hannahmarkezich's review against another edition
2.0
I don't even know where to begin with this book. Maybe by saying that Paglia is a libertarian and thus everything in the book comes from that perspective. She's against campuses getting involved in handling Title IX cases and feels that free speech is honored above all. She's entirely unsympathetic to people who feel threatened by hate speech and simply wants them to toughen up, without ever specifying how this should happen. Maybe we do need to toughen up, but we also need to learn how to be kind, understanding, and courteous, and Paglia discounts that entirely. It's a book with a lot of assertions and almost no practical solutions whatsoever.
One of my main problems with this book, aside from a lot of Paglia's ideology, is how intensely repetitive it is. Yes, it's a collection of previously written essays. Some repetition is to be expected. But this went above and beyond. There were certain phrases and ideas that were repeated constantly. By the end, I could predict exactly how a sentence about women's careers in politics, women's ability to have children, etc. would end (almost word for word). I wish some of the repetitiveness had been cut out or at least shortened. I would've been a lot less annoyed.
I was also disgusted by some of Paglia's personal attacks on women. It's fine to disagree with other people's views. That's allowed. But she spends pages upon pages personally attacking Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon. Paglia heavily disagrees with their strict views on pornography. But she spends the essay complaining about Dworkin being a "pudgy, clumsy, whiny child" and MacKinnon possessing "cold, inflexible, and fundamentally unscholarly mind." What a perfect opportunity to offer a thoughtful critique of their views. Instead Paglia wastes it with personal attacks that accomplish absolutely nothing of value.
Everything is also a bit dated. She criticizes how feminism doesn't allow women the freedom to choose to have children. But the feminists I know (both in real life and online) would never condemn a woman for wanting to have children rather than work, or do both, or do neither. It's an incredibly dated view on feminism for being published so recently. Perhaps feminism was like this in the 1980s - I won't deny that - but to imply that it continues to perceive motherhood this way is completely misguided.
Her views about sexual assault are also pretty crude. I'm a firm believer that women should be smart and aware of their surroundings and know how to defend themselves. We are strong and capable. But I also think that male aggressors should be held responsible for assault. She seems to think that if a woman says no to a man firmly enough, the man will back off every single time. Of course a good man would do so, but there are way too many men, and I've encountered some of them, who don't hear a "no" regardless of how firmly it's communicated and continue to pursue a woman who is uninterested. It feels like there should be a balance in who holds responsibility and how assault cases are handled, and Paglia misses that entirely.
Paglia does have some good points. Her incorporation of art into feminism is fascinating. I enjoyed her critique of books exploring sex. She rightly points out that humanities disciplines, like women's studies, shouldn't exclude scientific research from their positions. Science can inform philosophy, and I believe this strongly. Although I disagree with her claim that women's and gender studies programs entirely ignore biology and science. This hasn't been my experience in reading modern feminist works and in studying at my university.
I mostly enjoyed reading this as an intellectual exercise. I'm a philosophy major and I firmly believe that you have to read and study (and be charitable towards) dissenting opinions, both to understand other people and strengthen (or modify!) your own positions. It was good to see the ways in which we could agree and disagree on the same issue. It helped me to solidify my own views and to understand Paglia's perspective. I'm definitely glad that I read it even though I disagree with her on most major issues in feminism. I recommend this if you want to challenge yourself and learn something new from someone whose views can be appalling in some cases.
One of my main problems with this book, aside from a lot of Paglia's ideology, is how intensely repetitive it is. Yes, it's a collection of previously written essays. Some repetition is to be expected. But this went above and beyond. There were certain phrases and ideas that were repeated constantly. By the end, I could predict exactly how a sentence about women's careers in politics, women's ability to have children, etc. would end (almost word for word). I wish some of the repetitiveness had been cut out or at least shortened. I would've been a lot less annoyed.
I was also disgusted by some of Paglia's personal attacks on women. It's fine to disagree with other people's views. That's allowed. But she spends pages upon pages personally attacking Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon. Paglia heavily disagrees with their strict views on pornography. But she spends the essay complaining about Dworkin being a "pudgy, clumsy, whiny child" and MacKinnon possessing "cold, inflexible, and fundamentally unscholarly mind." What a perfect opportunity to offer a thoughtful critique of their views. Instead Paglia wastes it with personal attacks that accomplish absolutely nothing of value.
Everything is also a bit dated. She criticizes how feminism doesn't allow women the freedom to choose to have children. But the feminists I know (both in real life and online) would never condemn a woman for wanting to have children rather than work, or do both, or do neither. It's an incredibly dated view on feminism for being published so recently. Perhaps feminism was like this in the 1980s - I won't deny that - but to imply that it continues to perceive motherhood this way is completely misguided.
Her views about sexual assault are also pretty crude. I'm a firm believer that women should be smart and aware of their surroundings and know how to defend themselves. We are strong and capable. But I also think that male aggressors should be held responsible for assault. She seems to think that if a woman says no to a man firmly enough, the man will back off every single time. Of course a good man would do so, but there are way too many men, and I've encountered some of them, who don't hear a "no" regardless of how firmly it's communicated and continue to pursue a woman who is uninterested. It feels like there should be a balance in who holds responsibility and how assault cases are handled, and Paglia misses that entirely.
Paglia does have some good points. Her incorporation of art into feminism is fascinating. I enjoyed her critique of books exploring sex. She rightly points out that humanities disciplines, like women's studies, shouldn't exclude scientific research from their positions. Science can inform philosophy, and I believe this strongly. Although I disagree with her claim that women's and gender studies programs entirely ignore biology and science. This hasn't been my experience in reading modern feminist works and in studying at my university.
I mostly enjoyed reading this as an intellectual exercise. I'm a philosophy major and I firmly believe that you have to read and study (and be charitable towards) dissenting opinions, both to understand other people and strengthen (or modify!) your own positions. It was good to see the ways in which we could agree and disagree on the same issue. It helped me to solidify my own views and to understand Paglia's perspective. I'm definitely glad that I read it even though I disagree with her on most major issues in feminism. I recommend this if you want to challenge yourself and learn something new from someone whose views can be appalling in some cases.
gadda023gmailcom's review
3.0
While I did initially enjoy the poetry and beautiful use of literature to conjure up interesting images and concepts, it lacks any real proof of these ideas. While I appreciate many of the concepts mentioned in the book are hard to study or pin down, it would have been good to see academic studies which influenced this thinking, rather than an assertion of fact, for me the lack of any evidence was what put me off believing the concepts or even finishing the book. The experience quickly turned from being an amazing poetic explanation of the human condition, to a word salad.
erikahope's review
3.0
Paglia is an unapologetic libertarian intellectual and many of her insights are thought provoking and even refreshing, but ultimately she shows the same limits that plague anyone who writes about a movement from their very personalized POV. She is undoubtedly a pistol of a woman and she is understandably proud of that- but she barely disguises her disgust with anyone "too soft" to be an admirable woman. I admire a strong woman as much as the next person, but Paglia expects any woman "worth her salt" to be able to defend herself from insults, harassment and perhaps worse from men (who she characterizes as alternately cowed by women- or the brave warriors who built our civilization -depending on the essay). She essentially asks women why we expect to be protected and why can't we protect ourselves (dammit)? Well...Ok, I can appreciate the sentiment of taking care of yourself, but doesn't that give men a whole lot of latitude? It doesn't hold them accountable at all (except under the law if proven guilty which she adds as almost an aside) and puts all of the pressure on women to be tough enough to just... spit in their face I guess... meanwhile men can continue to foist all kind of obnoxious or aggressive of behavior upon us. I don't know about that. And this is one of maybe...25 topics that she writes about with a bold empowered perspective but often takes a bit too far almost as if she just wants to be a contrarian for the pure joy of it. It seems that she loves some women and despises others which is not terribly helpful-and her opinions are a little simplistic since every person is a mix of positive and negative aspects at least to some extent. In any case, we have to get along with a wide array of characters in this world and not everyone is willing or able to be the sultry vixen she seems to admire (a la Madonna). And this is not even touching some of her tone deaf comments on Affirmative Action. I haven't heard her address this topic in depth but she seems out of touch from what I see here. She usually starts out saying that these efforts are "well-intentioned" but then goes on the bash them. She has just about zero compassion or understanding of women who need help or ask for help not to mention asking why this would be the case (discrimination, abuse, illness or just not being born so damn strong/smart/outspoken as she was). Her ability to write a biting book review is unrivaled in my opinion (a dubious honor). I read this with my jaw dropped half the time. She does not pull her punches and she does have a remarkably descriptive vocabulary. I got lost in all her talk of post structuralist theory and didn't totally understand her gripe with Foucault or Pierre Bourdieu. In fact I found myself wondering if she would think I was smart or educated enough to be permitted to read her book-I could feel her imagined wrath descend on me when I skimmed through something too esoteric. She seems to loath most French intellectuals save Simone de Beauvoir (thank god) and Marquis de Sade (hmmm...) Reading this made me kind of relieved I am not a woman academic publishing today because she goes right for the jugular. God be with you if you haven't boned up on just about everything ever written about art or feminism. I almost pitied those two anti-pornography activists, Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon -and I had never even heard of them. But Paglia really roasts them-and it gets personal. I guess knowing her Vamps and Tramps book I knew what I was getting into. I can't help but think she goes for shock value with some of her opinions such as her ode to Princeton Wrestling and her high praise of buxom cheerleaders as fabulously feminine in all the best ways. She totally dismisses ideas of "female objectification" which, while it did make me think, did not really convince me. I wonder if there is a Feminist today who would take her on. I'd like to see it. Personally, she reminds me of an English teacher I had once. I never knew if she would love or hate what I wrote but I knew she could defend her judgement with impeccable prose. That doesn't mean she was always right though. The one thing I do like about her is that she brings up the male bashing habit of some feminists that is counter productive. She also has an interesting take on southern vs northern women (spoiler-she loves strong southern charm and hates the cold uptight north) but as with all her essays she manages to say thing in such categorically emphatic terms that ultimately, you can never agree with her.
mlytylr's review
1.0
i can read a book that includes views that i disagree with. fine. but a badly written book? nope.
More...