Levy, Ariel - Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture

[oyceter]

Levy is basically arguing that the recent rise in "raunch culture" is fuelled by women proclaiming that they are post-feminist and have the freedom to be raunchy, but that in reality, they are more conforming to men's ideas of sexiness than anything else. Levy points to the prevalence of porn stars in the best-sellers list, the popularity of Paris Hilton and etc. as evidence of raunch culture.

I do see why the book is controversial, but I liked that Levy isn't saying that women shouldn't be getting implants or pole-dancing or whatnot. She's instead saying that while many of the women who are doing these things say that they are post-feminist and have the freedom to do so, many aren't necessarily thinking about what post-feminist means and why, if they are free to be raunchy, the expressions of raunchiness fit so well into what has typically been termed as "tools of the patriarchy" (drink!).

I do think that it may just be another form of anti-feminism to point fingers back at the women, and I wish Levy would examine more why women feel like they need to fit in as "one of the guys" to get ahead, and how that is culturally dictated as well. If women are only hearing the message that the only way to be in power is to decry feminism and be "one of the guys," or if women are only hearing the message that the only type of sexiness that is appreciated is that of raunch culture's, then... is that really the women's fault? There are incidents in the book in which guys are yelling at girls to flash the camera in "Girls Gone Wild" that make me cringe, and I wish Levy would point even more fingers.

I suspect the book is a read only for people who already partially agree with Levy. I liked certain parts, particularly the examination of why women felt like they had to denigrate femininity (lesbian "bois" and female TV executives alike). I think she's a little too attached to her generation of feminism, though of course, I am biased in that respect because I am distinctly not of her generation of feminism. But it's very clear from her book that we aren't post-feminism yet.

I think I need a longer post on feminism and me and my generation, because I do notice a difference in my attitudes vs. other people's on LJ, which I find interesting.

oursin has some commentary on an interview with Levy.

Comments

[oursin.livejournal.com]

I suspect I am more or less of Levy's generation of feminism (actually, I probably predate it, having been a feminist since I discovered what feminism was), and I thought there were a number of problems with her take as it came over in that interview. Not that feminism of any generation has ever been monolithic!

[oyceter]

I didn't actually read her entire interview, but I did like the book... I feel a little bad doing the "You can't talk badly about women" thing, but I think if one just stops the analysis there and doesn't go more into the culture that spawns it, that's a problem.

[pinkdormouse.livejournal.com]

Not read the book -- only reviews - so while I get Levy's problem with female TV execs I'm not sure what the issue is with lesbian bois. Then again I like butch-femme in the same way I like the androgyny of glam rock and certain subgenres of Goth so I may be missing the point somewhat.

The raunch thing bugs me too as I'm worried about who the majority of women are doing it for. And that's from someone who genuinely gets off on giving pleasure to others, though as a top rather than an exhibitionist.

[oyceter]

I think her thing with the lesbian bois wasn't that they were adopting masculine traits, but that the ones she interviewed denigrated "femmes" and feminine traits and adopted rather 50s-ish attitudes toward gender roles.

[popfantastic.livejournal.com]

This whole thing fascinates and frustrates me, and maybe I need to read the book. The problem is that I see and pretty much understand all the critiques of raunch culture/lipstick feminism, but I can't get past the fact that they seem to boil down to one group of women calling another group of women out over their choice of empowerment -- even if they're being really reasoned and not just deriding the other group as whores, which is what happens at the extreme end. I guess I don't want women who want to pole-dance and wear tiny, tiny skirts to have to be responsible for thinking about the (post)feminist implications of their behaviors; I want non-patriarchy-reinforcing raunch! But we don't live in that world yet.

[oyceter]

Well, I think Levy was actually very good about separating out women who were actually being empowered by it and women who didn't really seem to be thinking about it. I know, it's rather problematic to say that someone isn't empowered when they say they are. But on the other hand, my college experience was very raunch culture/lipstick feminism, and I always felt that something was wrong, even though everyone was claiming to be empowered and etc.

So... hard to say. I want non-patriarchy-reinforcing raunch as well! But I think when everyone yells for girls to get naked and no one yells for guys to get naked, something is probably not right...

[forodwaith.livejournal.com]

when everyone yells for girls to get naked and no one yells for guys to get naked, something is probably not right

That's the best short-hand summary of the whole mess I've heard yet. ::notes down for future use::

[oyceter]

The really sad thing is that this is from my college, and I was there several times when it happened. I didn't say anything then, and I wish I had, but at least I can say something now.