Customer Reviews

The New Victorians: A Young Woman's Challenge to the Old Feminist Order

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Denfeld is dead on target in her scathing but articulate attack on the new feminism. Contrary to what some reviewers have claimed, her writing is lucid and direct--so much so that my EFL graduate students here in Beijing have found it easy to digest and highly compelling reading. Now they have begun to understand what prompted the patronizing antics of so many so-called feminist leaders who spoke at the women's conference here five years ago.

I applaud Denfeld's daring, although as an amateur boxer, she'd probably shrug her shoulders and say, "aw, it was no big deal to write this stuff." Still, it is bold to put your publishing career on the PC chopping block.

As for the book's arguments, she documents her sources well and manages to deftly demystify the often jargon- laden writings of many of the new feminists she so roundly criticizes. I was especially glad to see the even-handed manner with which she treated Gloria Watkins, aka bell hooks. Earlier in the book she credits this feminist critic but takes the latter to task in subsequent references. In contrast, Denfeld's regard for Friedan is sensitive, even poignant.

The book maintains a motif: that a kind of neo-Victorian disposition dominates the new feminists. Although the motif is indeed at times strained, it holds up well overall.

This book should be required reading in womens studies courses which purport to offer divergent feminist points of view but, in fact, assign mostly the radical fringe while conveniently and hypocritically ignoring the emerging mainstream thought (or was it always there beneath the turgid surface?) The sad irony, communicated well in this work, is that the new feminists have marginalized the very women they claim to defend.

I look forward to reading her new, co-authored work on related issues.

Rene Denfeld's critique of feminism is right on. Her analysis of Diana Russell and Mary Koss's inflated rape statistics is solid, she offers a strong libertarian argument against the censorship of pornography championed by Catherine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, and she condemns the goddess worship of Mary Daly as irrelevant to the political movement and alienating to women. However, while she's done her homework on the feminists, she neglected to study the Victorian era thoroughly, and offers only a superficial comparison, which is unfortunate because her explanation of the failure of feminism is so good. She should have left out the Victorian element entirely if she was unwilling to explore it. Also, Denfeld takes a lot of cheap shots at conservatives, calling them "archconservatives" and "right-wingers" and never explaining, as she does meticuously with the feminists, the actions that have caused them to earn her disgust. She need not like republicans or Christians, but it crowds her work to potray them as the enemy when her focus should be the feminists and (possibly) the victorians. In addition, she makes some suggestions at the end of the book, some of which are laughable, such as creating government-sponsored childcare (a chapter earlier she said taxes were too high, does she understand the system?), and make abortion "simply another medical procedure" (not going to happen, hon). She made some excellent points, but the book has some serious flaws.

This book is amazing in that it doesn't pull punches against the people who have spent the last two decades turning feminism into a joke. From Faludi's paranoia and victim mentality (and according to her latest book men are victims too. Isn't it nice when everyone's a victim?) to the exaggerated rape statistics to the flaky ramblings of Daly, Starhawk and Gloria Steinem's inner child, no one is spared. ALthough Dworkin and MacKinnon's anti-porn crusades are dead, the rotting corpses still live on in Women's Studies classes. There is a contigent of feminism that believes that lesbianism is the only politically honest response to the patriarchy (and all the poor lesbians who get stuck with these Women Studies major jerks could start a support group and it would rival AA) and there is a great deal of puritanical zeal running through feminism.

Denfeld's main point is that women are not victims in need of being saved by feminism but real people with real concerns who would benefit from feminism if it addressed the issues (child care, reproductive rights, equal opportunities) instead of flaking out. A must read for all feminists who are getting sick of what passes for feminism.

Rene Denfeld the author of this book is an interesting person. It is not often that a female boxer writes a book. The book is an attack on what some would see as fringe feminism.

Denfeld suggests that what most women want is equality with men, child care, job opportunities and reproductive rights. Feminism however is drifting away from these core concerns and fringe academic groups are defining feminism and what it means to be a feminist.

Denfeld argues that some academic feminists have preoccupations that involve arguing against heterosexual sex, opposition to pornography, the creation of a victim mentality and a bizarre attempt to create a new religion. In her view these currents to the movement are turning away younger women who make more practical demands from the movement and are not interested in obscure ideological debates. The book has a number of chapters which discuss each of these trends.

In the anti-phallic campaign Denfeld argues that a significant number of feminists have argued against penetrative sex and normal sexual practices. She quotes Adrienne Rich's essay on "Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Experience" which suggests that heterosexuality is the model every other form of exploitation. This essay is apparently used in most women's study courses. Denfeld argues that as most young women are heterosexual such essay's tend to turn them away from feminism.

In arguing how a victim mentality is encouraged Denfeld examines a number of prominent studies of female victimization. These include work by Diana Russell and Mary Ross. It is argued that such studies over inflate female victimization by including in rates of sexual assault consensual sex, minor contact such as wolf whistling and phone calls to grossly inflate the rate at which females are subject to sexual assault. Denfeld argues that these surveys trivialize the reality of rape by broadening the definition of rape to include very minor transactions. This leads to scare mongering suggesting that women are in constant danger of leaving home, does if believed restricts their enjoyment of life. It also is an insult to women as it is an attempt to recreate the model of the Victorian defenseless woman rather than today's modern self-confident woman.

The book is challenging and interesting. One suspects that the more doctrinaire will dislike it. It is however a passionate argument for women to equality with men and not to limit themselves by ideologies which will return them to the sheltered status of the women Victorian times.

It is a suggestion for feminism again to become a movement which will achieve things for a broad range of women rather than creating a new self limiting ideology.

Rene Denfeld's is one of those books that make you say, "I knew it! It's not just me! I've been waiting for someone to say this!" She presents an excellent post-boomer perspective (rare enough these days, outside of computers and technology) on what has happened to the once-proud and purposeful feminist movement, and an insightful and well-documented description of how it has changed over the past two decades.

As Denfeld illustrates with quotes from today's generation of young women, the official "feminist" movement has, in their eyes, lost its way. It is no longer about fighting for equal treatment under the law, equal pay in the workplace, or equal respect as individual human beings--all worthy goals which some Gen X and Y'ers have admittedly almost taken for granted in these more enlightened times. Instead, it has come to stand for Woman as Victim. The current focus of the core feminist movement in the past few years has been on protecting women, portraying them as helpless (yet noble and virtuous!) little hothouse flowers who need shielding and special treatment to survive against the onslaught of the big bad world and mean ol' men (all of whom are cast as violent, misogynistic predators, of course). Is it any wonder that so many young women who believe in equality nevertheless are reluctant to call themselves "feminists?"

The movement has been hijacked, as Denfeld amply demonstrates with an array of studies, statistics, and--most tellingly--quotes from the most prominent current leaders of the feminist movement today. What was once considered extremist has become mainstream as the cause has rigidified and polarized itself.

In addition, the book's writing style was a pleasant surprise. Too many books on political issues, particularly gender and family themes, are awkwardly and poorly written, mainly consisting of half-formed thoughts strung together with no regard for logic, organization, or thoughtful presentation. Denfeld is no ranter; she has methodically presented a number of well-researched and carefully organized points and concepts, and followed them up with discussion that is clear and thought-provoking. I found myself engrossed with every chapter.

Two minor quibbles:

1. As another reviewer has commented, I'm not sure that the Victorian analogy is consistent throughout the book. I recognize that in our society, "Victorian" represents backward and repressive thinking, and certainly this is an accurate description of what mainstream feminism has become. However, some elements of the current state of the movement are too new to fit the mold, and the analogy (but not the validity of the critique itself) becomes strained at points.

2. In addition to what feminism currently stands for, I would have liked to see some discussion of exactly how and why the feminist movement was transformed--although that could well have doubled the length of the book. The results of the change are clear, and clearly deplorable--but some more attention to the nature and origin of the change might provide some added insights into how to get feminism "back on track" for the future.

But all told, this is an excellent book that cogently presents and discusses some important ideas for modern equality-minded women who don't want the baggage and restrictions (Restrictions! In a movement purportedly concerned with women's freedom to choose!) that accompany modern mainstream feminism. The fact that many mainstream "old movement" feminists would probably hate it, despite its firm stance in favor of independence and equality for all women, illustrates just how far astray the movement has gone.

After reading this book, all of the feelings that I had about my college womens studies classes were verbalized. Finally, someone has dared to push past the rhetoric to find a voice that accurately represents women of my generation.

The New Victorians is one of the worst books I have read about feminism. It contains no new insights and relies disturbingly on mistaken and simplistic historical notions about the Victorians. Denfeld ends up becoming so obsessed with the supposed commonalities between the Victorians and the feminists of today that she forgets to give an argument as to what exactly is so bad about the plethora of policies and people that she labels "Victorian." She takes the easy way out by using "Victorian" as some sort of epithet, apparently thinking that the reader is an idiot and will not notice the absence of any justification for her views.

In addition to being devoid of any substantial argument, this book is simply unoriginal. Furthermore, it is written so poorly that it is painful to read. The author cannot write a decent paragraph and spends too much time writing about herself. I would not recommend wasting your money or your time on this book.