|
Backlash is an excellent resource for information on the patriarchal policies and practices of many major U.S. corporations, figures, and organizations. Filled with historical data, thorough case histories, and many personal interviews, Faludi's book reads like a mixture of sociological studies and politically-correct gossip on the patriarchy and sold out ex-feminists. Faludi bases her book on the idea that Amerikan society experiences a series of feminist upsurges which are inevitably followed by anti-feminist backlashes, a process that she describes as a spiral of progress and retreat for the feminist movement that never reaches its goal of equality. Faludi backs up this bleak historical outlook for Amerikan feminism with some convincing statistics. Her case is based on studies from all sectors of Amerikan life that show progress and then retreat for women, particularly focussing on what she says is the most recent backlash after the advances made by the women's movement of the 70s and early 80s. The reader's interest in what could be a dull sociological study of historical trends in feminism is held by the many stories of real life anti-feminists. From leaders in the garment industry to pop-psychologists to female right-to-lifers, Faludi depicts their motivations for personal power through interviews and anecdotes of their lives, presumably attempting to explain to the reader the pervasiveness of this anti-woman campaign. This is not a bad book for people to be reading. It is much better than most best sellers. The tactic of individual life stories and motivations is not the only evidence offered by Faludi of the obstacles presented to women, but unfortunately a number of sections in the book are just anecdotal without statistical evidence. For instance, Faludi cites the many anti-woman movies (and the motivations of their producers) of the past decade as evidence for the complicity of the movie industry in the current backlash, but she never offers any statistics on the preponderance of such movies compared over time. As a sociological review of Amerikan women, the book presents a lot of useful data. And the book contributes to looking at the patriarchy as a problem of group power in society rather than individual incidents. Although Time magazine pointed out some errors of Faludi's work, the book is particularly useful for refuting incorrect anti-feminist theories by correctly criticizing their method and data. Faludi describes how the media and the government use these incorrect theories to create public opinion. MIM believes that it is possible that Faludi is correct that there is a rise in anti-woman propaganda and actions in Amerika after women make advances against the patriarchy. But MIM asks, what is the significance of this phenomenon? It is important to understand that the bourgeoisie and the patriarchy often resort to increased fascism in the face of opposition. But it is even more important to develop an understanding of the most effective way to fight the bourgeoisie and the patriarchy through historical experience. Faludi's book fails to provide any useful analysis, instead falling into the patriarchal paternalism that she professes to hate. "To expect each woman, in such a time of isolation and crushing conformism, to brave a solitary feminist stand is asking too much."(1) As Faludi develops the story of patriarchal dominance of different sectors of society in each chapter, she also develops a story of women unable to resist, forced to give in to whatever that sector demands. From clothing to marriage, Faludi portrays women as pawns, forced to take part in whatever the patriarchy offers up. It is exactly this paternalistic view of women that will doom any women's movement before it begins. Faludi's weak conclusion that women should form a women's party and pursue electoral reform--but don't because of the backlash--is a good demonstration of the failings of this paternalist attitude. Faludi sees women as victims of an overpowering system. Rather than asking why women in Amerika have not risen up in revolution to overthrow the patriarchal demon that is the cause of their agony, Faludi describes women's oppression as unavoidable, in fact often women do not even realize they are being oppressed. A cursory reading of history will show that people who are oppressed and suffering so that they have little to lose by rising up and overthrowing their oppressor are easily organized against their oppressor. These people are not duped by the propaganda of the oppressor forever: they are easily convinced of the correct ideas of revolution, at least relative to bought-off Amerikans. Rather than wistfully wishing for a more successful feminist movement, Faludi should be questioning why Amerikan women are so unaware of their oppression. Faludi is playing into the biological determinism that she disparages--if women don't get it they must be inferior: all the men know what's up. Faludi even admits this: "All of these men understood the profound force that an American women's movement could exert if it got half a chance. It was women, tragically, who were still in the dark." Fund for the Feminist Majority founder Eleanor Smeal agrees: "The reason men 'overreact' is they get it."(2) MIM understands that women in Amerika are not inherently stupid. They are not just "in the dark" and unable to act because they don't understand what's going on. Women in Amerika, the women that Faludi talks about--mostly white women--don't overthrow the patriarchy because they do not want to lose the privileges it gives them. Women of the white nation receive certain privileges from the patriarchy. By using women and men of the Third World to test contraceptives, First World women can rest assured that their contraceptives are safe. First World women can accuse Third World men of rape to control Third World men and gain privilege in First World society. First World women are oppressed by the patriarchy. But First World women are also able to use the patriarchy to their benefit. While Third World women are forced to work long hours just to feed their family, First World women can use the patriarchy to gain access to certain jobs and advancements. If the abolition of the patriarchy were truly in the overall interest of First World women, they would refuse to use their sexual privilege to get ahead in society, they would refuse to accept the exploitation and oppression of all women, and they would ally with all women in a movement to destroy their oppressor. MIM understands that this will not happen. There are strong women's movements in the Third World, but they are not organizing against men, they are allied with the men of their nation, to fight imperialism and the patriarchy. Material interest will not cause First World women to join the movement to overthrow the patriarchy which feeds off of Third World people, supported and used by imperialism. Material interest can only cause First World women to ally with the imperialists while trying to achieve relative equality with their men. This is a delicate fight: don't overthrow the patriarchy, just eliminate its negative effects on First World women while preserving the privileges gained from it. MIM does not wonder why there has not been a successful feminist movement in Amerika. Overall, First World women are on the privileged end of the oppressors in relation to the patriarchy. MIM works to expose the myths of First World pseudo-feminism that is setting back the real fight against the patriarchy and against imperialism. Notes: |