Lately I’ve been devouring feminist lit. It’s something I never really delved into previously, but have recently developed a voracious appetite for. About a week or so ago, I finished the book The Bust Guide to the New Girl Order, which my friend Lisa let me borrow. It’s a compilation offering a broad range of ideas and thoughts about (third-wave) feminism. I liked it because it was raunchy, irreverent, enlightening, fun and sex-positive, in contrast to so-called second-wave feminism, which wagged a disapproving finger indiscriminately at things like porn, makeup, cleavage and heels. From what I understand.

As far as The Bust Guide, I’ve always believed in feminine empowerment through our physical attributes, and to hear that echoed and expounded upon from a feminist channel was neat. What I wasn’t really tuned into, however, was the idea that there’s a fine line between empowerment and enslavement via one’s female body, one of the issues that the book addresses. For example, a woman can be empowered by her breasts, using them to her own advantage in her everyday life. So long as she doesn’t become obsessed, always trying to have them measure up to some cultural ideal, for instance.

Frigid and slanted
Currently, I’m reading Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions by Gloria Steinem. She’s a second-wave feminist. Hence, I’m finding myself in disagreement with Steinem more often than not, but her points are not totally invalid. And she is, after all, a feminist pioneer. However, she is an extremist, as well as a very slanted writer. She also strikes me as being frigid. But anyway, one example of her extremist viewpoint arises in the introduction of the book, where she rails against the porn industry, particularly scenes depicting rough sex, such as S&M.

I’m sure working in the industry isn’t always a pleasant experience, but Steinem describes the portrayal of women almost as if they were victims of a prison camp (and she tosses in some thoughts on child porn in the same breath, which I thought was inappropriate, misleading and inflammatory.) Anyway, what she seems to ignore is that the sex that women have in front of the camera is consensual, and the women are getting paid to do it.

Also, I’m pretty sure that even during that era, there were films out there featuring men who were at the mercy of women. It works both ways. Which brings me to this point: I get the impression that Steinem just doesn’t get the fact that many people have an innate need to take part in sex acts involving a submissive-dominant dynamic. It’s a healthy expression of sexuality, in my view. What would be unhealthy would be to repress it. If it’s consensual, it’s cool.

Again, this doesn’t mean that Steinem’s ideas about porn are not worth thinking about. They are. The treatment of women is always something that’s worth questioning. And yes, the porn industry is heavily sexist. There’s no denying that. Not to mention the fact that most porn just plain old sucks, what with all the crappy music scores and insincere voice-overs. “Yes, yes — oh, right there. Yes, yes.” What the fuck?

Anyway, I’m currently reading a chapter called I Was a Playboy Bunny, an undercover journalism assignment Steinem took on, dealing with her working as a bunny at this Playboy club in New York City. What I’m really looking forward to reading is her thoughts on transsexualism. There’s five full pages dedicated to it just past mid-book.