It's hard to disagree with anything Walter writes. It's what she doesn't say that stops Living Dolls being truly convincing.
The Observer just published my review of Living Dolls: The Return of Sexism, by Natasha Walter.
While I felt a book that heralded “the return of sexism” should have made broader points and connections, I really did enjoy Living Dolls and think Walter is a fantastic writer. Let me know what you think of the review; here’s a snippet to get you thinking:
In her 1998 book, The New Feminism, Natasha Walter argued that the feminist adage the “personal is political” needed to ditch the “personal” and focus on broader political goals. Feminists shouldn’t worry so much about sexual objectification, Walter said; young women didn’t want to be told what to wear and who to sleep with. Walter now says that she was “entirely wrong”.
Twitter
Facebook
Tumblr
YouTube
3 Comments
Your invocation of “the personal is political” reminds me of Hanisch’s updated forward (that I think I read when you linked to it a few years ago): that the origin of the phrase was as a rejoinder to the fauxgressive dude dismissal of the concerns women had based on their life experiences as “personal.” She noted, for my generationa and those that follow, that the point was not to subject every woman’s personal choices to scrutiny, but to connect the discontents of their personal experiences to systemic dynamics that need to be changed.
It’s a great phrase, and I’m happy to see you use it in a way that is completely consistent with its original meaning.
I am awaiting my copy of Living Dolls in the post (hurry up post!!), but I had wondered if Natasha Walter had incorporated Transfeminism into her work, as I see it is essential to feminism today and any discussion of gender, and you have answered my question. I will read Living Dolls with your proviso in mind. Thanks for this review.
And I forgot to write – yes, class analysis is vitally important too.