it’s similar to how i came into feminism. from what i’ve heard, most young women don’t come into feminism by hardcore theory. it was a magazine and a personal experience for me. for others, it can be music or some other personal experience.

eliza can you search full frontal feminism on feministing for that?

I’m not sure what you mean? I mean, yeah, I’m sure I could, but I don’t want to. I don’t have the time. I don’t have the inclination. If you want an argument you gave over there to be used over here, perhaps you could cut and paste it here. Or, you could restate the argument here. Or, you can just pretend you never made the argument and participate (or not) in the discussion that’s being held here. Please do not expect me to know or go search out what you’ve said elsewhere.

As for the false dichotomy, I will try to explain. The argument was that the cover was offensive. The argument you quoted Jessica making was “no young woman would buy a book with a fist on the cover.” Even if that were true (which it clearly isn’t, as evidenced by the number of young women saying they would have bought such a book), there a multitude of other options besides putting a young, thin, naked woman on the cover. To pretend that the choice is between “fist on cover” and “naked woman on cover” is to create a false dichotomy. Those are not the only 2 choices. So, to say, “no young woman would buy a book with a fist on the cover” is not even close to a defense of why one would choose to put a naked woman on the cover. Since you not only quoted Jessica using that argument, but went on to expound on your own experiences and reasons for believing this, I’m going to assume that you agree with this argument. And I’m say, it’s not a decent argument — you’ve created a false dichotomy.

curious, ok i read surfacing and edible woman at 22 and bluest eye at 24 but what lured me was sassy which came out when i was 20. i was actually raised a feminist by my dad but didn’t have a name for it until 22 because of sassy. i had a transformative experience that year in france when a bunch of us american women secretaries in a law firm were overworked and underpaid because we were women. i put two and two together and read beauty myth and backlash at 24 and started reading ms. that year too. i’m one of those people who wasn’t lured by the hardcore stuff but that seems to be the norm.

I’ve gone over why the marketing for the cover works on the two threads on Feministing and I don’t want to talk about it again.

Well, I guess you’ve shut me down.

Look, I haven’t read Feministing, so I have no idea what you’ve gone over. I was responding to your arguments here, because you made them here. I understand not wanting to go over things over and over. And I understand not having the time. Heck, that’s why I’m not rushing over to the Feministing blog to find said threads and read them. It might make me an outcast in the world of feminist bloggers because I haven’t read that blog and am not up-to-date on the latest and greatest arguments. I can deal with that. But, in the end, you came up with a false dichotomy on this blog, and I was responding to that. Maybe you came up with the ultimate reasoning for the cover on any number of other blogs. But it’s not fair debate style to expect me to either A)just believe that you made said ultimate argument elsewhere or B)search it out when you were the one who started the discussion here.

I have a cousin about your age. She was one of the people who influenced me positively toward feminism. She had Ms. Magazine, stacks and stacks of it, back when it was really good.

Women of your generation also got into feminism via great feminist literature, like Toni Morrison and Margaret Atwood. Personal Politics, by Sarah Evans, published in 1980,(the year before I was born) is one book that had a major influence on my own femisim.

Which is to say, that I dont buy it that “feminism was less popular” back in the eighties. In fact, I’d say that back then there was a national movement of on-the-ground activists with a national program for activists back then; the women involved in clinic defense. Meanwhile other young feminists were playing leading roles in the queer liberation and ACT-UP. Lots of women your age and younger were majorly involved.

We dont (as far as I know) have anything of that scale or unity now, but we could sure use it!

Not that I am trying to trash you, becuase we’re all different in our personal histories, etc. I’m just trying to point out that lots of women have different experiences, becuase I think the idea that young women are too silly to “get” any feminism without first being seduced by a naked chick on the cover insulting. As for the content of FFF, I get the various beefs, but am less concerned as I think polemic has its place.

But I’m not sure we know enough to blame the publisher for the cover; we know from JV herself that she had a choice of three covers. I’m not aware of what the other options were, or whether they were equally bad.

Thanks.

I get that you’re disappointed. Hell, *I’m* disappointed that there aren’t more of my peers reading about feminism. But I don’t need to say that some young women don’t exist just because I can’t see them. It’s not just about the cover. It’s what’s behind the statement that “no woman” is going to do anything.

And yeah, on some level it is nitpicking. But not because of the amount of flak Jessica’s copped. It’s nitpicking because there are better criticisms being made by people who aren’t me.

Also, I don’t think it’s fair to compare your experience in the late 80’s — during which, by your own admission, feminism was a lot less popular — and today. And I’m sorry that you don’t see a lot of young women (including teenagers) in the women’s sections of bookstores or in women’s bookstores.

Someone asked why I wasn’t interested in feminism until 22 and I said it’s because Backlash and Beauty Myth came out when I was 23. Now you can all guess my age! That’s why it’s disappointing to NEVER SEE YOUNG WOMEN in Barnes and Nobles or Border’s women’s studies sections because feminism is a lot more popular or at least publicized than it was then. Maybe this is only anecdotal and I’m the only one pissed off about this but there you go. I’ve gone over why the marketing for the cover works on the two threads on Feministing and I don’t want to talk about it again.

Also, I don’t think it’s fair to compare your experience in the late 80’s — during which, by your own admission, feminism was a lot less popular — and today. And I’m sorry that you don’t see a lot of young women (including teenagers) in the women’s sections of bookstores or in women’s bookstores. I do find that very sad that there aren’t more young women doing this. However, A) I work in feminist bookstore and I see a number of young women (both teenagers and college-aged) in there; they are the majority of our customers and B) there are also a huge number of women (young and old alike) who buy books on-line — I don’t think you can make judgements about the buying habits of a group of people based simply on what you see.

Furthermore, even if it’s true that many (maybe even most, but certainly not “no“) woman would buy a book with a fist on the cover, that doesn’t, IMO, justify using a young, white woman’s naked body on the cover. There are a lot of options in between those extremes. If Jessica, or you, Donna, want to justify or defend the cover, please do so. But please don’t do so by creating false dichotomies.

With that said, while I do think Jessica bears some responsibility for the book cover (sorry, but as the author, she does; it’s got her name on the cover, she’s got to be willing to take the heat as much as the praise for anything in or on that book), I think we should also be targetting the publisher. Hell, it’s not like this was some patriarchal mega publishing house. This is Seal Press. This is a feminist publisher. They need to be called out on this.

As far as the cover, I don’t care to talk about that any more but she probably responded that way because she’s sick of talking about it too.

My own opinion is similar. I have NEVER seen young women ages 15-20 in women’s studies sections of book stores. EVER. I have spent hours in these sections and NEVER seen a 15-20 year old near it. It’s also very unlikely you’ll see 15-20 year old women in women’s bookstores. Heck, I was never in these bookstores until 22.

Donna, there have been numerous young women in the various conversations going on who have said they HAVE bought books like that at that; I bought a book like that when I was 16 and thought feminism was kinda passe. What your comment says to me, and to those young women, is this:

“You don’t exist because I haven’t seen you.”

Think about that the next time you make that justification.

That said, there are lots of young women who see feminism as uncool. I dont think Maia was even disputing that. I also dont see anything wrong with targeting/marketing a book at that segment of folks.

But, honestly. I could see the cover and title or something similar on a feminist text that was mostly about sex and sexuality–but this is supposed to be about feminist ideas, social roles, school, daily life, etc etc, not just sex. The cover and title reinforce the notion that women=sex. This indicates to me that its not just that Jessica (and Donna both here and in previous threads on this topic) think not only that young women think feminism is uncool, ibut that young women think cool=sexy, sexy=standard white femininty and that they are toltally obsessed with pursing and achieving that, to the point where that is the only cool through which to reach them.

I think throwing in a twist at any point in the equation might still have reached the intended audience without falling back on naked white skinny chicks to sell stuff.

Here are some feminist books aimed at young women with cool covers that dont fall into that trap:

http://www.amazon.com/Cunt-Declaration-Independence-Live-Girls/dp/1580050158/ref=cm_lmf_tit_1_rsrsrs0/103-5862476-2884661
http://www.amazon.com/Colonize-This-Young-Todays-Feminism/dp/1580050670/ref=sr_1_42/103-5862476-2884661?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1179525519&sr=8-42
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0312155352/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-5862476-2884661#reader-link
http://www.amazon.com/Fire-This-Time-Activists-Feminism/dp/0385721021/ref=pd_sim_b_3/103-5862476-2884661?ie=UTF8&qid=1179525519&sr=8-42

That said, my little search did turn up a NUMBER of feminst books (some aimed at young women, many not) which have pictures of womens bare stomachs on the cover. WTF is up with that?

But even if that’s true, then it doesn’t matter WHAT is on the cover because isn’t that where the book is going to go? I don’t really know what your point is?

Yes, she has taken shit for the cover - when you put yourself out there in the way she has, she opens herself up to that - it’s part of the price, people will have criticisms. I haven’t said word one about the CONTENTS of the book because I haven’t read it, but I have a strong feminist objection to that cover and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to point out the irony of simultaneously complaining about media representations of women’s bodies and using the same tactics because it will help you sell more books. And she can’t simultaneously claim that she’s doing it to appeal to the masses and that it is subversive at the same time. That’s bull shit.

I’ve taken a lot of shit about the cover—somebody called me a patriarchal whore. But let’s face it, no young woman is going to pick up a book with the woman’s symbol with a fist on it.

My own opinion is similar. I have NEVER seen young women ages 15-20 in women’s studies sections of book stores. EVER. I have spent hours in these sections and NEVER seen a 15-20 year old near it. It’s also very unlikely you’ll see 15-20 year old women in women’s bookstores. Heck, I was never in these bookstores until 22.

See, on one level I get that. And perhaps that’s why there’s a lack of ‘feminism is uncool’ stuff in NZ (as far as Maia’s experienced).

But, well, on your definition, Australia has a more advanced feminist movement. That doesn’t equate to a lack of young women saying ‘feminism is uncool and passe and icky’; I do know a lot of them. And, well, on one level I get that Jessica’s point was that there are a lot of young women in her target audience who would be turned off by a cover with the woman symbol fist on it. Problem is, that’s not what she said. She said no young woman would pick up a book with such a cover. And she said it like it was an inarguable fact.

I’m sure there are people who will call that nitpicking, but that statement erases some young women. And whilst I’ll buy the idea that Jessica was given minimal options in terms of the cover (and on some level I can see the cover working, even), I’m highly skeptical that she’d been somehow pushed into making such a blanket statement with absolutely no qualification, when even a minimal qualification probably would’ve sufficed and made her point. Maybe she was misquoted, but I’ve not seen anything indicating the likelihood of that.

Jessica said that no young woman would pick up a book with a fist on the cover. I know dozens of young women who would pick up that book.

The idea that feminists were uncool and unattractive never occurred to me as a reason not to support feminism (I was uncool and unattractive) .* Whatever reasons I’ve heard other women give for ‘not being a feminist but…’ the idea that feminists were uncool and unattractive never really featured. Maybe things are different in New Zealand.

New Zealand is different than the US. It’s one of a handful of nations with a more advanced feminist movement. New Zealand was the first country in which women were allowed to vote.

In 1893, New Zealand was the first country to introduce universal suffrage, following a movement led by Kate Sheppard. Women first achieved the right to stand for public office in South Australia in 1894, along with full suffrage in that state (previously granted restricted women’s suffrage in 1861).

Of course she could have. Don’t tell me that there aren’t tons of designs that could’ve been made that didn’t involve using the naked depersonalised womanflesh crap. It could’ve been made visually attractive through use of exciting abstract design and colour, for example. But of course, that would have required some imagination and adherence to feminist principles.

And the wink-wink, nudge-nudge title: PUKE. As boring and predictable as all those articles about successful women with titles like “Women on Top.” Oh har, har, how amusing.

And am I the only one who doesn’t buy the “well, it’s for young women” excuse? Why the blanket assumptions that a) all young women are going to be attracted by standard sexist imagery and b) all young women, or even just those young women who don’t already call themselves feminists, are apolitical morons without the brains, ethics or courage to be interested in anything that doesn’t appeal to their own narrow self-interest? Valenti and her supporters seem to have an awfully negative opinion of the book’s target audience.