I don’t know if that’s what Nemo is saying, but now that you point it out so, I have to say I think I have seen this kind of justification.
Right, I think there are plenty of choices which are just choices. I think my own problem is that I sense the position that if a choice isn’t obviously feminist then it just supports the patriarchy (or whatever… not trying to be glib just short). This is what bothers me personally.
Do you think that if porn and stripping went away or were very much reduce in popularity, those men who think women are only good for sex and that all women are demeaned by one stripper* would view women differently?
*Not that I think the stripper is necessarily demeaning herself.
Yeah, I see what you’re saying, but some choices really DO support the patriarchy. I don’t know if stripping is one of those, necessarily, but I don’t subscribe to the notion (as in the OP) that it’s a PRO-feminist choice, either.
Men who consciously think that? Probably not. But who knows what effect it has on men (and society) in general. No guy I know thinks that women are only good for sex, but do all of them 100% respect women as equal to them in all things? Of course not. Most men fall into the gray area, and who knows how their opinions are affected? Even if it’s just a tiny bit that they’re not even aware of, it could have huge repercussions.
I’m an executive assistant. You know, a secretary. I’ve even been known to fetch coffee and good-naturedly deflect clients’ advances.
This has enabled me to live the life I wanted, with enough money and time to raise a child without a husband or child support. Never had to compromise.
Did I betray the feminist movement by doing that instead of becoming a brain surgeon? Or did I celebrate it by living the life I want? It’s all so confusing.
No, of course not. Unless there were male executive assistants at the company who refused to fetch coffee! 
There’s another aspect of this that I consider important and part of feminism, which is what is the individual woman doing that will ensure exactly what you’re talking about…the ability to remain independent, to be able to support herself and her family if she has one? It boggles my mind how many women in this day and age rely on their husbands 100% and never seem to think about what’s going to happen if he runs off with someone or gets hit by a bus or something.
The fact that you have a career as an executive assistant is the opposite of betraying feminism, to my way of thinking.
But the thing is, it IS a job that comes with a whole ton of built in “this is what women do” baggage.
So if my story were exactly the same except that I were a stripper, I don’t see how that’s fundamentally different. Hell, in my 20s being a stripper would have been a whole lot more lucrative.
Maybe, but then you’d have been a 30ish former stripper trying to break into another career, which I have no doubt is not the easiest thing in the world.
I think there’s an inherent difference between jobs that may be stereotypically female (you could throw teaching and nursing in there, as well), but still require brains and professionalism and jobs that not only don’t, but bring women/people down to the lowest common denominator. Being a stripper doesn’t show the world that women are capable of anything at all. Well, other than giving guys woodies, which exactly difficult in the first place.
Feminism should be about giving women freedom to do what they want. If feminism is about having women conform to some ideal then it’s just another form of oppression. Telling a woman she shouldn’t be a stripper because she’s betraying other women and upholding the patriarchy is no different than telling a woman she shouldn’t be a police officer or a firefighter because those aren’t feminine professions. In both cases, a group is trying to pressure women into conforming with its vision of the female ideal. The only difference is whether the woman is being pressured by men or by other women.
Feminism IS about giving women freedom to do what they want. Including making UNfeminist choices. But don’t uphold the patriarchy and call it feminism, please.
It’s in no way about conforming to a female ideal, it’s about making choices that help give other women the power to make choices. Feminism is about ensuring that women have as much power politically and economically as men do. If you’re working against that, it ain’t feminism.
It’s not hard to see once one considers renting as being not much better than purchasing.
Edit: and the consent has to be considered with some scepticism, as Robert FitzRoy echoed a common sentiment that freedom was a burden and a slave was content and ignorant.
As for whether reducing a woman to a single component is objectification, sexual objectification covers a wide area in feminist literature. Perhaps deindividuation or compartmentalisation are more accurate depending on context?
Anyway, after viewing this video I had an epiphany (which is a sort of mental disorder where the sufferer becomes insufferable…). I figured that most pornography fits his depiction adequately and is probably a consequence of the fact that women are required to make commodities of their bodies if they do not have access to the means of production. Well, the “realisation” wasn’t in isolation, it concurred with the fact that prostitution essentially disappeared in Catalonia by George Orwell’s account. This was after the Churches were shut down and the women involved had some prospect of a future of prosperity.
I think the separate categorisation of rape from other forms of violence demonstrates that society still holds the intimacy involved as something more than mundane. Perhaps that’s something that liberals should stave off, rather than cherish.
At any rate, I don’t think the criteria apply to these instances. These are rational actors, making independent decisions and they are in no way compelled by their economic circumstances to participate. The fact that they’re actually utilising their nudity (their offence according to Dworkin) to protest against a repressive patriarchal regime is a bonus.
Feminism is about erasing the notion that women “aren’t allowed” to do whatever they damn well please. Period.
Precedent of male chauvinism and shame-centric attitudes towards sexuality have ironically caused an strain of feminism to admonish sexually-oriented types of personal expression. The thought is if that expression so much as looks like the kind of objectification men historically been responsible for, a womyn shouldn’t do it regardless of what said woman actually wants. I think the current parlance is “slut-shaming.”
No, feminism is about women gaining political and economic equality with men. Period.
I’ve got no issue whatsoever with women expressing themselves any way they want to, sexually or otherwise, and I think slut-shaming sucks. But that’s not what feminism is about.
I think there is definitely a strain of feminism that does think just this way. They haven’t eliminated slut-shaming, they’ve just rebranded it.
Right. And the usual feminist objection to pornography is that women are not doing it because they really want to, but because they’re forced into it due to economic and social pressures that are, at least in part, uniquely applied to women. And yes, you can say the same thing about working minimum wage at McDonalds, but inherent in this worldview is the idea that having to trade sex for survival is inherently worse than having to rely on other forms of labor for survival.
Some feminists approach the issue from the assumption that a woman would only do porn if they were forced into it, and some of *those *feminists do not react well to having their assumptions on that issue challenged, which can lead them to questioning or attacking women who enjoy being sex workers. And that’s fucked up - as erislover says, it can turn into slut-shaming under a different name. But the basic feminist objection to pornography is not inherently anti-sex, but anti-exploitation. Most contemporary strains of feminism recognize the distinction, and (in theory) don’t have a problem with pornography that’s not exploitative.
Of course, the question of what is and is not “exploitative” is an entirely different can of worms.
I agree with you. The part I don’t agree with is that it’s the goal of feminism to eliminate it. I mean, sexual freedom is important, but it’s got nothing on political equality. I’ve got no problem with women stripping, it’s not about that, it’s about calling it feminist. One woman’s personal feeling of empowerment doesn’t equal a feminist movement.
But she’s got a YouTube channel! 
Yeah, I agree.
I think that doing whatever you want is inherently feminist, and that telling women otherwise is a tacit endorsement of a world where white men are the only people who don’t each represent their entire gender/race/demographic. Fuck that.
I understand your point, but I just have to disagree that doing whatever you want is inherently feminist. It might be personally empowering, but I don’t think that’s the same thing as feminism. And, yeah, identity politics is a part of it..it’s a part of every movement to advance an oppressed group because the whole point of such movements is to improve the standing of the group as a whole, so you can’t divorce your choices from how they affect the group.
When women really can make any choice they want, we will be in a post-feminist utopia. I don’t think we’re there yet.
I mean, look at it this way…Michelle Duggar is doing what she wants to do…is her lifestyle feminist because she’s chosen it?
What about women who actively campaign against women’s rights, are those feminist choices?
Mind you, I’m not talking about whether they have the right to make those choices, or whether they should have the autonomy to make those choices, I’m asking whether or not they are feminist choices.