|
|
Title: Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender)
Purchase
Item
Manufacturer: Routledge
List Price: $29.95
Our Price: $28.95
|
|
| Customer Reviews: |
| Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender) by Routledge Women are NOT robots | I will start by saying that this review is not intended to be academic. It is not prose, nor is it a probing look into the psyche of Americans. It is merely why I didn't like reading this book for my humanities class.
Sandra Lee Bartky presents a collection of essays which are designed to prove that a culture of chauvanism and capitalism not only exists, but is the most powerful influence in a woman's life. In these essays, Bartky presents that the "fashion-beauty complex" essentially dictates every decision the 'average' (read: unenlightened) woman makes. Bartky's paranoia regarding the "fashion-beauty complex" takes it's description almost to a level of a grand capitalist conspiracy, saying that it is a "vast system of corporations - some of which manufacture products, others services and still others information, images, and ideologies - of emblematic public personages and sets of techniques and procedures" (p.39) - essentially, a grand scheme by Corporate America to dictate the 'average' woman's purchases. However, she doesn't see the truth of the matter - corporations only want to make money, and they will target whoever will give it to them.
For every woman who buys expensive makeup to "impress" men, there is a man who buys special aftershave to "impress" women. For every woman who feels that she must be thin to "appeal" to men, there is a man who feels that he must have scupted abs to "appeal" to women. There may well be a "fashion-beauty" complex. However, there must be a corresponding "automobile-athleticism" complex. And Bartky seems to be unwilling to acknowledge this.
A previous reviewer said that feminists like Bartky need to stop seeing themselves as victims, but rather as heroes. This is indeed the case. Feminists like Bartky cannot simply claim that there is a "manifest male supremacy," (p.25) as she says, that controls everything. It is not what one says, but rather how one says it - and Bartky seems to fail to realize that her writing style will offput virtually everyone who doesn't simply follow her worldview.
Men such as myself who do believe that there is a gender disparity in not only our nation, but of course in the world as a whole, are basically simply lumped in with those who are 'part of the problem', and at one point, I realized that if I ever felt particularly self-loathing, all I had to do was pick up Femininity and Domination and that feeling would be satiated. At the times where Bartky essentially devolves into 'male-hating' in her works, I found myself skipping entire paragraphs for a return to fairness, as it often seemed that she was all too willing to engage in reverse sexism to 'support' her arguments. | | Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender) by Routledge What's taught in university Women's Studies | As a feminist theorist, Bartky sprouts from one of many branches on the postmodernist tree - postmodernism being a form of religious fundamentalism (with no association to the heritage, ethics or message of world religions). As such one must be careful of criticism, however, Bartky engages in so many suppositions as though they were critically derived conclusions, the reader finds criticism difficult to avoid. I.e. Bartky submits without substantiation that all humans are born bisexual. As humans are mammals with a long history and variety of living organizations from gatherers to civilizations, examples should be found somewhere among those human organizations to substantiate Bartky, or at the very least among the thousands of mammal species on earth. None exist. (Interestingly, Creationists - political rivals of Bartky - use the same unsubstantiated tactics.) Bartky's supposition flies in the face of biology and common sense but it does expose her underlying support of "social constructivism" - the idea that society creates boys ands girls, that there is no nature, all is nurture and thus, ultimately males can be reengineered into more feminine creatures for the "safety" of females. Despite that males of all species tend to be aggressive, this is a clinical ailment, from the perspective of social constructivism, to be expunged through psychological manipulation without regard to implications beyond Bartky's program. "I argue," says Bartky, "that sexual fantasy, not just sexual behavior, should be made the object of moral justification." But who's to be in charge of thought control? The answer is Bartky and her comrades now embraced by university administrations and Congress as the current proper fashion in "right thinking". Surprisingly, Bartky makes great use of Marxist theory, while most postmoderns gave up on it after its failure to address the universal nature of humans - their desires for freedom, peace, stability.
Bartky notes the objectification of women as indication of a sexist, suppressive society. But men are objectified as well, for their wealth, height, intelligence, appearance, items of display from expensive cars to big houses (or lack of these). Though male oppression is not her topic, does that make society sexist and suppressive of males? Or is society simply a large-scale inflection of biology? And if so, who's to blame but the species itself? Of course some behaviors - of both sexes - needs steering, but for Bartky only males are to be bridled and not in traditionally acceptable ways but in total, into something males can never be by virtue of genetics, not social fashions.
The nature of works like Bartky's are the very definition of religious claims to truth - claims that cannot be refuted. As feminist theory (like psychoanalysis and sociology) is an area of study not science, its authors make claims which by making them alone seem sufficient to make them true. What we get from Bartky are biases in the workplace, perspectives of female sexual dimorphism, and a linty of past offenses. It may be true the workplace is still a boys club - inferred from the near homogeneity of males as overpaid CEOs - and certainly biology still influences perceptions and values, but we hear nothing of the gains in those arenas and the perpetual power women have over men's sexuality, which drives so much of male behavior and materialistic avarice.
Human nature's desire to create or emphasize "us versus them" from before the Old Testament to the Cold War as a real means of survival or simple unity loses none of its charm with Bartky. Until feminists such as Bartky see themselves as heroic, rather than in terms of our modern currency as victims, they will continue to blame, seek vengeance and demand "from others" certain payments and consideration. In America, victim status carries significant rewards, most importantly the freedom from challenge. Bartky and so much of women's studies gets a free ride and the product is our university output. One effect of Bartky's work and feminist theory "may" be net reductions in male/female relations with associated depressions in fertility rate. As the planet needs no more humans this may be a positive outcome of her program. | | Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender) by Routledge a way of looking at how we're socialized for trouble | | There's nothing worse than forced femininity and how it limits a woman's life.This book gets you beyond all the gender bias non-sense and leads you to understand how we got in this mess in the first place and how to change,because humans ARE capable of change and do not have to stay in boundaries which bind their talents,aspirations and individual make up. Within all humans,there are different degrees of femininity and masculinity and the masculine based way that men are raised,has allowed them not only greater freedom in the world but also greater freedom within,to think strong and be strong,whilst women have been given a limited recipe for life which binds them to a femininity which may not be part of a particular woman's physical or emotional make up..I get the message that women are taught to play a role of false femininity which suffocates their true natures as individuals. | | Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender) by Routledge an essential read to help understand human relations | | though i first read this book for a class, i have since turned to it many times. ms. bartky has a clear grasp on the dynamics of relations between men and women not only on the basic level of how we treat eachother, but on the intimate level of how we treat ourselves. this is a must read not only for feminists, but for anyone who has ever wondered why men and women are treated differently in our society... why we ARE different, and how we can change or overcome our seeming differences. it may be a bit thick at times on philosophical and sociological language, but the messages come through loud and clear enough so that you don't need to be schooled in either discipline to enjoy it. | | Femininity and Domination: Studies in the Phenomenology of Oppression (Thinking Gender) by Routledge Product Description | | Bartky draws on the experience of daily life to unmask the many disguises by which intimations of inferiority are visited upon women. She critiques both the male bias of current theory and the debilitating dominion held by notions of "proper femininity" over women and their bodies in patriarchal culture. |
| |
