And a link

Posted on August 19, 2007 by erimentha

Blr Bytes sent me this quite a while ago, and I’ve been meaning to blog it and forgetting. So, who’s going to be the first to figure out what’s wrong with what Naomi Wolf’s saying about Andrea Dworkin?

Filed under: Feminism

« Hair For my tax students »

6 Responses to “And a link”

  1. qwerty, on August 20th, 2007 at 12:08 pm Said:

    Well. To my mind, Naomi Wolf is missing the point that despite what she says, women are still objectified and is concentrating too much on the ‘effects’ seen. The cause for the effects is still the objectification. And the ‘effect’ she mentions is the cause that leads to that sexual mayhem.

  2. another tax student, on August 21st, 2007 at 7:01 pm Said:

    Why can’t we have a slightly elaborated post on this? (A little too shocked after reading the piece!)

  3. taxstudent, on August 21st, 2007 at 10:41 pm Said:

    We Indians don’t need pornography to objectify women. We have movies.
    Who needs nudity with songs like “Sexy, Sexy, Sexy mujhe log bole….”

    sigh… Bharat Mata ki jai…

  4. erimentha, on August 23rd, 2007 at 8:26 pm Said:

    qwerty: But that’s not what is wrong with her analysis of Dworkin, is it?

    another tax student: It’s in the works :)

    taxstudent: A different question for you, then: what is the BIG POINT you’re missing here? Think. You’re not completely stupid, I know.

  5. another tax student, on August 23rd, 2007 at 11:26 pm Said:

    As far as my rudimentary knowledge goes, Dworkin doesn’t talk of the effect of porn on men.. she talks of porn itself being a product of this male-lorded-over society. Her point was not that porn will cause men to look at women as a debased species, porn in itself was testimony to that.

    Full marks or a straight fat zero?

  6. Of Myths « methinks, on August 27th, 2007 at 2:22 pm Said:

    [...] Some time ago, I blogged about Naomi Wolf’s essay, The Porn Myth, and I asked what was wrong with Wolf’s statements about [...]

Leave a Reply