Scan barcode
gloomyboygirl's review against another edition
3.0
It was interesting and informative, but the fact the voice for liberal choice feminism was a comically feminine valley girl made the criticisms seem like a logical defense of not-like-other-girls complex. The argument and information was all good, though, I just hated the way it used valley girl dialect.
colin_cox's review against another edition
4.0
One Dimensional Woman is a compact and readable introduction to contemporary concerns within feminism. Power is endlessly quotable, but this is a short text that feels less like a book and more like an essay or M.A. thesis. As the title suggests, Power pivots from the deeply influential One Dimensional Man by Herbert Marcuse, and in doing so, she argues that feminism has transformed into a one-dimensional philosophy, overly determined by notions of self-fulfillment and consumerism. She argues, “For all its glee and excitement, the self-congratulatory feminism that celebrates individual identity above all else is a one-dimensional feminism” (69). Power's analysis of chocolate, for example, is witty and sharp while also encapsulating her critique of one-dimensional feminism: “Chocolate represents that acceptable everyday extravagance that all-too-neatly encapsulates just the right kind of perky passivity that feminized capitalism just loves to reward with a bubble bath and some crumbly cocoa solids. It sticks in the mouth a bit…It irresistibly symbolizes any or all of the following: ontological girlishness, a naughty virginity that gets its kicks only from a widely-available mucky cloying substitute, a kind of pecuniary decadence” (36-37). While she may lack the breadth and virtuosity of a figure like Zizek is a text of this length, his influence as a culture critic is visible in moments like this.
However, One Dimensional Woman is neither that simple nor that predictable. Power is far more interested in female labor (both inside and outside the domestic sphere) and the ways in which female labor is understood and misunderstood, visible and hidden. Her chapters on sex work possess a degree of focus the remainder of the book, at times, lacks. If anything, this is the one topic I want Power to explore in a lengthier more robust way.
However, One Dimensional Woman is neither that simple nor that predictable. Power is far more interested in female labor (both inside and outside the domestic sphere) and the ways in which female labor is understood and misunderstood, visible and hidden. Her chapters on sex work possess a degree of focus the remainder of the book, at times, lacks. If anything, this is the one topic I want Power to explore in a lengthier more robust way.
akemi_666's review against another edition
2.0
Kinda funny, mostly a mess.
I agree with the thesis: feminism has been co-opted by capitalism. Wokeness, girl boss, lean in, whatever. Individualist identification has replaced collective demands for systemic change. Feels like an old argument by now. We define ourselves through consumption, the endless accumulation of commodified experiences, unto a world of abstract signs — all the easier for us, as labouring bodies, to be measured and judged by the labour market.
But if someone gave me a t-shirt that had WITCH-SLUT printed on it, I'd wear it lol. As Helen Todd said, "bread for all, and roses too." I don't believe sex-positivity is at odds with direct action, even if sex-positivity has been co-opted by market forces. We don't just abandon everything that is taken from us — we take back. We re-appropriate, re-signify, and re-contextualise all that is stolen by capitalism, patriarchy, imperialism and fascism — otherwise, we're left with nothing but dispossession, resentment and nostalgia.
Power is snappy, but not particularly deep in her analysis. She doesn't seem to understand that life under capitalism is life in contradiction. How does she know the woman across the street buying a vibrator isn't also an anarchist, artist or indigenous scholar? She has no ethnography, no discourse analysis, no statistics to back up her claims. She collapses the market into the mindset of its consumers, and in doing so, gives into the pessimism of exchange value — of only seeing the world through exchange value. I don't know about you, but to me, that's entrapment in capitalist mindset, par excellence; or, at least, in an elitist disdain of the masses that will attract a few edgelords to your side (before leaving a trail of PTSD in their wake once they discover your WITCH-SLUT vibrator orgies).
Edit: okay, chapter 3 is fucking lit. It's where Power starts exploring alternative conceptions of sex, sexuality, reproduction and social organisation. Mostly socialist and socialist feminism communes and ideas. (Yo, get this: there was a commune where you had to fuck 5 times a day, and you couldn't fuck the same person each week, so you had to fuck 35 different people every week! That is hilarious — and awful.) I would have absolutely loved a whole book tracing these sexual relations across history. Guess it's time to dive into Foucault's lsd dream valley again.
I agree with the thesis: feminism has been co-opted by capitalism. Wokeness, girl boss, lean in, whatever. Individualist identification has replaced collective demands for systemic change. Feels like an old argument by now. We define ourselves through consumption, the endless accumulation of commodified experiences, unto a world of abstract signs — all the easier for us, as labouring bodies, to be measured and judged by the labour market.
But if someone gave me a t-shirt that had WITCH-SLUT printed on it, I'd wear it lol. As Helen Todd said, "bread for all, and roses too." I don't believe sex-positivity is at odds with direct action, even if sex-positivity has been co-opted by market forces. We don't just abandon everything that is taken from us — we take back. We re-appropriate, re-signify, and re-contextualise all that is stolen by capitalism, patriarchy, imperialism and fascism — otherwise, we're left with nothing but dispossession, resentment and nostalgia.
Power is snappy, but not particularly deep in her analysis. She doesn't seem to understand that life under capitalism is life in contradiction. How does she know the woman across the street buying a vibrator isn't also an anarchist, artist or indigenous scholar? She has no ethnography, no discourse analysis, no statistics to back up her claims. She collapses the market into the mindset of its consumers, and in doing so, gives into the pessimism of exchange value — of only seeing the world through exchange value. I don't know about you, but to me, that's entrapment in capitalist mindset, par excellence; or, at least, in an elitist disdain of the masses that will attract a few edgelords to your side (before leaving a trail of PTSD in their wake once they discover your WITCH-SLUT vibrator orgies).
Edit: okay, chapter 3 is fucking lit. It's where Power starts exploring alternative conceptions of sex, sexuality, reproduction and social organisation. Mostly socialist and socialist feminism communes and ideas. (Yo, get this: there was a commune where you had to fuck 5 times a day, and you couldn't fuck the same person each week, so you had to fuck 35 different people every week! That is hilarious — and awful.) I would have absolutely loved a whole book tracing these sexual relations across history. Guess it's time to dive into Foucault's lsd dream valley again.
comradebiblio's review against another edition
2.0
The first half is alright, basic but sound. The second half gets incoherent at speed. The singular best part is a quote from an interview with Toni Morrison. May as well just read that instead.
georgewood's review against another edition
3.0
There’s some interesting ideas in this book and I did find it quite thought-provoking, particularly about the history of pornography and the way feminism has been taken up by neo-imperialists. However, the collection of topics seem fairly disjointed, some of Power’s assertions aren’t really backed up (I found her generalisation of self-harm as a feminine individualistic act aimed at feeling reality particularly problematic, seeing as she only cited one woman’s experience) and it hasn’t aged overly well, as the feminist movement has developed a lot in the 11 years since its publication and isn’t really about the “having it all” consumerism that she critiques. It’s perhaps an interesting look into criticism of late-twentieth century and early 2000s consumerist feminism but would question its applicability to modern feminism as it has developed in recent years.
meganzc's review against another edition
3.0
This book contains quite a few gems, but is mired in academic jargon. I don't agree with some of what she said, but much more I never fully understood. I was often unclear on her position (is she making fun of this? lauding it?), and at other times I felt her irrelevant biases were all too clear. It's a quick read though, worth a shot.