Take a photo of a barcode or cover
victor_a_davis 's review for:
The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism
by Katie Roiphe
Ah, yes, a critical treatment of modern feminism, what ever could go wrong? Activism is funny... At first they call you crazy, then they call you brave. Before you know it, the new order is crystallized into gospel and any who dare smudge it, let alone crack it, are branded heretics.
More than a book about feminism, I read this as a book about all-or-nothing-ism. Don't all activist movements derive their strength from challenging conversations and hard, open discussion? Once you've lost that, you should know you're past your peak and either in decline, or at least having already made whatever mark you were destined to make.
I'll be honest, this wasn't a great book. Somewhat poorly prosecuted, it reads like a freewritten screed of passion for a college newsletter than a proper book. It contains lots of witty "gotcha" quotes, lots of insider and contemporary references, and no structure. But I defend the author's right to blaspheme the gospel of the official "line" on feminism, which, if it is to survive and thrive, must be treated as living, growing, and adaptive to change, else it will die, even today. Activism should borrow from science the concept that "truth" is not only arrived at, but defined as what little is left over that has withstood every possible challenge, every angle of attack, the more brutal, the more proved. A thing can only be said to be bulletproof after riddling it with bullets.
Take this little "bullet", for example:
Leaving the merits of the argument aside, if this makes your blood boil, then remember, it is incumbent on you to articulate why, to understand the heart of the argument and make a counterargument, to convince another, or at the very least, to show up to the fight with an actual weapon. But all too often, the more common reaction to such a criticism is to cry, "She is a wolf in sheep's clothes! She accuses all feminists of being 'privileged' and therefore irrelevant. Traitor! Fraud! Conservative! Anti-feminist!" This book was written before the Internet, but I can just see the river of memes and counter-memes flowing down the newsfeeds now...
More than a book about feminism, I read this as a book about all-or-nothing-ism. Don't all activist movements derive their strength from challenging conversations and hard, open discussion? Once you've lost that, you should know you're past your peak and either in decline, or at least having already made whatever mark you were destined to make.
I'll be honest, this wasn't a great book. Somewhat poorly prosecuted, it reads like a freewritten screed of passion for a college newsletter than a proper book. It contains lots of witty "gotcha" quotes, lots of insider and contemporary references, and no structure. But I defend the author's right to blaspheme the gospel of the official "line" on feminism, which, if it is to survive and thrive, must be treated as living, growing, and adaptive to change, else it will die, even today. Activism should borrow from science the concept that "truth" is not only arrived at, but defined as what little is left over that has withstood every possible challenge, every angle of attack, the more brutal, the more proved. A thing can only be said to be bulletproof after riddling it with bullets.
Take this little "bullet", for example:
Many of the Princeton students who take the microphone [at an anti-rape-culture rally] emanate a sense of entitlement. These students say, again and again, "It's not fair that I should be afraid." This is an idea that springs from privilege. Who besides these well-dressed, well-fed, well-groomed students would expect the right to safety and march for it? Many of these girls came to Princeton from Milton and Exeter. Many of their lives have been full of summers in Nantucket and horseback-riding lessons. These are women who have grown up expecting fairness, consideration, and politeness. They have grown up expecting security. Considering how many things there are to be afraid of and how many things are not fair, being frightened to walk around Princeton, New Jersey, late at night does not seem like one of God's greatest injustices.
Leaving the merits of the argument aside, if this makes your blood boil, then remember, it is incumbent on you to articulate why, to understand the heart of the argument and make a counterargument, to convince another, or at the very least, to show up to the fight with an actual weapon. But all too often, the more common reaction to such a criticism is to cry, "She is a wolf in sheep's clothes! She accuses all feminists of being 'privileged' and therefore irrelevant. Traitor! Fraud! Conservative! Anti-feminist!" This book was written before the Internet, but I can just see the river of memes and counter-memes flowing down the newsfeeds now...
It is tempting--convenient, really--to glance at an article and immediately categorize it as ours or theirs without bothering to think it through. But nothing interesting can come out of cultural discussions that are right against wrong, as appealing as they seem. They satisfy us, like watching sports or footage of wars. There is no doubt that it is somehow reassuring, and maybe more entertaining, to watch the forces of darkness battle the forces of light without any twinges of doubt about which is which. But tolerating dissent is about sustaining that doubt, keeping it alive long enough to come to one's own conclusions.