, attention-seeking. I’ve met this guy before. I’ve met him with different faces, always in his mid-thirties, in a vicious mood and often, curiously enough, in one of those pseudo-liberal campaign groups that fights tirelessly for free speech - except when it’s women talking about feminism, because those bitches need to shut up already.
In the past month I've given talks all over Europe, mainly speaking about with Meat Market, my little anti-capitalist-feminist pop-theory book, doing interviews and discussions and readings in twelve cities. If this particular talk were happening in Italy, someone would have turned around and laughed in this guy’s face. In Britain you'd have had a bit of cross muttering followed by quietly furious people coming up to me after the event to ask if I'm sure I'm okay and isn’t it shocking, which is British for "this is fucked beyond belief". But this is Germany, and the room is an orgy of polite silence. And suddenly I’m tired beyond words.
It’s the kind of tiredness that’s mental as well as physical, the kind that makes your soul feel grimy. Rattling between Hamburg and Bumblefuck, West Germany, I find myself wishing, not for the first time this trip, that feminists could go on tour like rock bands. What I wouldn’t give for some interesting support acts, groupies, fascinating fall-outs, booze. Instead it’s just me, on my own, traveling in second-class and hoping there’ll be somewhere to wash my socks at the next stop before I actually have to beat out the crusty bits with a hammer. Somewhere between Paris and Athens I got sick - really sick, sick enough to have lain sweating and vomiting for twenty-for hours in a strange bed in a friend-of-a-friend’s house in Exarchia. The sickness hasn’t really gone away, though sprays and pills and a variety of culturally-specific alcoholic hot drinks have just about chased it off my chest, a product of too many late nights and cheap carbs and nasty cigarettes and unhygienic kisses and fascinating new friends who are more interesting than sleep.
Friends sometimes ask me why I do this. They ask why I live out of a suitcase and fling myself around the world writing for next to no money, work that keeps me from all the things young women my age are meant to want: the steady boyfriend, the the steady job, the shoe collection with a place to keep it in, the flat. Why do I do a job that makes me constantly nervous about being on show and not having the right answer, this work that means that I have to deal every single day with bullshit like this particular chap in the audience who right now seems to represent, perhaps unfairly, every single back-seat mouth-breather who ever set up a webpage dedicated to calling me a mad cunt who deserves to be raped to death? Why? I could have gone and worked in PR. I could have done fashion journalism. But instead, I do this, because I can, because the opportunity was there to live the sort of life denied to women like me well within living memory.
At my age, twenty- six, my grandmother was a recent immigrant with five kids and another on the way. She was shackled by religion to a violent alcoholic husband whom she had married in wartime to escape her island poverty. At twenty-six, my mother was already divorced, had begun the process of sacrificing herself to work and marriage and all the things expected of a second-generation immigrant career girl duped into believing you can ‘have it all’. Neither of them would have called themselves feminists. But feminism was what won for me and my sisters the birthright of all women in the twenty-first century, the one conservatives across the world are actively trying to confiscate right now: the right not to have to rely a man to keep you, the right to live your life without worrying whether or not you’re pretty enough or well-behaved enough to stop your boss or your husband getting sick of you, the right to be socially, sexually and financially independent.
I do this because I can and because they couldn't, and because most women, even in the privileged west, still can’t. Feminism has won social mobility for a minority of women, but not social justice for all of us, not yet. I travel with a purse full of lipstick and birth control and books because if I didn’t I would be dishonoring the memory of my grandmother and generations of women like her who grew up frightened of the things they most wanted, of sex and power and self-reliance. I feel I have a duty to live as freely as I possibly can and to join the fight to defend and extend that freedom to women who did not grow up with my privilege. Let me explain this another way:
There’s a great deal of reading I ought to be doing, dull but important books I’d set aside to read on the interminable trains, but when I’m lonely on the road I keep coming back to science fiction. I lose myself in stories of other worlds, Dune and The Dispossessed and Use of Weapons and the Vorkosigan books, whizzing through the cold flatlands of mid-west Germany on trains that are a little like spaceships themselves, with doors that swish open at the slightest touch and, not for the first time, I find a hot, urgent sort of longing swelling in my chest. I always get emotional when I read books or watch films about space travel. I know that I won’t ever get to the stars, or have adventures under the light of strange moons. My friend Deirdre Ruane wrote a fantastic comic about just this feeling. I wonder, often, if this is what women of my nanna’s generation felt when they saw girls like me living our lives today.
I wonder if the shiver of impossible yearning I experience when I watch space-battles on the television is what my nanna and women like her felt when they watched us going to university, having boyfriends before marriage, travelling to other countries, dancing all night in dresses cut short so you can feel the sweaty air of dark clubs on your thighs. For her, my life was, is, science fiction: strange and frightening, enabled by technology, and I see women my age handling it all as casually as a extra on Original Star Trek might handle one of those palm-computers that looked so exciting in the 1970s and now look like dated, old-model smartphones. We handle it all casually because we’re unable to conceive of an even better world. We’ve been told that this shaky picture is the best we’re ever going to get.
In Frankfurt, the fifth stop on my book tour, I walked alone to the student social centre through the city's small, grisly red light district and felt my phone buzz in my pocket: an email from a comrade, had I seen the news? Back home the minister for Work and Pensions had made a speech declaring that the big reason the British economy is in trouble has nothing to do with corporate tax avoidance, irresponsible banks, or the decision to sell off the welfare state to pay for the mistakes of the financial elite. No: women are the problem. Poor women, and their children. How dare they reproduce without husbands to support them? How dare they demand ‘handouts’ from the state?
The week before that it was women who have late-term abortions under fire. How dare they? How dare they presume to have the right to decide what happens to their own bodies, how dare the brazen hussies ask for access to basic medical services? Whenever right-wing governments want to distract attention from their frenzied evisceration of the social contract, they point to women, particularly poor women and women of colour, and tell us that those women are the real problem. And we let them, because we still live in a world where structural misogyny and the machinations of post-Fordist capitalism dance together like Fred and Ginger dancing to "Smoke Gets In Your Eyes", moving as one. Look at him driving her backwards in high heels.
Somewhere along the line we seem to have forgotten how far we’ve got to go. Women have made enormous strides in the past hundred years, yes, of course we have, but let’s get beyond this idea that we’re supposed to be grateful that some of us are now permitted a warped sort of equality in a fundamentally unequal labour market. We have no reason to be grateful. We have every right to want more. We have a right to want everything, including not being morally and financially attacked by bigots in government with a business agenda every time they want to distract attention from their own fuckups. We have every right to demand more than this.
The man in the audience who called me a liar is not happy with my answer. He shrugs on his coat and marches out. Once he’s gone, the rest of us get down to the serious questions. Spiky-haired students and parents with young kids who’ve crossed town to be there ask me: where do we go from here? And just what are we supposed to want? And what do I believe can really change? And every answer is a little different, a little bit personal, and every answer comes back to this:
Feminism isn’t about telling women how to live or who to love or what not to wear. Feminism is about imagining a future where gender isn’t destiny and sexism isn’t rampant, and then working to achieve that future. I believe it’ll happen, if we want it enough. If we allow ourselves to want it.
So that's what I told the shy student with the curtains of dark hair who asked the last question on the last stop in my little book-tour, the girl who asked if we really have so much further to go. I told her - your mileage may vary, but I’m a utopian. I believe that the time will come when women have full control over our bodies and our lives, when girls do not grow up ashamed of our sexuality, when we do not have to fear violence at home and in the streets if we step out of line and poverty if we are not born rich. I believe there will be a time when the world is better and braver and freer than we can possibly imagine. And hey, maybe I won’t get to live in that world for very long, but I’m prepared to believe that some of the women who will lead it and build futures in it have already been born. Until then, I’ll keep on writing and talking and watching the star battles on television, because it’s longing like that that sets us free.
You can watch Laurie reading from the conclusion of Meat Market here:
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















59 comments
Comments on this article are now closed. Thanks for your contributions.
Oh dear... This article and video are embarrassingly dreadful. Cringeworthy rubbish. I do wish people would wake up to the fact that LP is immature (just listen to the "baby" voice), unstable and depressive. Hardly a role model - or anything else, for that matter...
There you go Spud Middleton, you and the other sane posters, I have to admit there's not many, give her idiotic views give her oxygen by answering her nitwit folowers. The bosses at The NewStatesman then see mass comments and keep her on in the belief that she actually has something useful to say.
I must admit though it's amusing to read the comments.
There's no issue with giving her views publicity. If she was gonna go away, she'd have gone by now. She's become, for whatever reason, one of those media fixtures that you just can't get rid of; like Jimmy Saville. And I'm actually glad she's around. When I've retired and can't maintain the necessary funding to support my narcotic consumption at current levels, I'm looking to the likes of Ms P to provide the slightly surreal ambience which my personal aesthetic favours.
I see myself rolling outta bed about 9ish, nipping downstairs, putting on the telly and catching Lorraine Kelly announce: "and now we're going to hear from our economic, foreign, philosophic, gender and pop-cultural guru and über-correspondent Laurie Penny MP, OBE". That's the way it's going. This country's had it; I've told my kids to bail ASAP. I'd go myself except I like it here and I've always seen myself as a Captain of the Titannic type of guy...bit of a f**k up but willing to stick around and carry the can etc.
More so than any depth of wanton depravity, any amount of unemployment, penury, destitution, political corruption and rampant inequality, the sign that this country has become truly dysfunctional will be the day Laurie penny appears on, say, Newsnight as more than entertainment or a curiosity. By sheer weight of 'service', these people actually acquire a sort of credibility. I fear in the future we'll have our political and cultural agenda set by public school types suspended in a sort of permanent adolescence, forever striving for a degree of radicalism which will shock the middle-class from which they're trying to disassociate themselves. They're everywhere; it's the future.
i think your imagined trajectory hits the nail on the head Spud, the future is medium. a polished turd that replaces genuine art and craft, and negates the need to provide substance and depth.
not sure though that there is anywhere to "bail" to for your kids, or mine? instead i am trying to point out those turds to them, hopefully allowing them to at least recognise and work with the failings of humanity, rather than become victims.
btw i do keep noticing that quite frequently people assume you could not possibly be working class. i would suggest this is because of your ability to put write coherently, grammatically flawless to my foreign eyes. which of course opens a whole new can of irony imho.
Jankass
Indeed...it's precisely this failure amongst people who doubt my background to grant that the working class- which they claim to 'understand' -can produce literate correspondence which bolsters my belief that your average middle-class liberal is precisely the problem; given that they're dealing in gross stereotypes. Presumably, their 'understanding' of the working class leads them to the conclusion that they are effectively uneducated and unsophisticated plebs in need of moral, political and spiritual guidance from their betters.
And please don't think the above is a distorted caricature. Everything I've read in the Guardian, say, for the past thirty years has confirmed me in this opinion. Take a look at anything by Polly Toynbee or Rushbridger. There's a clear strain of that brand of Victorian paternalism and philanthropy which at its base is the bland formulation: 'daddy/ mummy knows best'. Personally, I'm left cold by the lot of them. At the heart of every hand-wringing, tweedy self-effacing liberal is a giant sense of entitlement and presumption. And other than a calculated 'edginess' which is little more than artless rebranding, how does Laurie Penny differ?....she doesn't...that's how.
(erm, it's jankaas, so mind my botty pls...)
some of the journos on the NS threads have been known to respond to those who clearly are questioning the article put up for online discussion. would be nice to see Laurie herself put in the effort to put you in your place, or me for that matter. i think that would show her admirers how to deal with mere males such as you and i. but she never puts in the effort for her fans. i'm sure it would only take a moment of her time, and then she could write another article about it, and build that career. but no. nothing.
Oh my...just read the comments. I'm a bit concerned about the posts which start off along he lines of: 'brilliant Laurie...you've managed to express what I've been thinking but couldn't put into words'
A few points occur to me...
1) if that's the case, then what exactly have you been thinking? I'm not claiming that thought or mental processes rely on language, but if your thoughts are given concrete expression by ms penny's prose then presumably your views rely for their formulation on rhetorical devices and techniques rather than any actual 'form' ,conceptual coherence or correspondence with reality. In brief...you're admitting your thoughts are essentially superficial and lack substance.
2) why don't you buy a thesaurus or an 'improve your English' type book or pamphlet? Then you won't 'need' to rely on others to express your own thoughts...such a dependency is surely more debilitating and oppressive to an individual than anything served up by he patriarchy. Unless of course, women's inability to arrive at a delineation of their own concerns is simply another facet of the patriarchy's totalitarian repression; extending even to the cognitive and expressive apparatus of womankind.
3) when you praise ms penny, is it as a kind of 'everywoman', distilling the grievances of women across the globe and through the ages-as she seems to assume- or does your identification with her mark you out as a particular stripe of feminist, largely informed by the preoccupations of affluent, metropolitan, middle-class, liberal solipsists. (I know she has finally started to acknowlege class concerns these days...but it's only ever in a theoretical sense...the occasional (alleged) grubby, hollow-eyed gamine uttering profound aperçus on a demo while the fascist juggernaut revs up....she never actually ventures up to Hull or Liverpool or Middlesbrough and confronts class inequality in a setting which lacks any shred of radical chic or topicality.)
4) if her writing serves to crystallise your thoughts, are you really sure that they're your thoughts?
Spud - has it ever occurred to you that there is a third possibility - that all these people praising la penny are actually her posting under assumed names?
See joann hari and david rose.
"Feminism is about imagining a future where gender isn’t destiny and sexism isn’t rampant, and then working to achieve that future."
The thing is destiny is governed more by poverty than by gender, and sexism depends on power structures based mostly on wealth. There is a point at which a rich person can literally 'buy' someone else; buy their acquiescence, their servitude, own them totally, even at a distance. It is euphemistically known as 'capitalism', though whether it adheres to such principles is doubtful.
"In the past month I've given talks all over Europe, mainly speaking about with Meat Market, my little anti-capitalist-feminist pop-theory book, doing interviews and discussions and readings in twelve cities."
So basically, you're travelling around Europe cities plugging your book? I hope all those women working 12 hour shifts on minimum wage, stacking shelves, cleaning toilets or wiping octagenarian arses are grateful for your sacrifice...sounds like hell...especially where you point out that some people don't actually agree with you...and worse- have the bare-faced temerity to actually say so...out loud. Don't they know who you are...and what you've achieved?
Forgive them Laurie, they know not what they do.
As a working class feminist (and trust me all Working Class women are feminists whether they admit it or not) I have no problem with Laurie describing her own life. What is she meant to do? Describe someone elses life? The New Statesman is at fault for not hiring enough working class voices. Laurie is not at fault. It's that simple really. Keep going Laurie because as you probably know, you cannot win for losing if you're a woman and a feminist. No matter what you do, or how you play it, you will be found at fault.
"I have no problem with Laurie describing her own life. What is she meant to do?"
Actually describing her own life, minus the little embellishments, post hoc justifications, calculated emotional responses, outright inventions and cack-handed attempts at historicity, would be a good start.
"(and trust me all Working Class women are feminists whether they admit it or not)"
And as for this....words fail me. This is way beyond 'wrong' for so many reasons on so many levels....as anyone could tell you...whether they admit it or not.
Spud, nice name, suits ya... the more bitter men like you constantly stalk Lauries blog to moan about every little thing she says........the more you show why a woman like Laurie is needed at the New Statesman. The more silly people like you don't under the Working Classes to any degree or the effect of poverty on how vocal one can be about one's politics.....the more it shows how the New Statesman could use a working class voice. Class (including race/class intersection) IMHO trumps gender with regards to lack of opportunities but I can't blame Laurie as an individual, for writing about her own life, in her own blog section. You are using Lauries class to have a go at her when it's clear that you could not give a t*ss about the working classes. It's just an excuse. NS lack of representation of the lower classes would be your concern if your motivation was not just to have a go at someone you've never met who you have a weird grievance against for some reason.
So, erm...let's see if I've got this straight...the more a person's views are criticised, the greater the probability that they're right...in fact more than right, they're actually 'needed'? Is that what you're saying? ....surely not?... I'm sure you can see where that kind of logic leads. Or does this only apply when a woman is being criticised by a man because, as we're all aware, the only reason a man ever criticises a woman is out of pure rank misogyny....erm...except when it's Thatcher or Baroness Warsi or Sarah Palin or...
Right, let's have another go....When a man criticises the views of a woman who has vaguely liberal and feminist leanings, it can only ever be a result of his latent misogyny. Is that what you're telling me? Or is it one of those things where it's misogyny if the victim or any female observer considers it to be misogyny?
And, as for it being clear that I could give a toss about the working class or understanding the working class then, unfortunately for your little thesis: I am working class. By which, I don't mean I went to a grammar school and now I'm a f**kin solicitor etc. I mean I was skint as a kid, went ( now and again) to a school which didn't even bother pretending it wasn't a glorified youth club with optional woodwork, and now I'm an occasional builder when there's any f** kin work. I understand the working class all too well which is why I'm fully acquainted with the fact that it's middle-class useful idiot liberals like you know who that are most of the problem...along with anyone who shares their worldview.
Calm Down Dear!!!! I hate to feed a troll but... I am working class Spud. If you as a man are not privvy to the private conversations of working class women and believe them not to be feminists then poor you spuddie. Yes they do it differently, by publicly kicking the guy out for example, but they don't sit around wondering 'if feminism is still relevant' like the middle classes do...they are more..to the point shall we say? Still I am happy to see any feminism in a publication. So I support Laurie. Your can I not criticise etc... long long rambling stuff.... ? Course you can Spud and I can criticise you. Have a nice day and stay calm dear.
Troll?
Sorry, but that's just pathetic.
I notice you've dropped the 'misogyny' trope....really can't be sustained can it?
But now you've adopted the 'troll strategy' which is even more lame. So many people have made the point on here that it's a simply an embellished form of 'I don't like what you're saying' that it doesn't bear repetition. If it's the best you can do then I feel bad for you.
And as for 'calm down'...if I didn't think it'd encourage you in your vision of angry little men frothing at the mouth and ranting away at their keyboards to try and keep strong and courageous women in their place, I'd take exception to that too. Suffice to say that the image you have is pure projection. What's even worse is that it's probably not even your own projection; you've probably adopted it via Laurie penny's own distorted and self-bolstering projections...ie. they don't agree with me, they must be woman-fearing troglodytes. Do yourself a favour: get a sense of proportion, a sense of perspective and, above all, a mind of your own.
Oh spud, I do have a mind of my own. Your opinions however are ten a penny, that is, 'so common as to be worthless'.
Translated, what you really mean is: why don't I think like you?
Re: misogyny. You caught me out I didn't properly read the first two thirds of your comment before last. I just skim read the last comment actually. I am, in all honesty, quite bored by your comments, unlike the article written by Laurie which is an interesting view on the world.
Ciao Spud I have stuff to do......People to see and all that.
Oh my...you've actually done it.
I bore you...the final instalment of the holy trinity. First I'm a misogynist, then a troll and to round it off...hallelujah...how f**king predictable..."you bore me"!
I'm starting to suspect you can only actually trade in boilerplate "Internet Radicalese". It's a dialect adopted by people wanting to seem progressive and morally impeccable; however, since they lack the wherewithal to actually rationally defend their own views or undermine those of other people, they adopt an imaginary high ground from which they throw down all-too-predictable reasons for their lack of engagement. You've just revealed yourself as a native speaker.
Sorry but you're a mindless liberal clone sweetheart...a walking talking cliche. And I think you've realised that by now...whether you admit it or not...to paraphrase somebody I was corresponding with lately.
And don't forget to reprimand me for the latent misogyny in 'sweetheart'...must be that I need to calm down, eh?
mainly for the fact it joins the last post but just thought the same thing again;
top punchline(s).
top punchline.
Once again you've managed to write a piece that exposes your badly constructed justifications for being self-obsessed. Well done, 10/10.
Once again you've managed to write a piece that exposes your badly constructed justifications for being self-obsessed. Well done, 10/10.
Why have you censored my comments?
You cant invite people to comment and then silence them if they dont agree with the person the editors have decided their opinion is worth printing?
What is it with the feminist that the male media promotes that they get their male protectors to silence other women?
The CiF feminists are always doing it. Getting their male protectors the censor others.
Truely disgusted that this small elite group is being given such power by the male establishment.
You are a fantasist, Laurie - or rather a double fantasist.
Firstly the fantasy of a feminist utopia you want to create, as you put it, which anyone can take or leave depending on what they think of it. You might prefer "dreamer" for this one. No issue there, we all have our dreams and objectives.
Secondly, your habit of making things up when you report 'facts' is well established. Have you really forgotten the non-existent water cannon you reported that the Met were planning to deploy if necessary on the London student March on 9/11 last year for example, when we all know that there weren't even any on the country?
Critics with fair criticisms aren't going to go away just because you try and dismiss them with stereotypes.
Sorry.
Fantastic... beautiful... insightful. You've expressed a number of things I usually find hard to put into words. Being an Engineering student, working with words isn't my best talent lol.
I feel like there's so much hatred against Feminists based on bad stereotypes. Whenever I try to call out sexism, I'm met with "hurr hurr stop whinging/b*tching/overreacting". The thing is, I could have done something as simple as call out someone who says stupid sh*t like "don't complain about getting raped if you dress like a whore".
It makes me particularly sad when women shy away from Feminism, but I can see why it happens. I'm much happier when I don't publicly express my thoughts, basically because I can avoid those horrible encounters. But I find that this only gives me a sense of deluded security for a short time, until I'm met with the every day sexism that is unavoidable, especially in the male-dominated field that I'm involved in. I've decided that I'm not going to keep quiet for the approval of others. I will call out whatever that needs to be call out, but I wont let it ruin my happiness either - I will joyously, raucously, relentlessly fight injustice (not just gender based injustice), while still being a happy camper.
COME AT ME, PATRIARCHAL BIGOTS.
from a non-patriarchal-non-bigot, a simple question for you LHR;
do you think only a feminist would condemn those who say things like "don't complain about getting raped if you dress like a whore"?
Nope. I never said or implied that. The point is, even when I point out something as simple as that, feminism gets dragged in and bashed up.
And I'm glad you're not a non-bigot :)
woops - *I'm glad you ARE a non-bigot. sorry lol.
“Male dominated”
…why the sexist language? “Dominate” has many negative connotations, why attach that label to every man who wants to work in engineering?
The first place we end sexism is with ourselves. Feminist thinking has so many sexist orthodoxies that labels people based on gender, you probably don’t even realise you’re doing it?
Good luck with the engineering, best career in the world.
That wasn't meant to be sexist at all, sorry if it came across that way. Within context, by "dominate" I merely meant that they constitute the overwhelming majority of Engineering students. I'm fairly sure the word "dominate" has been used this way before. I definitely didn't mean that all current or aspiring male Engineering students are sexist either; there're just those sadly unavoidable sexist situations in that sort of environment.
I don't think my Feminist thinking has sexist undertones at all... because of feminism, I actually observe the constraints of patriarchy on both men and women a lot more. I also consciously try to catch myself at any gendered ways of thinking that has been so ingrained into me by society and media. It truly has made me more aware. Of course, this is just my personal response to feminism and thankfully, the sum of my experiences/my personality makes it a positive one. I think most of it comes down to my law/science side - I hate being inconsistent. But sadly, there are some people who may interpret Feminism wrongly for their own benefit. This maybe a result of the experiences they've had in their lives - maybe they've had childhood experiences that made them hate a man in their lives and all men as a consequence. The sad thing is, this minority of 'feminists' often becomes the face of feminism and that makes me sad :(
And thank you! It is a wonderful career path, but being a young and indecisive uni student, I'm going to need to explore a few more options before I settle myself completely. I wish I could do everything :( it's all so exciting!
And child-care is female dominated is it not? What is your point? You're waffling nonsense.
Have you replied to the right post?
This was just a comment on the article reflecting on my experiences and thoughts about how Feminism is viewed these days.
Unless you're talking about the bit when I said Engineering is a male dominated field. This is just a fact (in Australia, anyway). I don't understand why you're bringing child-care into this. How does me saying that Engineering is a male dominated field even imply that I think there are no female dominated fields?
Do I hope that in the future we will see a balance between female and male Engineers? Yes. That will greatly reduce some of the unfortunate sexism that exists in this particular field. Do I hope that in the future we will see a balance between male and female child-care workers? YES! I want to tear down all of those social constructs and gender roles that dictate to people what they should or shouldn't do. I wish everyone could just choose what we want to do, and do it to the best of our abilities without being judged, or having barriers thrown in their way simply because of their sex. It needs to stahp :(
Either you've misunderstood my post or you've replied to the wrong one :/
What do you think the point is?
Fantastic... beautiful... insightful. You've expressed a number of things I usually find hard to put into words. Being an Engineering student, working with words isn't my best talent lol.
I feel like there's so much hatred against Feminists based on bad stereotypes. Whenever I try to call out sexism, I'm met with "hurr hurr stop whinging/b*tching/overreacting". The thing is, I could have done something as simple as call out someone who says stupid sh*t like "don't complain about getting raped if you dress like a wh*re".
It makes me particularly sad when women shy away from Feminism, but I can see why it happens. I'm much happier when I don't publicly express my thoughts, basically because I can avoid those horrible encounters. But I find that this only gives me a sense of deluded security for a short time, until I'm met with the every day sexism that is unavoidable, especially in the male-dominated field that I'm involved in. I've decided that I'm not going to keep quiet for the approval of others. I will call out whatever that needs to be call out, but I wont let it ruin my happiness either - I will joyously, raucously, relentlessly fight injustice (not just gender based injustice), while still being a happy camper.
COME AT ME, PATRIARCHAL BIGOTS.
just to pick you up on this bit of delusional thinking. you say;
"I find myself wishing, not for the first time this trip, that feminists could go on tour like rock bands. What I wouldn’t give for some interesting support acts, groupies, fascinating fall-outs, booze."
really? you get a little poorly on a book tour and fall apart? just ask real women like L7 or The Go-Go's what it takes to spend 3 or 4 months in a bus at a stretch. repeat for several years. you have absolutely no idea Laurie.
Some good stuff but dont through the baby out with the bath water.
To be successful you have to be sweet bitch and live with the issues. But what you say is there should be no costs to woman if they are not successful (OK I agree) but also if they do make it (get real, life is tough. Success has a price for men and women).
Labour has a massive problem with women getting ahead. I've seen sexist Labour biggoted males on this site who have told me my place is in the kitchen and certainly not earnering enough to afford decent lifestyle. Why not pick on Labour males who are a cost to women?
Has a man ever disagreed with you who isn't a violent, death threatening, rape monster...it seems not.
Clearly, this guy violently put his coat on, oppressively walked out the meeting on his way out to dominate a bus stop.
It's a wonder you escaped with your life.
In the West, gender is not destiny.
I believe that the time will come when humans have full control over our bodies and our lives, when humans do not grow up ashamed of our sexuality, when we do not have to fear violence at home and in the streets if we step out of line and poverty if we are not born rich. I believe there will be a time when the world is better and braver and freer than we can possibly imagine.
I don't always agree with what you say or how you say it, but I thought this was a great, moving piece.
Silly, trivial, self centred, irrelevant bubble dweller.
I know I know John Cronin but it's good to have such a laugh, remembering that she's only ever been able to do this epic journery because of her daddy's money.
I'm pleased to have her back to be able to read her fancinating reports from the sisterhood's glorious never ending battle against us. It's better than Michael McIntyres Roadshow.
Such a pity you choose to use an Apple lap-top Laurie. What with their poor treatment of workers so often reported. Still a big fan of your work though.
The man was not speaking with dull rage, and not on behalf of your imagined backlash against women's freedom. He was venting his righteous indignation at an ideology run amok; against childish wailing for "having it all," demanded by elitists who create nothing, and contribute nothing but their petty demands to the world around them.
He is not alone. He is not even always a he. There is indeed a backlash coming, just as there was against the scourge of racism and other forms of hate. It is needed and just and grows with every word of hollow, infantile propaganda such as this.
So it was *you* in the audience, then. That's all I took from your whining, you tedious reactionary.
Feminist debate, ladies and gentlemen.
"Feminism isn’t about telling women how to live or who to love or what not to wear. Feminism is about imagining a future where gender isn’t destiny and sexism isn’t rampant, and then working to achieve that future. I believe it’ll happen, if we want it enough. If we allow ourselves to want it. "
I've never been able to vocalise this, always wanted to. Thank you.
I thoroughly enjoyed this piece.
I have to be honest, I've only just started reading the NS, before it my knowledge of you had been gained from TV appearances. I wasn't a big fan. However, I think your writing is superb and I find myself agreeing with much of what you argue.
Keep striving.
Laurie, you touch on it in your cri de coeur, but you must always keep in mind that the cause for which you fight is, and always has been, yoked to the more general cause of economic equality. Wollstonecraft knew this, and never forgot it: two years before her great 'Vindication of the Rights of Women', she wrote 'Vindication of the Rights of Men', and always regarded any alleviation of the subjugation of women as being concomitant with (and conditional on) a more equitable distribution of property and dignity within society. So too Harriet Taylor (wasn't it she who forced J S Mill to remove his sctrictures on socialism and communism in the second edition of 'Political Economy'?) Your cause is admirable (as is your utopianism!) but it will materially benefit from an uncompromising commitment to a society in which NO ONE need fear poverty "if we are not born rich."
As for your "man in the audience" - it's a shame you got down to "the serious questions" only after he left. You should have urged him to stay; he might have learned something....
And do your friends really express puzzlement that you don't want a "boyfriend" and a "shoe collection"? Perhpas the lectures should start closer to home.