Reconcilable Differences: Confronting Beauty, Pornography, and the Future of Feminism

by Lynn S. Chancer

This volume examines controversial faultlines in contemporary feminism―pornography, the beauty myth, sadomasochism, prostitution, and the issue of rape―from an original and provocative perspective. Lynn Chancer focuses on how, among many feminists, the concepts of sex and sexism became fragmented and mutually exclusive. Exploring the dichotomy between sex and sexism as it has developed through five current feminist debates, Chancer seeks to forge positions that bridge oppositions between unnecessary (and sometimes unwitting) "either/or" binaries. Chancer's book attempts to incorporate both the need for sexual freedom and the depth of sexist subordination into feminist thought and politics.

336 pages, Paperback

First published April 15, 1998

Reviews

[Jo · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read for all those interested in a nuanced and intersectional approach to feminist thought in theory and EVERY DAY LIFE

[Lara Torgesen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Lynn S. Chancer’s book Reconcilable Differences examines some of the issues on which feminists have been deeply divided over the past several decades and seeks to propose a middle ground or “third option” in the hopes that feminists can come together and realize that their differences are far less important than their commonalities. Some examples are the battles over beauty, pornography, prostitution, and sexual practices and freedoms. In some ways it can be viewed that feminism has changed the world, and yet in other ways it can be viewed that feminism has changed very little. The backlash and anti-feminist movements have worked against certain feminist agendas, even rolling back some of the progress that has been made. And if feminists are constantly divided among themselves and bicker over these polarizing issues, they stand to lose sight of a bigger picture. The arguing and bickering may also make it easier for anti-feminist movements to steal back from them what they have gained.

I really liked Chancer’s “big picture” view of feminism. She is able to present feminist debates without coming down on one polarized side or the other, but rather she looks for a third option by examining what the main goals are on each side and seeking a way to meet those goals without trampling the other side’s purposes. I especially liked her examination of the pornography battles of the 80’s and 90’s. When I first read essays from Catherine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin, I was so enthused. I’ve always hated the pornography industry—for their ability to grow filthy rich off the degradation and exploitation of women and girls. I also am drawn to the use of legal reasoning to make one’s case. I felt that MacKinnon and Dworkin had built such a powerful case for turning pornography into a violation of the civil rights of women. They included testimony after testimony of women who had been harmed some way because of pornography. One testimony in particular that I remember was of a violent rape that had occurred directly after an angry man had viewed a XXX film depicting a violent rape. I felt that the victim should be able to sue the film makers of that movie for their role in contributing to her rape. But then, as I read the counter-arguments to MacKinnon-Dworkin, I could feel myself slowly deflating as I realized they are right. I also strongly believe in the First Amendment and our right to free speech and freedom of expression. Once we set a precedent for being able to sue anyone who might have “put an idea” into someone else’s head that could arguably have contributed to a despicable act, we go down a very dangerous road. All film-makers, authors, song-writers, and artists would have to worry about whether their work might somehow “incite” someone to commit a crime. The makers of “The Burning Bed” might be sued if a battered wife got an idea to kill her husband from that movie. In the end, we have to hold people responsible for their own actions. We also need to understand that, while the pornography industry has boomed in the last several decades, the rates of rape and violence against women have actually gone down, so there’s not even a correlation argument much less a causation argument to be made. Chancer examines the underlying goals behind each argument: challenging the themes of hegemonic pornography while protecting general freedoms including women’s freedoms. She proposes that there is a way to come together to protect the goals on each side: to work together to dismantle gender bias and social inequities stopping short of censorship. I liked Chancer’s ideas, especially because I have always been able to see and agree with both sides of most feminist arguments.