Erishkegal
Quote:
However, contrary to one negative reviewer said, women's power does not depend solely on men's sexual attraction to them. Sexual attraction is power, yes, but it's not the sole female source. If this person is complaining that the book tries to revamp female power by turning into men, advocating that female power is derived soley from women's status as men's sex objects is surely no better.
Agreed. I was horrified by that review. If ever there was a failed understanding of female sexuality (more properly sexualities, but I digress), that was evidence. Based on the reviewer's rhetoric, I'm guessing that by "turning women into men" he means "daring to suggest that women's sexuality might be active rather than passive" or some such thing. Either that, or he's referring to the packing thing, and clearly doesn't get it.
i'm going to disclaim my post by saying i am offering up an explanation of what the review in question was trying to say (or at least my interpretation of it). needless to say, i don't claim to be a women's studies expert.
i read that review as trying to articulate that women are downplaying the power of their own sex appeal; that "turning women into men" more would mean "ignoring the inherent strength of female sex appeal." to quote the Producers, "if you've got it, flaunt it." it's not relegating women to men's objects or saying that they can't do anything else. it's simply another area in which they can exert a lot of influence, if they so choose. what's wrong with using a pretty face to, say, get free drinks or talk down a traffic ticket? unfortunately, i lack such a pretty face, so the strength of my sex appeal is limited to my boyfriend, and so my experiences in sex/sexuality/sex appeal/whatever are limited to this relationship. i know i like knowing that he finds me sexually irresistible--does that reduce me to nothing more than his sex object? certainly not. and if the review was saying that's SOLELY where women's power lies, then i missed it, and i would agree that's a damaging way to look at women.
sometimes people actually feel comfortable in stereotypical gender roles and remain in them without feeling used or cheapened. some people find them limiting and choose to transcend them to make their own identity. neither should be faulted.
i've taken a long time to type out this post, but i still feel like i'm not quite expressing my view clearly. unfortunately, i really don't know how to clarify it any more at the moment. apologies.
