What do you think?
Rate this book
The Female Thing: Dirt, Sex, Envy, Vulnerability
From the author of the acclaimed Against Love comes a pointed, audacious, and witty examination of the state of the female psyche in the post-post-feminist world of the twenty-first century. Women remain caught between feminism and femininity, between self-affirmation and an endless quest for self-improvement, between playing an injured party and claiming independence. Rather than blaming the usual suspects--men, the media--Kipnis takes a hard look at culprits closer to home, namely women themselves. Kipnis serves up the gory details of the mutual displeasure between men and women in painfully hilarious detail. Is anatomy destiny after all? An ambitious and original reassessment of feminism and women’s ambivalence about it, The Female Thing breathes provocative new life into that age-old question.
192 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2006
30 people are currently reading
1149 people want to read
About the author
Laura Kipnis
15 books179 followersLaura Kipnis is the author of Against Love: A Polemic; How to Become A Scandal; The Female Thing; Bound and Gagged; and the upcoming Men: Notes from an Ongoing Observation (out in November). Her books have been translated into fifteen languages. She's written essays and criticism for Slate, Harper’s, Playboy, New York Times Magazine, New York Times Book Review, and Bookforum. A former filmmaker, she teaches filmmaking at Northwestern University. She lives in Chicago and New York.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 76 reviews
May 21, 2010
As I read my way through the first chapter, I felt like I was reading a Cosmo or Glamour for feminists, a little trashy and a lot of fluff, but just enough to have some bite. Several times I almost put it down, but I'm glad I kept reading due to taking some perverse pleasure in it.
To some extent, it's a frustrating read. It is just as dichotomous and contradictory as the subject Kipnis seeks to explain. Her sweeping statements about how great women have it "post-feminism" are irksome (Though she states from the beginning that she is speaking from a middle-upper class white woman's perspective.). She hits upon some great insights but rarely has the analytical depth to take it further. Instead, the first chapter is replete with mocking swipes at feminists who invoke patriarchy to explain social behavior and the structure of society. To say that a woman's behavior is influenced by patriarchy is not the same as denying her agency - though Kipnis seems to think so.
Sex and Dirt, the central chapters, are the strongest and quite captivating. An interesting mix of science, history and culture mixed in with her own theories on the subjects at hand. By the time I was through with them I was eager to read more and genuinely interested in hearing more of her theories.
Unfortunately, Vulnerability went downhill and I felt it was as weak as the first chapter. I thought her analysis of anti-porn feminists and the issue of rape to be way off, both for the same reason. Her discussion of prison rape misses the mark because she maintains that feminists put forth that rape is about violence. Perhaps power and violence are synonymous to her, but when viewing all forms of rape through a lens of power, particularly with a focus on misogyny, the dynamic she scoffs at makes a lot more sense.
She also skewers feminists who have been affronted by the sexual advances of men in power as "female wounded bird syndrome." Also thought this was way off - it isn't about expressing delicacy and fragility and "refeminizing" oneself so much as it is wanting to be seen as a person rather than a conquest. My question in the case she describes - if the student had been a man, would her professor have taken her poetry seriously instead of using their meetings as an opportunity to make sexual advances towards her? At times the last chapter had me pretty infuriated.
Despite my issues with the book, I'd recommend it. There were times when I definitely felt challenged, and she gave me some things to think about. I genuinely enjoyed it and at times it was hilariously funny. It takes a lot for me to laugh out loud when reading a book, and she had me cracking up.
To some extent, it's a frustrating read. It is just as dichotomous and contradictory as the subject Kipnis seeks to explain. Her sweeping statements about how great women have it "post-feminism" are irksome (Though she states from the beginning that she is speaking from a middle-upper class white woman's perspective.). She hits upon some great insights but rarely has the analytical depth to take it further. Instead, the first chapter is replete with mocking swipes at feminists who invoke patriarchy to explain social behavior and the structure of society. To say that a woman's behavior is influenced by patriarchy is not the same as denying her agency - though Kipnis seems to think so.
Sex and Dirt, the central chapters, are the strongest and quite captivating. An interesting mix of science, history and culture mixed in with her own theories on the subjects at hand. By the time I was through with them I was eager to read more and genuinely interested in hearing more of her theories.
Unfortunately, Vulnerability went downhill and I felt it was as weak as the first chapter. I thought her analysis of anti-porn feminists and the issue of rape to be way off, both for the same reason. Her discussion of prison rape misses the mark because she maintains that feminists put forth that rape is about violence. Perhaps power and violence are synonymous to her, but when viewing all forms of rape through a lens of power, particularly with a focus on misogyny, the dynamic she scoffs at makes a lot more sense.
She also skewers feminists who have been affronted by the sexual advances of men in power as "female wounded bird syndrome." Also thought this was way off - it isn't about expressing delicacy and fragility and "refeminizing" oneself so much as it is wanting to be seen as a person rather than a conquest. My question in the case she describes - if the student had been a man, would her professor have taken her poetry seriously instead of using their meetings as an opportunity to make sexual advances towards her? At times the last chapter had me pretty infuriated.
Despite my issues with the book, I'd recommend it. There were times when I definitely felt challenged, and she gave me some things to think about. I genuinely enjoyed it and at times it was hilariously funny. It takes a lot for me to laugh out loud when reading a book, and she had me cracking up.
July 29, 2008
Kipnis examines women and modern American society's relationships with dirt, sex, envy and vulnerability. It's a huge subject, and she does not do it justice. Kipnis focuses all too often on pithy cheap-shots and sarcastic responses to other feminist thinkers. I liked some of her analysis, but she overstated her case and made terrible comparisons (women shouldn't worry so much about rape because "violent things happen to men too: they're maimed or die in pointless wars, for instance." What? The link between the two is nonexistent.) Kipnis does have a good point that the people who are the least statistically likely to be raped are the most worried about it. Unfortunately, her insights are overshadowed (in my mind) by her pettiness and "loledgy" writing.
May 19, 2019
This shit was so contradictory, it was painful to read. I had to put it down and come back to it at different points because I was like - is this woman serious? I couldn't tell if she was being sarcastic, facetious, or making an attempt at being purposefully "controversial". A lot of the contradictory information that she's collected and espoused felt barely analyzed or scraping the surface analyzed. There was little context or account given for women outside of the author's wheelhouse who may be impacted or have a reason to be fearful surrounding rape and sexual violence, see: Vulnerability.
I just couldn't rock with this book. The writing style as well was pretty awful. Huge sweeping mass/mess of paragraphs that felt like diatribes filled with what felt like part-overworked comedy sketches which, in my opinion, had no purpose or place in a book like this. Large scale generalizations rooted in white feminism. Skip this, there's gotta be better out there.
I just couldn't rock with this book. The writing style as well was pretty awful. Huge sweeping mass/mess of paragraphs that felt like diatribes filled with what felt like part-overworked comedy sketches which, in my opinion, had no purpose or place in a book like this. Large scale generalizations rooted in white feminism. Skip this, there's gotta be better out there.
January 10, 2008
So I pulled this rather randomly and haphazardly off the library bookshelf, based on a random and haphazard online review from a cartoonist I sometimes admire. While I appreciate Kipnis's layman's speak, I am having trouble seeing her as the representative for All Western Womankind. I can't help but wonder: how influenced by Sex and the City is the "normal" modern woman? Because that's how this reads--if Carrie Bradshaw wrote a textbook on the female psyche, this would be it.
November 15, 2011
Kipnis covers 4 basic factors relating to feminism: envy, sex, dirt, and vulnerability. She discusses how there is a "new femininity"--namely, women are voluntarily participating in "hook-up" culture, willingly submitting themselves as sex objects and rejecting ideas of the "old femininity", namely when women would be taken out to dinner and courted in an old-fashioned way. Basically, women are at odds between being assertive, independent, sexual beings yet the irony is that many of these women are only "liberating" themselves sexually (assertiveness only in the form of shopping for lingerie, getting brazilian waxes, and breast implants) and thus enslaving themselves by consumerism. In their endless quest to achieve perfection, women are losing sight of many of the rights that past feminists fought for (deciding to leave careers to instead become full-time moms) This is probably because the division of household labor is still unequal--women now have the right to work but they're still the main caretakers of the home whereas before their domain was the home. They're doing double shifts daily.
Kipnis posits that feminism and femininity are having such a hard time reconciling because there's so many various factors that affect today's society (and the female psyche) that are at odds. Femininity is based off of a sense of feminine inadequacy while feminism wants to level the field, make things good and fair for both sexes. Yet, feminists get such a bad rap (men-haters, hairy bitches, dykes) In regards to sex, women nowadays have "choices" but they are still enslaved. With the invention of birth control, women are now not expected to give birth compulsively but they're still chained to their bodies in the form of new fad diets, new body operations, new trends. There's even the possibility that, if anything, the pill seemed to liberate men instead of women (they no longer have to answer for the consequences of their sexual behavior)
Kipnis makes many points and offers hilarious insights into what is going on with today's women. They're stuck between claiming emancipation yet they're still shackled to old-world traditions. They want to be independent but place much of their self-worth on whether men find them attractive, they want to be free enough to sleep with men but complain when they're not respected, they want to be viewed as self-sufficient yet complain when the man doesn't open the doors. It's a pretty messy situation, with both sexes confused about what to do. What's controversial and refreshing is that Kipnis doesn't lay the blame solely on men but acknowledges that women have a lot to say about this too and, in them, lies the power to change their situation. If only they unplugged their hair straighteners and took a pause from getting their nails done long enough to take a look at what's going on and clearly define their stances.
Kipnis posits that feminism and femininity are having such a hard time reconciling because there's so many various factors that affect today's society (and the female psyche) that are at odds. Femininity is based off of a sense of feminine inadequacy while feminism wants to level the field, make things good and fair for both sexes. Yet, feminists get such a bad rap (men-haters, hairy bitches, dykes) In regards to sex, women nowadays have "choices" but they are still enslaved. With the invention of birth control, women are now not expected to give birth compulsively but they're still chained to their bodies in the form of new fad diets, new body operations, new trends. There's even the possibility that, if anything, the pill seemed to liberate men instead of women (they no longer have to answer for the consequences of their sexual behavior)
Kipnis makes many points and offers hilarious insights into what is going on with today's women. They're stuck between claiming emancipation yet they're still shackled to old-world traditions. They want to be independent but place much of their self-worth on whether men find them attractive, they want to be free enough to sleep with men but complain when they're not respected, they want to be viewed as self-sufficient yet complain when the man doesn't open the doors. It's a pretty messy situation, with both sexes confused about what to do. What's controversial and refreshing is that Kipnis doesn't lay the blame solely on men but acknowledges that women have a lot to say about this too and, in them, lies the power to change their situation. If only they unplugged their hair straighteners and took a pause from getting their nails done long enough to take a look at what's going on and clearly define their stances.
February 26, 2008
Kipnis is the wry, well-informed, playfully ranting feminist friend that we should all be so lucky to have. Simultaneous paying respect to the multi-faceted, many-phased ‘women’s movement,’ while still being able to approach it objectively, Kipnis is able to suggest that “feminism came up against an unanticipated opponent: the inner woman,” without self-righteous finger-pointing or woman-aggrandizing propaganda (she’s actually remarkably empathetic with feminist backlash against undeserving males). This is what Feminism was asking for originally, she shows us, and this is how it has (or hasn’t) played out according to plan. And if Kipnis has a one particular talent, it’s revealing how principals that sounded so good in theory, really fall apart when put to practical use. Doing so isn’t a devious scheme to undermine Feminism as a whole, but rather to show how far we still have to go.
A fascinating element underlying some of Kipnis’ culture readings is a sort of proto-Marxist economist’s analysis of the female condition. Watch as capitalism co-opts the ‘Revolution,’ with cleaning products sold to women, by women (“female-on-female emotional sabotage”). As pay equity ends up having some unexpected and unjust consequences. Another lynchpin in her equations is the ability to relate abstract social conditions (an obsession with cleaning one’s home) to the female body and how it perceived by both men and women (the social purity movement). In these cases (and many others—her discussion of rape and the gap between actual statistics of victimization and the perceived fear of the likeliness that one will be raped was rather eye-opening for me), Kipnis shows a truly versatile flair for questioning our comfortably held assessments of the female experience.
Minor complaints: I’m not sure that The Female Thing is as cohesive a text as it could be—I for one, could have certainly used a ‘let’s put the pieces together now’ type of conclusion—but each topic (Envy, Sex, Dirt, and Vulnerability) is approached with such a fresh perspective that I’m happy to have read what could have easily been free-standing essays all together. And granted, Kipnis’ sarcasm and irony is spread on a little thick at times—and she’s far too fond of suggestive ellipses—but, all things considered, these are balanced rather gracefully. (A notable example of this is found in the final chapter, when Kipnis takes on the indomitable Andrea Dworkin, whose work and feminist legacy Kipnis has frequently--albeit rather playfully--challenged. Here, Dworkin is described as “a bit unhinged,” but nevertheless is still a “gripping—and symptomatic—figure…” when teasing out the many contradictions at work within “female emotional life.”)
But all knit-picking aside, Kipnis has certainly provided a valuable trampoline for us to spring from. As she says at the very end of her book, “A full accounting of the female situation at the moment would need to start roughly here.”
A fascinating element underlying some of Kipnis’ culture readings is a sort of proto-Marxist economist’s analysis of the female condition. Watch as capitalism co-opts the ‘Revolution,’ with cleaning products sold to women, by women (“female-on-female emotional sabotage”). As pay equity ends up having some unexpected and unjust consequences. Another lynchpin in her equations is the ability to relate abstract social conditions (an obsession with cleaning one’s home) to the female body and how it perceived by both men and women (the social purity movement). In these cases (and many others—her discussion of rape and the gap between actual statistics of victimization and the perceived fear of the likeliness that one will be raped was rather eye-opening for me), Kipnis shows a truly versatile flair for questioning our comfortably held assessments of the female experience.
Minor complaints: I’m not sure that The Female Thing is as cohesive a text as it could be—I for one, could have certainly used a ‘let’s put the pieces together now’ type of conclusion—but each topic (Envy, Sex, Dirt, and Vulnerability) is approached with such a fresh perspective that I’m happy to have read what could have easily been free-standing essays all together. And granted, Kipnis’ sarcasm and irony is spread on a little thick at times—and she’s far too fond of suggestive ellipses—but, all things considered, these are balanced rather gracefully. (A notable example of this is found in the final chapter, when Kipnis takes on the indomitable Andrea Dworkin, whose work and feminist legacy Kipnis has frequently--albeit rather playfully--challenged. Here, Dworkin is described as “a bit unhinged,” but nevertheless is still a “gripping—and symptomatic—figure…” when teasing out the many contradictions at work within “female emotional life.”)
But all knit-picking aside, Kipnis has certainly provided a valuable trampoline for us to spring from. As she says at the very end of her book, “A full accounting of the female situation at the moment would need to start roughly here.”
April 1, 2020
I saw some of the negative reviews before I started this book, and through the first three sections I didn’t get why people were so against it. The author had interesting points and challenged some of my beliefs in a really interesting ways. And then I got to the the last section about female vulnerability. And now I am filled with rage. The author tries to retain the style of academic curiosity; I can almost hear her saying something like “just hear me out, I’m just playing devil’s advocate.” However, this does nothing to excuse the rampant victim blaming, disbelief of women’s lived experiences, and almost complete dismissal of the power dynamics involved in sexual assault. The women she used as examples were either, in her estimation, delusional, allowing things these things to take place, or voluntarily releasing their own power by daring to admit that these events affected them in any negative way. This treatment of women who were brave enough to speak out about their experiences is disgusting, and this author should be ashamed of herself.
April 11, 2007
"... when it come to the female situation, contradictions speckle the landscape, like ingrown hairs after a bad bikini wax." So writes Kipnis in the preface of the book, which is about the contradictions of being a modern woman. This is the third book that I read by her, and I picked it up mainly because she is so incredibly witty, insightful, and hilarious. Her Against Love: A Polemic is the best book that I've read on the subject of marriage. I don't know what kind of feminist Kipnis is (I've lost track of different kinds), but I find myself agreeing with her quite often. She picks four different areas in which women are struggling, and it's not a patriarchal conspiracy that is holding them back, but their own internal contradictions. I especially liked her analysis of how feminism played into the hands of capitalism and a consumerist society.
March 8, 2013
Well researched, wonderfully poetic, and at times (the essays on Sex and Dirt) quite fierce and funny all at the same time. Even if you don't agree with everything Laura Kipnis has to say in this short, but gripping tome, I think it's an interesting social commentary that everyone in our post modern world should read. We've definitely made progress, but there's still a lot more progress that needs to be made, and maybe a good place to start is looking within ourselves.
I am intrigued to hear her lecture at Elmhurst College on Narcissism: A Defense once it's rescheduled, (It was originally supposed to take place March 5, but we had a big snow storm so it was cancelled) as I like that she speaks her mind no matter what.
I am intrigued to hear her lecture at Elmhurst College on Narcissism: A Defense once it's rescheduled, (It was originally supposed to take place March 5, but we had a big snow storm so it was cancelled) as I like that she speaks her mind no matter what.
August 12, 2008
This book was frustrating because I could not for the life of me tell when Kipnis was being sarcastic, funny, serious, or just what her position was on anything. In a way, that made it interesting, because it forced me to think about my own opinions. But mostly it just made me want to throw the book at the next biological determinist I see. And I agree with the reviewers who said it reads like Cosmo - which, in my opinion, only undermines any point she might be trying to make.
March 18, 2020
I didn't agree with all of the author's interpretations, but that's okay; part of the purpose of reading is to see different viewpoints and possibly expand our own. Kipnis has an engaging voice, and the book has a nice balance of research and lightness.
June 19, 2009
Generally speaking, I thought this was a better book than Against Love, which I found quite mediocre and unmemorable. There were some contradictions and things I disagreed with (well, a lot I disagreed with), but it was more of an *interesting* book. Another short diatribe related to sexuality and gender, this one covers four themes: Envy, Sex, Dirt, Vulnerability. Envy was the blandest chapter, followed by Sex, which is mostly about female orgasm. I found myself disagreeing with a lot, but it was an interesting chapter with some good sources (I really would have liked endnotes). Dirt is about some innate desire women have for things to be clean, which I definitely think is not true. Possibly for a majority of women, yes, but not as large a majority as Kipnis would have you think. The last section is the one that I most want to comment on, though. I thought I'd like it the most, because the Vulnerability chapter is about rape and sexual violence, and this is a topic I'm interested in as a feminist. Unfortunately, I went from disagreement to rage as I read through Kipnis's thoughts on the subject. In the rest of the book, she seems to identify somewhat with feminism, though she has her issues. Here, she calls feminists ridiculous, and doesn't really seem to agree with anything feminist, though it's a little more complicated since she's dealing with an area where feminists split widely (think the pro-porn/anti-porn and pro-sex work/anti-prostitution camps).
The most infuriating part is the finale, where Kipnis builds up to two personal stories, one told by Naomi Wolf and the other by Andrea Dworkin. She says some mildly annoying things before that point, downplaying the significance of rape, implying that feminists overemphasize it and that we don't concern ourselves enough with male prison rape, even subtly seeming to imply that rape should not be a big deal, even if it happens. She mentions that some feminists consider rape worse than death in a way that seems to refute the point, which triggered my anger. But then we get to the two stories. First is Wolf's memory of a situation in which Harold Bloom touched her thigh after drinking together at a dinner party and made her uncomfortable. Now I'm not saying that the facts are necessarily true, but Kipnis doesn't dispute them. Her issue is that she thinks Wolf has far overblown the incident, which she calls "hand-on-knee" (I think most women would agree that there is a big difference between knee and thigh). I'm very bothered with anyone refusing to let a victim of any sort of sexual harrassment tell her own story and experience the incident in her own way. Who is Kipnis to tell Wolf that a hand on her thigh was insignificant? In certain contexts, such a touch can be highly disturbing and unwanted. There's also a touch of victim blaming, when Kipnis focuses on Wolf's own desire to meet with the professor (though it is entirely possible that this was purely intellectual). Even if a woman does have a crush on a man, it is completely acceptable for her to decide that she does not want this touch, at this time. Kipnis should really consider reading the anthology Yes Means Yes, to understand that *all* touch should be a matter of mutual choice and understanding. Then it goes on to Dworkin's story. I may not like Dworkin generally, and I may disagree with her all-sex-is-rape line, but when Kipnis described Dworkin's experience of what she believes was rape and then more or less discounts it, I felt physically ill. Whether or not the rape occurred, any woman who wakes up, feeling a pain deep in her vagina, and gushing blood after having had a couple of cocktails and feeling woozy, has every right to be terrified. Kipnis suggests that because of Dworkin's experiences with rape, because of her writings that suggest, in Kipnis's view, a desire for rape at some level, she must have made it up or at least have wanted it to be true. I may not agree with the way Dworkin thinks about sex and violence, but I would never suggest that an experience she describes didn't happen, just because she's been raped before, just because she seems obsessed with the subject. Using this claim to finish up a book on the "female psyche" is appalling and deplorable.
The most infuriating part is the finale, where Kipnis builds up to two personal stories, one told by Naomi Wolf and the other by Andrea Dworkin. She says some mildly annoying things before that point, downplaying the significance of rape, implying that feminists overemphasize it and that we don't concern ourselves enough with male prison rape, even subtly seeming to imply that rape should not be a big deal, even if it happens. She mentions that some feminists consider rape worse than death in a way that seems to refute the point, which triggered my anger. But then we get to the two stories. First is Wolf's memory of a situation in which Harold Bloom touched her thigh after drinking together at a dinner party and made her uncomfortable. Now I'm not saying that the facts are necessarily true, but Kipnis doesn't dispute them. Her issue is that she thinks Wolf has far overblown the incident, which she calls "hand-on-knee" (I think most women would agree that there is a big difference between knee and thigh). I'm very bothered with anyone refusing to let a victim of any sort of sexual harrassment tell her own story and experience the incident in her own way. Who is Kipnis to tell Wolf that a hand on her thigh was insignificant? In certain contexts, such a touch can be highly disturbing and unwanted. There's also a touch of victim blaming, when Kipnis focuses on Wolf's own desire to meet with the professor (though it is entirely possible that this was purely intellectual). Even if a woman does have a crush on a man, it is completely acceptable for her to decide that she does not want this touch, at this time. Kipnis should really consider reading the anthology Yes Means Yes, to understand that *all* touch should be a matter of mutual choice and understanding. Then it goes on to Dworkin's story. I may not like Dworkin generally, and I may disagree with her all-sex-is-rape line, but when Kipnis described Dworkin's experience of what she believes was rape and then more or less discounts it, I felt physically ill. Whether or not the rape occurred, any woman who wakes up, feeling a pain deep in her vagina, and gushing blood after having had a couple of cocktails and feeling woozy, has every right to be terrified. Kipnis suggests that because of Dworkin's experiences with rape, because of her writings that suggest, in Kipnis's view, a desire for rape at some level, she must have made it up or at least have wanted it to be true. I may not agree with the way Dworkin thinks about sex and violence, but I would never suggest that an experience she describes didn't happen, just because she's been raped before, just because she seems obsessed with the subject. Using this claim to finish up a book on the "female psyche" is appalling and deplorable.
September 7, 2010
Kipnis is the sort of woman I'd enjoy watching dissect a crowd of intellectuals, then sitting back and discussing it with her. Her mind, and tongue are razor sharp and she has that mystical ability to see what's plain behind the show and pomp of a lot of modern thought. No small feat.
Against Love, her poorly named polemic against relationships, or more specifically against marriage--though titled so--was a rip roaring ride of research, biting wit, cleverness and general disregard for the common expectations of good behaviour when dealing with topics like love and marriage. If you haven't read it, do.
This short book never quite reached the fevered pitch of Against Love, and in some senses you could almsot feel her stepping gingerly lest she engage the entire feminist cadre against her. The closest she gets to her true form of freewheeling intellectual destruction is in the chapter about the elusive female orgasm. The farthest while discussing rape. An uneven pace despite the brevity of the book.
However, I think the book might be good primer to anyone interested in gender studies. Particularly as a jumping off point to other works that might expand more deeply.
she ends the book with a valid description of a couple paradoxes of the modern idea of women as viewed through the lens of feminism and declares from that point is where a true look at the issue must begin. An odd sort of way to end a book. A page taken from the fluff passing as a heavy-handed appeal for a trilogy ala Angelina Jolie's Salt perhaps? Whetting our appetites for her real next novel? or testing the grounds to see how much flame is roused from this?
a couple interesting threads of thought:
1. the idea that the preternatural mother instinct and mother bonding with child is actually a convenient construction of modern (or recent, historically at least) thought.
2. that until the 1920s a goodly part of a doctors work was to deal with feminine hysteria. The cure for which was often manual genital massage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_h...
there are many more interesting morsels layered throughout the book and while they all tend toward her case--if she was actually making a case--even combined they failed, for me, to raise a coherent thread of thought in any particular direction. this is more like a review of the state of things than a discorse, or argument put forth. which in some way is a shame as where kipnis shines brightest is when she's dismantling some unsuspecting hacks work with the sheer violence of her thought.
alas, perhaps the next book..
Against Love, her poorly named polemic against relationships, or more specifically against marriage--though titled so--was a rip roaring ride of research, biting wit, cleverness and general disregard for the common expectations of good behaviour when dealing with topics like love and marriage. If you haven't read it, do.
This short book never quite reached the fevered pitch of Against Love, and in some senses you could almsot feel her stepping gingerly lest she engage the entire feminist cadre against her. The closest she gets to her true form of freewheeling intellectual destruction is in the chapter about the elusive female orgasm. The farthest while discussing rape. An uneven pace despite the brevity of the book.
However, I think the book might be good primer to anyone interested in gender studies. Particularly as a jumping off point to other works that might expand more deeply.
she ends the book with a valid description of a couple paradoxes of the modern idea of women as viewed through the lens of feminism and declares from that point is where a true look at the issue must begin. An odd sort of way to end a book. A page taken from the fluff passing as a heavy-handed appeal for a trilogy ala Angelina Jolie's Salt perhaps? Whetting our appetites for her real next novel? or testing the grounds to see how much flame is roused from this?
a couple interesting threads of thought:
1. the idea that the preternatural mother instinct and mother bonding with child is actually a convenient construction of modern (or recent, historically at least) thought.
2. that until the 1920s a goodly part of a doctors work was to deal with feminine hysteria. The cure for which was often manual genital massage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_h...
there are many more interesting morsels layered throughout the book and while they all tend toward her case--if she was actually making a case--even combined they failed, for me, to raise a coherent thread of thought in any particular direction. this is more like a review of the state of things than a discorse, or argument put forth. which in some way is a shame as where kipnis shines brightest is when she's dismantling some unsuspecting hacks work with the sheer violence of her thought.
alas, perhaps the next book..
Read
April 25, 2013Well researched, wonderfully poetic, and at times (the essays on Sex and Dirt) quite fierce and funny all at the same time. Even if you don't agree with everything Laura Kipnis has to say in this short, but gripping tome, I think it's an interesting social commentary that everyone in our post modern world should read. We've definitely made progress, but there's still a lot more progress that needs to be made, and maybe a good place to start is looking within ourselves.
I am intrigued to hear her lecture at Elmhurst College on Narcissism: A Defense once it's rescheduled, (It was originally supposed to take place March 5, but we had a big snow storm so it was cancelled) as I like that she speaks her mind no matter what. The lecture was rescheduled for today, April 24, 2013. It was an easy commute by Metra to Elmhurst College. It's a small but beautiful campus and Laura Kipnis was great! In her speech she said that narcissism is an anxiety about ourselves and our relationships at the moment. She deconstructed the clinical definition of narcissism and said as our society and sense of self shift, so does this word and how it's defined. Which also raised an interesting question: Does leisure = narcissism? The simple answer is no. Having time to explore other activities isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's how we discover new things about ourselves and reinvent ourselves in a way that just might surprise us. How much work does it take to uphold a societal system? Why do we have to work so much when we have so much abundance out there that just needs to be redistributed evenly across the board? Again, there are no easy answers for these questions, but I was glad she started this conversation and that I could be a part of this dialogue. I hope to attend another of her lectures in the future and in the meantime, I need to read her other books.
I am intrigued to hear her lecture at Elmhurst College on Narcissism: A Defense once it's rescheduled, (It was originally supposed to take place March 5, but we had a big snow storm so it was cancelled) as I like that she speaks her mind no matter what. The lecture was rescheduled for today, April 24, 2013. It was an easy commute by Metra to Elmhurst College. It's a small but beautiful campus and Laura Kipnis was great! In her speech she said that narcissism is an anxiety about ourselves and our relationships at the moment. She deconstructed the clinical definition of narcissism and said as our society and sense of self shift, so does this word and how it's defined. Which also raised an interesting question: Does leisure = narcissism? The simple answer is no. Having time to explore other activities isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's how we discover new things about ourselves and reinvent ourselves in a way that just might surprise us. How much work does it take to uphold a societal system? Why do we have to work so much when we have so much abundance out there that just needs to be redistributed evenly across the board? Again, there are no easy answers for these questions, but I was glad she started this conversation and that I could be a part of this dialogue. I hope to attend another of her lectures in the future and in the meantime, I need to read her other books.
January 11, 2021
What Kipnis is trying to ask (sometimes unforgivingly, always cheekily) is if the more modern problems of feminism and femininity are self-made — by women, for women...or whatever artisanal feminine hygiene products say. She explores how women "fail in advance" in narratives they now largely control, especially in what she coins the "feminine industrial complex" where one woman's insecurities are another's quarterly sales goals. In four parts, Kipnis wonders if equality can ever be achieved when women have never particularly been satisfied by the so-called gains of their male counterparts (who wants to grind at the office for 60 hours a week? who wants to shower amongst soap scum and loose hair? who wants to be responsible for disappointing sex?) and casually explores capitalism's need to thrust women in the work force (for cheaper than ever) while still expecting them to give birth at a rate that maintains future production. The last section, Vulnerability, will make some scream (or throw the book at a wall), but there's something inarguably correct about the regressive modern narrative of female fragility and how if you expand the definition of injury, you're left with far too much opportunity to feel injured. She retells the famous (pre me-too era) stories of Dworkin and Watts and wonders if they've done anything to advance women's liberation other than 1) make women very afraid and 2) give both of those women fabulous book deals. This isn't for everyone and I myself sighed in some of the more judgmental parts (first because HEY don't judge me and second because while I don't blame The Patriarchy for capitalism, I should be allowed to) but it is a thoughtful, well-researched, and extremely fun read by a woman asking us all to grow up a little.
April 1, 2012
Such clear vision! Laura Kipnis manages to look, open-eyed, at all the things women do to each other, as well as those things we allow to happen to us, in defining ourselves as a gender. Yet, this isn't a heavy read - it's fun and full of humour, both gentle and sharp. Kipnis is a well-known writer on so-called women's issues, and here she lays it on the line, asking why we take on the responsibility for housekeeping, why we wallow in envy and vulnerability instead of being strong, why we allow the depiction of our normally womanly functions as dirty.
Way back when I was breastfeeding my babies, one of my associates shuddered with horror at the thought. "That's disgusting," she said, "My breasts are for my husband." I wondered then, and still wonder now, how such wonderfully useful appendages became only appropriate for sexual satisfaction. It's easy to say it's because men wanted it that way, but, as Kipnis says, they've been aided and abetted by women.
I highly recommend this book for some true "aha!" moments and many wry laughs as you recognize yourself in the pages. It's something all women should read, and then leave around for the men in their life to read. The lessons are many, but the writing is so delightful you barely notice them going down...
Way back when I was breastfeeding my babies, one of my associates shuddered with horror at the thought. "That's disgusting," she said, "My breasts are for my husband." I wondered then, and still wonder now, how such wonderfully useful appendages became only appropriate for sexual satisfaction. It's easy to say it's because men wanted it that way, but, as Kipnis says, they've been aided and abetted by women.
I highly recommend this book for some true "aha!" moments and many wry laughs as you recognize yourself in the pages. It's something all women should read, and then leave around for the men in their life to read. The lessons are many, but the writing is so delightful you barely notice them going down...
December 28, 2015
a nice collection of feminist essays. one of the first books/essays I've read that challenges false dichotomy and false binary choices between men/women male/female in heterosexual relationship, both the personal, the career, and the political. it's refreshing to read someone who questions male privilege from the perspective of "is that something we actually want?". and not assuming that those who have power and privilege are actually happy with what they have.
My favorite excerpt from the book, on pg 71, " But what happens when we think about female sexuality as a totality: pleasure AND pregnancy, AND the contemporary sexual bargain, namely, who raises the next generation? Why is it that female sexuality can be re-imagined at one end of the equation but not the other? After all, there are ways to organize society and sexuality that don't create false choices--once again, it depends how you decide to tell the story."
the essays in this book address several aspects of the female psyche in this way...what happens if we reframe the questions? What happens if we stop looking at these issues through false binaries?
My favorite excerpt from the book, on pg 71, " But what happens when we think about female sexuality as a totality: pleasure AND pregnancy, AND the contemporary sexual bargain, namely, who raises the next generation? Why is it that female sexuality can be re-imagined at one end of the equation but not the other? After all, there are ways to organize society and sexuality that don't create false choices--once again, it depends how you decide to tell the story."
the essays in this book address several aspects of the female psyche in this way...what happens if we reframe the questions? What happens if we stop looking at these issues through false binaries?
October 24, 2007
I appreciate how this books discusses a variety of ideas central to feminist theory without disintegrating into an lengthy philosophic tome. For a serious student of philosophy, the casual references to Shulamith Firestone and Judith Butler may appear superficial. But I think this is an excellent book to buy a friend who has nascent ideas about her own feminism, but just hasn't articulated them yet.
"[T]he drawback to femininity, as currently construed, is that it can never be successfully attained. Or not once consumer culture got into the act, since in this configuration, femininity revolves around the anxiety of female defectivness to perpetuate itself."
"[T]he drawback to femininity, as currently construed, is that it can never be successfully attained. Or not once consumer culture got into the act, since in this configuration, femininity revolves around the anxiety of female defectivness to perpetuate itself."
February 18, 2015
Kipnis' essays are a brancingly insightful, well researched collection into four key components that define the modern day female experience. Her willingness to examine the fundamental concepts of feminism from a more queer friendly, interdisciplinary perspective, and to add context with regard to other dominant lines of thinking result in clearly presented arguments that will give some, if not all, readers cause to rethink the dominant stance on class, race and fear that continue to define the experience that biological females have. If you come with an XX set of chromosomes, it's well worth the read.
December 11, 2012
I had to grit my teeth to get through this one. I know Kipnis is a somewhat well-known feminist academic, so I wanted to get familiar with her work, but oy. I would have gotten through it more quickly if I hadn't been compelled to stop and make sarcastic comments in the margins every third paragraph.
December 31, 2014
Not my usual I stumbled on this via Goodreads and thought why not. I have read Naomi Wolf and some controversial (but often funny) Camille Paglia as well. Strident feminists like Andrea Dworkin just scare the hell out of me. I had no idea about Kipnis' background before reading this; I actually thought this was her first book. Oops!
In terms of readability it's easy; short and broken down into 4 chapters. In "Dirt," she examined why women seem more deeply affected, almost manic about dirt than men. Included were several amusing anecdotes about how women rail against their MANFOLK (love that word, sorry) refusing to clean or simply doing a terrible half hearted job when they succomb to nagging. She offered a few theories here. Perhaps women see controlling dirt as a way to manage a world that still doesn't quite have the right spot/niche for women. Do they frantically clean to eke out a place for themselves? I don't know. Sometimes we just like a clean home. OCD might also come into play. And I'll be honest here I would be leery of any man who was too fussy and into cleaning. Not hot. I would wonder how uptight he was about more important things. So, while this chapter was entertaining I found that the subject was entirely open for personal speculation/preferences. She had an interesting commentary on how cleaning products are aimed at women. Just as the cosmetic industry has the slick ads aimed at women insecure about their appearance, commercials seem to implore women to have the cleanest homes. As if having the cleanest home gives you the competitive edge! Many magazines (under the auspices of self improvement/help) have 'experts' who dole out advice in using 'the girlfriend' approach. This is really a studied casual approach telling them how to look/act/smell in order to be the best version of themselves. Commercials do much of the same thing. Since the ad agencies started hiring women, Kipnis observed that only other women know how to make another woman feel vulnerable and inadequate. Salient point indeed. Incidentally, after I read this chapter I was at a store and saw some Biore cleansers. Guess what the label read? "Don't be DIRTY". Now that's catchy as a slogan, but it really stuck out because I had just read about this trend. The slogan clearly states dirty as a double entendre. OH NO! Dirty is bad! Which brings us to this bit: at some point in history society became obsessed with women's virtue and purity (read: sexual celibacy/chastity). Pure, sexless = good! Sexual = bad, dirty, and dangerous..which apparently is too scary. So I had to laugh at that undercurrent still floating around advertising campaigns. As the famous 80's Virgina Slims slogan said "Baby, you've come a long way!
In the second chapter,"Sex," Kipnis talked about the differences in anatomy in men and women. She commented on the unfairness of how easy it is for men to have sexual pleasure and how much more difficult it is for women based on anatomical differences. The elusive 'g spot' and how a high percentage of women polled cannot climax with intercourse alone. This sets women and men up for constant miscommunication, disappointment and frustration (often kept silent or shared with close confidants only) which she claimed must have been a practical joke of nature. Ok then!
In the chapter called "Envy," she wrote about women's envy of how males were treated in society but also about other women. The 'grass is greener' theory was applied here. Stay at home mothers seemed to go insane with boredom. Working mothers felt immense guilt, pressure to be perfect and simmering resentment for having to do it all at once and with aplomb. I will say one thing here: women still do not respect the choices of other women. They judge, critique and comment on total stranger and that's weird. Is it borne out of insecurity with their own choices? The fabled 'grass is greener' syndrome? I think it's just because women are alwayys second guessing themselves. That and the so called 'sisterhood' in a bit of a myth. That subject is enough to fill several volumes, though.
In the final chapter, "Vulnerability," Kipnis shared the one spectre that loomed universally for women: rape. Polls of women from all walks of life confirmed that many women would see rape as a fate worse than death. Even going about daily mundane tasks a woman is aware, almost has to reconcile herself to the fact that she could be assualted. Kipnis' feeling was that this takes a great psychological toll on women. The dear is crippling for some, certainly restricts particular activities for others. Interestingly she noted that although rapes are on the decline statistically the media are still stirrng the pot in terms of fear mongering. Of course sensationalism and violence sells but this creates a climate of fear which is doing women do favors at all. Prison rapes, however, are still happening and Kipnis felt not enough is being done about it. She has a good point; not all of these criminals are violent offenders. Often prison rape is overlooked because we feel criminals are somehow not really victims anyway. This is an ethical issue and many of the rapists are the guards/people in power. My opionion is this: many of these people will be released at some point. It's best to mtiigate the violence they experience on the inside (including rape) so they aren't a ticking timebomb once they are released. Obviously this is a work in progress for the Bureau of Prisons.
The book was ok; I found her tone a little flippant on occasion. I think it made me take her less seriously. I was not offended by what she wrote it just had a very casual, almost colloquial tone. It comes down to style preference. If anything this book has some good topics to talk about with friends; it's broad enough that almost anyone would have a strong opinion about each chapter.
In terms of readability it's easy; short and broken down into 4 chapters. In "Dirt," she examined why women seem more deeply affected, almost manic about dirt than men. Included were several amusing anecdotes about how women rail against their MANFOLK (love that word, sorry) refusing to clean or simply doing a terrible half hearted job when they succomb to nagging. She offered a few theories here. Perhaps women see controlling dirt as a way to manage a world that still doesn't quite have the right spot/niche for women. Do they frantically clean to eke out a place for themselves? I don't know. Sometimes we just like a clean home. OCD might also come into play. And I'll be honest here I would be leery of any man who was too fussy and into cleaning. Not hot. I would wonder how uptight he was about more important things. So, while this chapter was entertaining I found that the subject was entirely open for personal speculation/preferences. She had an interesting commentary on how cleaning products are aimed at women. Just as the cosmetic industry has the slick ads aimed at women insecure about their appearance, commercials seem to implore women to have the cleanest homes. As if having the cleanest home gives you the competitive edge! Many magazines (under the auspices of self improvement/help) have 'experts' who dole out advice in using 'the girlfriend' approach. This is really a studied casual approach telling them how to look/act/smell in order to be the best version of themselves. Commercials do much of the same thing. Since the ad agencies started hiring women, Kipnis observed that only other women know how to make another woman feel vulnerable and inadequate. Salient point indeed. Incidentally, after I read this chapter I was at a store and saw some Biore cleansers. Guess what the label read? "Don't be DIRTY". Now that's catchy as a slogan, but it really stuck out because I had just read about this trend. The slogan clearly states dirty as a double entendre. OH NO! Dirty is bad! Which brings us to this bit: at some point in history society became obsessed with women's virtue and purity (read: sexual celibacy/chastity). Pure, sexless = good! Sexual = bad, dirty, and dangerous..which apparently is too scary. So I had to laugh at that undercurrent still floating around advertising campaigns. As the famous 80's Virgina Slims slogan said "Baby, you've come a long way!
In the second chapter,"Sex," Kipnis talked about the differences in anatomy in men and women. She commented on the unfairness of how easy it is for men to have sexual pleasure and how much more difficult it is for women based on anatomical differences. The elusive 'g spot' and how a high percentage of women polled cannot climax with intercourse alone. This sets women and men up for constant miscommunication, disappointment and frustration (often kept silent or shared with close confidants only) which she claimed must have been a practical joke of nature. Ok then!
In the chapter called "Envy," she wrote about women's envy of how males were treated in society but also about other women. The 'grass is greener' theory was applied here. Stay at home mothers seemed to go insane with boredom. Working mothers felt immense guilt, pressure to be perfect and simmering resentment for having to do it all at once and with aplomb. I will say one thing here: women still do not respect the choices of other women. They judge, critique and comment on total stranger and that's weird. Is it borne out of insecurity with their own choices? The fabled 'grass is greener' syndrome? I think it's just because women are alwayys second guessing themselves. That and the so called 'sisterhood' in a bit of a myth. That subject is enough to fill several volumes, though.
In the final chapter, "Vulnerability," Kipnis shared the one spectre that loomed universally for women: rape. Polls of women from all walks of life confirmed that many women would see rape as a fate worse than death. Even going about daily mundane tasks a woman is aware, almost has to reconcile herself to the fact that she could be assualted. Kipnis' feeling was that this takes a great psychological toll on women. The dear is crippling for some, certainly restricts particular activities for others. Interestingly she noted that although rapes are on the decline statistically the media are still stirrng the pot in terms of fear mongering. Of course sensationalism and violence sells but this creates a climate of fear which is doing women do favors at all. Prison rapes, however, are still happening and Kipnis felt not enough is being done about it. She has a good point; not all of these criminals are violent offenders. Often prison rape is overlooked because we feel criminals are somehow not really victims anyway. This is an ethical issue and many of the rapists are the guards/people in power. My opionion is this: many of these people will be released at some point. It's best to mtiigate the violence they experience on the inside (including rape) so they aren't a ticking timebomb once they are released. Obviously this is a work in progress for the Bureau of Prisons.
The book was ok; I found her tone a little flippant on occasion. I think it made me take her less seriously. I was not offended by what she wrote it just had a very casual, almost colloquial tone. It comes down to style preference. If anything this book has some good topics to talk about with friends; it's broad enough that almost anyone would have a strong opinion about each chapter.
September 15, 2017
As someone who has had some education in women's and gender studies I am able to see the pitfalls of this book. However, I am scared of what this book would do to the opinions of someone who isn't able to think critically about it. Over generalizing and very trans exclusive, I can't take this book seriously as "feminist" literature. I put the book down when she started portraying rape (especially rape of boys and men) in a light that is just not accurate to the realities of our world.
February 4, 2019
While I certainly don't agree with everything the author claims, it is important to look at other side of an argument. Making oneself intellectually uncomfortable and persevering and not automatically shutting down when confronted with positions you don't automatically agree with is vital for development a strong and clear sense of one's views on any subject.
October 14, 2020
Everyone has a right to a healthy sex life. Kipnis digs in and gives us all permission to find our happy place. She points out that too many women can't tell a guy what they want in bed ~ which leaves him "scarred". I love this because I truly believe that everyone needs to "rise to the occasion" in life. If someone isn't open to growth ... what are they doing?
January 16, 2018
the first three parts (envy, sex, dirt) brought up some interesting points and were worth the read, but the final section, Vulnerability, and its minimizing of sexual assault and rape were very off-putting
September 6, 2020
There are a lot of very interesting ideas in this little book, and they continue to be timely and relevant, possibly even more so now than when it was written in 2006. Reading it was a rewardingly thought-provoking way to spend an afternoon.
April 13, 2018
Many in my book club had issues with this book.. maybe too close to home? But I liked Kipnis bold casual voice and whether good or not, much of what she said resonated with me.
January 2, 2023
In my younger days, I put this out as my staff rec at Barnes and Noble. Laura Kipnis is never boring.
March 16, 2016
In The Female Thing, author Laura Kipnis, a professor of media studies at Northwestern University researches what she calls the “female thing.” To her she considers that the female psyche although much of the book focuses on the vagina through research and discussion on orgasm, rape, and sexual equality for women in pleasure, cleanliness, and confidence. I didn’t find any of her research or theses new but simply reminders that women still do not get the attention we need and desire in the bedroom. Kipnis also is quite funny in her wording and the way she addresses all the issues she brings up in The Female Thing. She breaks it up as: Envy, Sex, Dirt and Vulnerability. I found the sex chapter most interesting.
A few tidbits:
Please read what follows as an account of the female psyche at the twenty-first century mark, which is to say, in the aftermath of second-wave feminism and partway to gender equality, both factors having put many female things into question lately. [p.vii]
Face it, we all inhabit at post feminist world: it was, after all, feminism that brought women equal treatment under the law, voting rights, access to public life, some progress toward pay equity, and so on, and even the most diehard “I like being a woman” set, you don’t find too many arguing with the right to own property or wanting to hand back the vote or anything silly like that. [p. 6]
She wants to have orgasms the womanly way: during penetration, even though the therapists assure her that some 75 percent of women don’t. [p. 40]
Most recent studies still put the number of women who don’t consistently have orgasms as high as 58 percent (The Hite Report: A Nationwide Study of Female Sexuality) [p. 42]
While not an insurmountable obstacle, some percentage of the male population has yet to fathom these female anatomical complexities, despite the ongoing education efforts. And why were the organs of sexual pleasure and those of sexual intercourse not combined into one efficient package, as with the lucky male? [p. 44]
Many report that they simply can’t have orgasms with a penis inside them because they often dislike, distrust, or don’t want to “open up to” the men on the other end of them . . . [p. 55]
She Comes First is similarly girl-friendly: here men learn how to identify the eighteen parts (!) of the clitoris . . . [p. 56]
Orgasms are, needless to say, the Holy Grail, and male ineptitude the dark forest of ignorance through which the hero must traverse. Men! If only they could find the clitoris, the blundering idiots. [p. 57]
Proto-feminist novelist Doris Lessing also devotes a fair amount of attention to the dual-systems issue in her 1962 novel The Golden Notebook. Ella, a novelist, resents her lover Paul’s attempts to provide her with clitoral orgasms, which she regards as his flight from commitment and emotion. Even though the clitoral orgasms are far more powerful and thrilling, there’s “only one real female orgasm and that is when a man, for the whole of his need and desire, takes a woman and wants all her response.” [p. 60]
The G-spot is basically where the clitoris should have been located—this is, if sexual intercourse actually made sense from the standpoint of efficient female pleasure. [p. 63]
If you’re a chick, you’re sitting on some pretty valuable real estate. Is any other human body cavity so laden with symbolic value, not to mention actual monetary worth, particularly for exclusive access? [p. 123]
A few tidbits:
Please read what follows as an account of the female psyche at the twenty-first century mark, which is to say, in the aftermath of second-wave feminism and partway to gender equality, both factors having put many female things into question lately. [p.vii]
Face it, we all inhabit at post feminist world: it was, after all, feminism that brought women equal treatment under the law, voting rights, access to public life, some progress toward pay equity, and so on, and even the most diehard “I like being a woman” set, you don’t find too many arguing with the right to own property or wanting to hand back the vote or anything silly like that. [p. 6]
She wants to have orgasms the womanly way: during penetration, even though the therapists assure her that some 75 percent of women don’t. [p. 40]
Most recent studies still put the number of women who don’t consistently have orgasms as high as 58 percent (The Hite Report: A Nationwide Study of Female Sexuality) [p. 42]
While not an insurmountable obstacle, some percentage of the male population has yet to fathom these female anatomical complexities, despite the ongoing education efforts. And why were the organs of sexual pleasure and those of sexual intercourse not combined into one efficient package, as with the lucky male? [p. 44]
Many report that they simply can’t have orgasms with a penis inside them because they often dislike, distrust, or don’t want to “open up to” the men on the other end of them . . . [p. 55]
She Comes First is similarly girl-friendly: here men learn how to identify the eighteen parts (!) of the clitoris . . . [p. 56]
Orgasms are, needless to say, the Holy Grail, and male ineptitude the dark forest of ignorance through which the hero must traverse. Men! If only they could find the clitoris, the blundering idiots. [p. 57]
Proto-feminist novelist Doris Lessing also devotes a fair amount of attention to the dual-systems issue in her 1962 novel The Golden Notebook. Ella, a novelist, resents her lover Paul’s attempts to provide her with clitoral orgasms, which she regards as his flight from commitment and emotion. Even though the clitoral orgasms are far more powerful and thrilling, there’s “only one real female orgasm and that is when a man, for the whole of his need and desire, takes a woman and wants all her response.” [p. 60]
The G-spot is basically where the clitoris should have been located—this is, if sexual intercourse actually made sense from the standpoint of efficient female pleasure. [p. 63]
If you’re a chick, you’re sitting on some pretty valuable real estate. Is any other human body cavity so laden with symbolic value, not to mention actual monetary worth, particularly for exclusive access? [p. 123]
Displaying 1 - 30 of 76 reviews