Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.38 AVERAGE
3.38 AVERAGE
I brought this book on a whim; I'd seen it sat in the exact same place in my local Waterstones for years and had always found one excuse or another not to indulge. As a feminist I finally felt I should read what is often sign posted as one of the 'feminist literary greats'. Almost immediately I came across it's portrayal of transwomen as 'men who mutilate themselves'. I sighed. An old book was guarenteed to have outdated ideas, but the problem with outdated ideas about transfolk is that they come hand in hand with outdated ideas about what makes a woman.
Greer has some good points: women are desperate to fulfill a stereotype which we think will give us security; women have been told to live and die for the household; women are sold the idea of a love that is often not real. However, in her many anecdotal assumptions of women she reveals her own misogynistic streak. Somewhere in the first half of the book she states that men are the ones to have truly deep friendships and women are not capable of this, being only ever able to form gaggles of gossips of which each woman secretly despises. I snorted at the mere thought. The idea that women can not be friends because we all secretly hate each other is so densely similar to what every man who hates women thinks, I could not believe she'd write it in a feminist book and expect all female readers to just gently nod along. Then there is her call of teaching being a 'Cinderella degree'. As a secondary science teacher, let me assure you Ms Greer, teaching is no fairytale.
Her writing was constantly marred with the typical distaste for 'other women' that is often seen from academics. Much of the book is without scientific claim and bows to speculation. Women hate each other because Greer believes it so. Men have much tighter friendships because Greer believes it so. There is so much context missing from her narrative. Not a word or a thought does she spare for women's own contribution to romance, or why people lust for romance, or how men may struggle with their own emotions. These things are glossed over in the pursuit of keeping the conversation focused on what Greer insists is the greatest evil; women, in and of ourselves.
I enjoyed and understood the things she said which had grounding in observable ways. I rolled my eyes at the tired stereotypes. The missing data. The almost conservative acknowledgment of women's faults yet absolutely none of the praise for their hardiness. In it's effort to be self-criticizing of the female condition, it pushed itself further into being a complete damnation of it. If every word of this book was literal, woman is painted as much the shrew people believe her to be and 'The Female Eunich' gives no other reason for this shrewness than 'woman and her self made misery.'
This book makes some good points but it's out dated. It's trans-misogynistic and Greer doesn't shy away from the N word nor does she mind brushing that feeble idea that 'Woman is the N-word of the world'. Read it with a pinch of salt.
Greer has some good points: women are desperate to fulfill a stereotype which we think will give us security; women have been told to live and die for the household; women are sold the idea of a love that is often not real. However, in her many anecdotal assumptions of women she reveals her own misogynistic streak. Somewhere in the first half of the book she states that men are the ones to have truly deep friendships and women are not capable of this, being only ever able to form gaggles of gossips of which each woman secretly despises. I snorted at the mere thought. The idea that women can not be friends because we all secretly hate each other is so densely similar to what every man who hates women thinks, I could not believe she'd write it in a feminist book and expect all female readers to just gently nod along. Then there is her call of teaching being a 'Cinderella degree'. As a secondary science teacher, let me assure you Ms Greer, teaching is no fairytale.
Her writing was constantly marred with the typical distaste for 'other women' that is often seen from academics. Much of the book is without scientific claim and bows to speculation. Women hate each other because Greer believes it so. Men have much tighter friendships because Greer believes it so. There is so much context missing from her narrative. Not a word or a thought does she spare for women's own contribution to romance, or why people lust for romance, or how men may struggle with their own emotions. These things are glossed over in the pursuit of keeping the conversation focused on what Greer insists is the greatest evil; women, in and of ourselves.
I enjoyed and understood the things she said which had grounding in observable ways. I rolled my eyes at the tired stereotypes. The missing data. The almost conservative acknowledgment of women's faults yet absolutely none of the praise for their hardiness. In it's effort to be self-criticizing of the female condition, it pushed itself further into being a complete damnation of it. If every word of this book was literal, woman is painted as much the shrew people believe her to be and 'The Female Eunich' gives no other reason for this shrewness than 'woman and her self made misery.'
This book makes some good points but it's out dated. It's trans-misogynistic and Greer doesn't shy away from the N word nor does she mind brushing that feeble idea that 'Woman is the N-word of the world'. Read it with a pinch of salt.
Outdated, exclusive views of feminism. Interesting from a historical perspective but difficult to read.
Content Warnings
Minor: Transphobia
one of the hallmark texts of the 2nd wave, so the usual fun stuff (transphobia bordering on bioessentialism, an obnoxious amount of 'we are women and so we suffer') is to be expected. still, i find the main points more powerful and encouraging that even most modern ones. i am a fan of greer's main views of sexuality, identity and revolution as well her snark. what a nice refresher from all the bell hooks and roxane gays and self censoring and infantilisation i am constantly met with in discourse, both literary and embodied.
Greer’s racism, homophobia, transphobia, and gender essentialism is rampant and borderline nonsensical in places, as she advocates for her small pool of privileged peers. This book is recommended as a seminal feminist piece, however in the 21st century should only be used as a historical document - as it clearly outlines the pitfalls of second wave feminism.
More specifically, her take on male violence is anything but feminist and explicitly shows a constant theme that underpins the whole book - her need to establish herself as superior to other women. ( At various stages in my life I have lived with men of known violence, two of whom had convictions for Grievous Bodily Harm, and in no case was I ever offered any physical aggression, because it was abundantly clearfrom my attitude that was not impressed by it. Violence has a fascination for most women; they act as spectators at fights, and dig the scenes of bloody violence in films.)
informative
reflective
slow-paced
A lot of the times when people describe famous political books, they talk about how modern they feel, or how relevant they are to the modern world. This book is not modern. It is full, in parts, of Germaine Greer’s prejudice and a lot of what she writes will be known by even the most reluctant feminist but she writes in a way that’s electrifying. You can feel it in your heart as you read and it’s the kind of book that makes you want to change your life and the world around you. It is definitely a book that you have to read critically but oh my god, what a book!!
“It was assumed that unmarried women and widows suffered most from hysteria, and that a good husband could fix it. […] Some doctors really believed that est femineo generi pars una uterus omnium morborum, ‘the womb is a part of every illness of the female sex.’
Not even ankle deep in feminist literature but “having kids with a man is a humiliation ritual” somehow came to mind with this one. How strange!
Not even ankle deep in feminist literature but “having kids with a man is a humiliation ritual” somehow came to mind with this one. How strange!
There were some exciting chapters but didn't love this overall. I was wondering if Greer's transphobia would show up since it wasn't exactly a hot button issue in the 1970's but it definitely does.
Mostly interesting just in that it was an influential book.
recommended by: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/dec/16/book-that-made-me-a-feminist
Mostly interesting just in that it was an influential book.
recommended by: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/dec/16/book-that-made-me-a-feminist
challenging
informative
inspiring
slow-paced
Great ideas, a bit outdated for some parts, but the essence of the book remains relevant. The beginning and end were very interesting to read because Greer invoked a lot of emotion (RAGE), but man, the middle was slowww. I think her stance on what’s necessary for revolution is great.