Ladies! Here!!! We!!!! Go!!!!
I have the hardest time reading non-fiction books because they are CHOCKFUL OR ENERGY!! Chockful of information and one solitary paragraph of one solitary page can mean so much, say so much, express so much, BE SO DENSE
They are entities unto themselves, creatures that have arisen from the swamp of intelligence and masses of information
Brick by brick
A building that's a dense, juicy peach
So, to help me read, and to retain, and to articulate SOMETHING in my mind, make something out of this morass,I have come up with the "Collage Post Throwdown"; because obviously there are people who have thought it, researched it, and said it better than I ever could and they need to duke it out for my entertainment and enlightenment.
The two contenders of this edition of "Collage Post Throwdown" are "False Choices: The Faux Feminism of Hillary Rodham Clinton" edited by Liza Featherstone (with contributions from Laura Flanders, Kathleen Geier, Frances Fox Piven, Belen Fernandez, Donna Much, Medea Benjamin, Maureen Tkacik, Tressie McMillan Cotton, Megan Erickson, and more) AND "Too Fat, Too Slutty, Too Loud: The Rise and Reign of the Unruly Woman" by Anne Helen Petersen
Passages from the False Choices book will be designated with a red font F and passages from the Petersen book will be designated with blue font P (or for a fun game you can cover up the letters and guess from which book passages come???)
So two forces are opposing each other here: uber progressive "bernie bro" feminists (haha), women I like to think are honest enough and have enough integrity to call out their fellow lady politicos (pseudo-leftists though they may be) out when it's necessary, and lukewarm celebrity feminists who have embraced feminist consumerist choices
And while this "discussion" focuses on Hillary Clinton, Hillary is really just the human pivot representing the shallow, white, bourgeoisie feminism that has taken over in this country, and which is unashamedly celebrated in the Petersen book. I believe the Petersen book to be a political book, and not just a book regarding pop culture: it's a fairly representative manifestation of the privileged feminism which retains Hillary as its figurehead.
Reading the False Choices book, you learn that Hillary is no Erin Brockovich or Ralph Nader. This is an individual WHO HAS NOT dedicated her life to civil rights, the environment, reproductive issues, or any social justice issue for that matter. She worked in a law firm that defended corporations for fifteen years for Christ sakes. Anyone who has studied her trajectory sees that it is contrived and trendy; she's like the Madonna of politics - there's no real talent or dedication to any cause but self-enrichment (so not surprising Madonna and Hillary would both be on the same side regarding feminism.)
Intersectional feminism? What's that? I was shocked to read this, because I thought no one was actually paying attention. How refreshing.
Jessica Valenti once claimed on Twitter that feminism is a movement for social justice; well then! If it's a movement for social justice that is intersectional and tries to take into consideration other forms of injustice, how could you support someone who doesn't care about any of those things? Because it seems the fact that she is a woman was the only thing you were considering here, so I guess feminism really is just about being a particular kind of woman. She was complicit in throwing Bernie Sanders under the bus at the DNC primary, she helped destroy the nation of Libya, she stood by while her husband molested women, and she chose a running mate who was anti-abortion: how the hell did you justify this to yourself??? What does this woman have to do for you to not like her? And don't tell me because "Donald Trump was the worse option", because you all were not advertising her in that way; she was being advertised as the freaking Second Coming of liberation and feminism and everything-good-in-the-world.
What she does best: destroying countries (hello? Libya?) and making up excuses for it (strange videos that went floating around). And you're right, she doesn't campaign. She didn't campaign in the last election either. She was too good for it and mostly went to fundraisers with her rich friends.
And if "Beyonce, Lena Dunham, Amy Schumer, and Zendaya (who is THAT?)" are the new figureheads of feminism, then feminism is JUST DUMB, and I want nothing to do with it, and I see why other women have decided to contemptuously dismiss it (although unfortunately I don't think that they dismiss it for these reasons)
(I'm SO MAD because when I was in my twenties,I did want nothing to do with it, and I was really smart, I was already smart, and I knew this "woman hear me roar" crap was bullshit and cringeworthy and embarrassing, but I got sucked in because feminism obviously does have legitimate criticisms and men can be pretty shitty sometimes. But those legitimate criticisms are being ignored in favor of representation and rights for rich women.
I agree that women being harassed in the street by random men is uncomfortable and wrong, and that media representation of women in this country and abroad is just awful, but that doesn't give Hollywood and wealthy, privileged women the right to hijack the movement. They are just like corporations who co-opt social movements to sell their products.
So feminism has worked wonders for ol' Hill. Not only does she not have to actually care about social justice and present the country with a plan for saving it because she can ride on the coattails of being a woman, but she's also immune from criticism for anything she does because she is always right, so if you're criticizing her, it's only because you're sexist .
The mainstream media was adamantly pro Hillary. This was especially obvious during the final bout between her and Trump; all the major polls predicted her to win, and the news was constantly bashing Trump, jumping on every little thing they could get their grubby little hands on (the same as they're doing now). How convenient that if anyone criticizes you at all, it's because you're prejudiced. THAT is the only thing she had going for her.
This is crap.
Yes, there were actually female Bernie supporters, but you wouldn't know it from the Petersen book. She makes it seems like all of his supporters were male.
The reason all of this still bothers me, even after the election, is because this disparity that disguises itself as a feminist debate still rages in this country, and it's covering up the fact that the Right and the Left are a phony dichotomy that apparently need to be protected at all costs. Feminism is just being used as a tool to excuse corporate excesses. Not just in excusing a soulless corporate candidate for President, but excusing the soulless women who hold positions as CEO's and commercials that now women with feminist-infused advertising, excusing corporatism in general.
Hillary represented and still does represent the interests of the wealthy and the corporate state (and the Deep State, if you are into that). If you were for Bernie Sanders, a candidate much more progressive than she was, you had to be destroyed, and calling you a sexist is an effective means of doing it. Then when she was running against Trump, this method was amplified, and quite frankly was the only real weapon in her arsenal ( the secret recording of Trump claiming to "grab pussies" sunk any enthusiasm I had for him at the time). How could anyone with social justice leanings vote for someone so monstrously sexist? No one has to present a legitimate plan for the country if everyone is worried about who's being sexist.
Scams all have a little truth to them, and the most effective ones have a lot of truth to them. Many times they use the tools of liberation against us all, especially in service of the continued existence of the corporate world.
Amargita Zestoff has always hated the Clintons, ever since they destroyed her homeland.