Take a photo of a barcode or cover
jada 's review for:
Feminism is for Everybody
by bell hooks
this was my first foray into bell hooks' work, and it's definitely interesting, to say the least. in the introduction, hooks stated that her intention with writing this book was to give un-believers a primer on feminist theory, and I'm still in two minds on whether this goal was met or not, because while it did provide a pretty good overview of the general feminist perspective, it may have tended (only slightly) towards preaching to the choir and presupposing a bit too much knowledge—it didn't give a clear definition of "white supremacist capitalist patriarchy", a term she beat to death in the book—and while it definitely was not as inaccessible as feminism for the 99%, it still could do better.
one thing that it had going for it was the clear definition of feminism as a movement predicated on ending sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression, rather than just being "men bad" (which a surprising amount of people still think feminism is. she definitely belaboured the point that the problem wasn't men, but patriarchal thinking, which anybody (yes even women) could be guilty of perpetuating. Similarly to the last feminist book I read (feminism for the 99%), I appreciated the renunciation of liberal feminism, where women claimed to be acting on behalf of women, but were instead only acting for themselves and profiting off oppression. The intersection of feminism with class and race was thoroughly addressed, definitely making it clear that feminism isn't feminism if it doesn't hold the interests of marginalised women at heart.
the book explored the various areas in which feminism was applied, from its roots in women's consciousness-raising circles which later transformed to academia, and into arenas of everyday life, like parenting, sexuality, the workplace, and marriage. I especially enjoyed her points about feminist parenting (which I think that a lot of Jamaican parents need to read) and the recognition of children as a marginalised group because violence against children, done by both men and women, is so concerningly normalised, and is a prime example of anti-feminist actions done not only by men.
however, one thing that struck me as odd, to say the least, was her continued reference to women as "choosing" lesbianism. I'm sure as a reputed feminist theorist and all, she knows better than anyone that sexuality isn't a choice, so her phrasing really confused me. Also, reading other reviews of the book made me realise how odd it was for her not to cite any sources, making it seem like this was purely opinion-based. It definitely didn't have the academic rigor nor the foothold in theory that I was hoping for.
one thing that it had going for it was the clear definition of feminism as a movement predicated on ending sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression, rather than just being "men bad" (which a surprising amount of people still think feminism is. she definitely belaboured the point that the problem wasn't men, but patriarchal thinking, which anybody (yes even women) could be guilty of perpetuating. Similarly to the last feminist book I read (feminism for the 99%), I appreciated the renunciation of liberal feminism, where women claimed to be acting on behalf of women, but were instead only acting for themselves and profiting off oppression. The intersection of feminism with class and race was thoroughly addressed, definitely making it clear that feminism isn't feminism if it doesn't hold the interests of marginalised women at heart.
the book explored the various areas in which feminism was applied, from its roots in women's consciousness-raising circles which later transformed to academia, and into arenas of everyday life, like parenting, sexuality, the workplace, and marriage. I especially enjoyed her points about feminist parenting (which I think that a lot of Jamaican parents need to read) and the recognition of children as a marginalised group because violence against children, done by both men and women, is so concerningly normalised, and is a prime example of anti-feminist actions done not only by men.
however, one thing that struck me as odd, to say the least, was her continued reference to women as "choosing" lesbianism. I'm sure as a reputed feminist theorist and all, she knows better than anyone that sexuality isn't a choice, so her phrasing really confused me. Also, reading other reviews of the book made me realise how odd it was for her not to cite any sources, making it seem like this was purely opinion-based. It definitely didn't have the academic rigor nor the foothold in theory that I was hoping for.