Where are all of the feminists?

I know that you’re here. And I’m here. And lots of other kick ass feminist bloggers (whom I admire greatly) are here. And I have a bookshelf filled with books by modern feminists who are here.

But where the hell are they? Because they’re sure as hell not in the mainstream media.

This morning, my heart broke when I read about a horrifying recent talk given by Naomi Wolf, a woman who changed my life with her book The Beauty Myth. I had heard that some of Wolf’s later writing left a lot to be desired, but I wasn’t exactly expecting a diatribe on the horrors of “hook-up culture.” I mean, I do agree with her basic premise:

“If you’re a woman, did you learn about pregnancy, chlymydia, AIDS, gonorrhea, herpes, separating sores and leprosy? (laughter) So you learned about all the disgusting and scary things that could happen to you if you had sex, right? But did learn anything about pleasure?”

As a result, Wolf believes that many young women tend to feel shame when they’re attracted to someone and have libidinous feelings. “What makes it possible to find some sort of release is to get drunk and have sex with someone you don’t know, because if you are conscious and not drunk then you have to be thinking things like — Do I like this guy?, Is this the right guy?” Wolf added, “If you’re conscious and taught to feel so ashamed about your sexuality, all of this anxiety will kick in when you’re in a sexual situation, which is so overwhelming that it’s easier to get sex with alcohol, is pretty much what it comes down to for a lot of women. It’s easier to deal with it; it’s easier to compartmentalize the emotions.”

That’s true! Women are taught to be fearful of their sexuality and do not learn about the fact that they are meant to experience sexual pleasure! They are presented with conflicting messages about sex, that say they have to be both virginal and hyper-sexual! Yes! Speak the truth, Naomi!

So, what’s the solution exactly?

“… When you leave here, ask someone for a date. Send someone a letter, send someone flowers. Boys, girls… invite someone to sit on a blanket with you and look at the stars,” she said to applause.

Wait, that’s it? We’re going to make women feel badly about the choice they’ve made while trying to live under this crushingly patriarchal system and tell them that they should have been gazing at the stars instead? You mean, instead of actually going through and teaching women about pleasure and that there is nothing inherently wrong in either “hooking up” or remaining celibate or any other sexual choice, we’re going to lament the fact that romance is dead? Romance, that’s the solution? . . . Oh.

Sigh.

The good news, I suppose, is that she’s still no Wendy Shallit. Personally, I thought that Shalit’s supposed feminism regarding her “modesty movement” had been thoroughly debunked. Apparently not, because in this raving, parroting reveiw of her book Girls Gone Mild: It’s Not Good to be Bad at AlterNet calls the fucking thing feminist in the review title.

Article author Anneli Rufus is clearly a big fan of Shalit’s ideas, since she spends the three page article pointing out how oh-so-very-right Shalit is in her arguments. First, she takes these obviously horrifying examples that just about any feminist would admit are a problem:

The image of the twelve-year old circling a suburban bedroom on her knees, servicing fourteen-year-old boys as they played video games, chiming “Next!” after each one, then explaining that “she was doing it because that was what she did for her guy friends,” sticks in the mind. You don’t have to be evangelical to think: Uhh, twelve?

The “Girlcotters” are Pittsburgh teens who boycotted Abercrombie & Fitch in 2005 to protest the company’s sexist tees. (“WHO NEEDS BRAINS,” one shirt asked, “WHEN YOU HAVE THESE?”)

Then, she concludes that instead of teaching girls to actually respect their bodies, we should just tell them to cover the bodies up! And that they should be virgins! Wait, who is the “she,” here, Rufus or Shalit? Quite honestly, I haven’t the slightest clue, because they seem to be attached at the brain.

There’s absolutely nothing feminist about Shalit’s book or Rufus’ argument. Let’s see, Rufus uses the words “hoe” and “slut chic” to describe how young girls dress, and no, not as part of quote. Shalit’s subtitle is “It’s Not Bad to Be Good.” And yet, strangely enough, any poorly-read feminist knows that dividing sexual behavior up into “good” and “bad” categories is the antitheses of all things female-friendly. For Christ’s sake, the above examples of extreme misogyny and abuse are conflated with the giant inflated vagina used at V Day celebrations.

Personally, while I recognize that AlterNet is far from perfect, I do expect a lot better from them. I sure as hell expect better from Naomi Wolf, and I’m still desperately seeking a way that her comments might have been taken out of context (help? anyone?).

And with so many actual feminists out there, is it too much to ask to see one of them in a newspaper every once in a while?