How would you compare Meg Ryan's feminine sex play with Elvis's sex moves in his polk salad annie stage performance? Do you think Elvis is suggesting a more thrusting violent sex?
He was called 'Elvis the Pelvis' by the press during the beginning of his career and was only filmed from the waist up for a while? He hated the suggestion that he was being sexually provocative on stage.
Does this not exemplify how contradictory the male patriarchy, evident in American society during Elvis's rise to celebrity, was? To me, the importance of the Meg Ryan scene was more about place and time (in a restaurant, when everyone was eating.) That was also her expose, imo, as not everyone in the restaurant would know the conversation that led up to her performance.
Almost a sex in public because it's so taboo challenge. Some people watching such an event, may assume she had a secreted sex toy in play. Would that alter the analysis you posted?

:up:

lampshade — fdrake

A new word, for me a least. Actually, a new use for an old word. "To intentionally call attention to the improbable, incongruent, or clichéd nature of an element or situation featured in a work of fiction within the work itself."

Also, as you suggested, you may be over-analyzing the scene and giving the movie more significance than it deserves or needs.

polk salad annie — universeness

Poke Salad Annie because:



Pokeweed is toxic, but if prepared correctly can be eaten, which makes you wonder why anyone would. I remember it as a kid. It grows just about anywhere.

A southern US delicacy. @Hanover eats it with fried livermush and Krispee Kreeme doughnuts.

You have to boil it twice. It tastes like spinach.

You have to boil it twice. It tastes like spinach. — frank

Thanks. I still don't think I'll try it.

Here are altogether too many words about it. — fdrake

Apparently, only the tip of the iceberg. There are multiple critical analyses of not only that scene but the whole film. Interdisciplinary theses concerning how we have been historically influenced by romantic comedy, especially from Hollywood.
One example: ( and related papers)
(PDF) Romantic comedies of Hollywood a critical analysis | Chayan Acharya - Academia.edu
https://www.academia.edu/41766394/Romantic_comedies_of_Hollywood_a_critical_analysis#:~:text=This%20thesis%20examines%20the%20history%20of%20the%20genre%2C,politics%20in%20the%20course%20of%20the%20twentieth%20century.
[ sorry, don't know how to reduce all the blue ]

When I watched the film - all those years ago - I took it at face value - an entertaining rom-com with a predictable end. No idea as to its effect or impact on people concerned with male/female roles or gender politics.

Initially, I thought you were having a bit of a laugh. Nevertheless, your post and follow-up provide much food for thought. I'll have a go at responding...

The scene is ultimately conservative, except for the lady at the end.

[...] it embodies the whole "dance" of patriarchal feminine sexuality, rather than subverting it. — fdrake

I hadn't thought of it in terms of 'conservatism' before. But yes, I suppose humans have always danced or interacted to the tune of love and sex. Standard relationships. Stimulus/response. Hence the continuing popularity of watching romcoms, even with updated awareness of different genders and situations. Hollywood happy endings. ( I read that Nora Ephron was overruled. She wanted the ending to reflect reality)

Not sure whether the intention was to subvert 'patriarchal feminine sexuality' - whatever that is.
Is it the expectation that a woman isn't a woman unless she is married and has kids?
Or that casual sex, multiple partners and sex outside of marriage were unacceptable acts for women.
For men only. An old patriarchal taboo about to be turned on its head.

Yes, I see you have explained this in terms of 'female dignity' in the sense that Harry seems to disrespect women through serial casual sex. I can't remember if we are given the perspective of all his 'girlfriends'. And yet, from what I remember he was married and his divorce caused him all kinds of agony. Perhaps a prime example of the masculine - wanting to 'sow his wild oats' before a settled monogamy with all-important kids.
I should watch it again...perhaps.

Whatever subversion there is in the scene is only Sally's... vocalisation... of the shame/desire bind patriarchal sexuality demands of both of them - she ain't supposed to be that direct about it. Which opens up an interesting space of merely aesthetic adherence to post-patriarchal norms of eroticism and romance, while in fact embodying them. — fdrake

I'm not sure what you are saying here. Is it that there will always be the hope and expectation of mutual climax with some performance anxiety attached? Young males/females impressed/trained by the arts as to what normative roles to play in the 'dance'.

Like radical feminist couples defaulting to patriarchal splits of household labour when times get tough, women letting men "put them on their front again", and men expecting it. The patriarchal generation of desire tends to prove stronger, psychogenically, than transgression against it. — fdrake

Does this follow, given that a radical feminist couple might consist of 2 females or 2 males, or any combination of 'masculinities and femininities...?
Confused as to the description of traditional women 'letting' men put them 'on their front' again.

The crone at the end lampshades that dynamic - she's an anonymous middle aged woman. She simultaneously expresses a desire for genuine satisfaction, but it's directed toward the mere emulation of satisfaction. She instead will receive lunch, off screen. — fdrake

An interesting transformation from 'lady' to 'crone'. Do any of the labels apply?
Is it that the quip supplied by Crystal is only about the desire for an orgasm, or even a simulation?

The scene is ultimately conservative, except for the lady at the end. — fdrake

Is it surprising that a woman of a certain age ( a 'crone' ?!) still has sexual drives/needs?
Is it that a post-menopausal woman is no longer seen as attractive? Dried-up. So after her man has left through death or divorce, there are fewer available options. She would like some/more of that.

Basically that movie wouldn't make much sense if it was set in a polycule. Would be over in about 15 minutes. — fdrake

Well, a lot of things could be over in 15 minutes but I'm not sure that a polycule would qualify.
It would be more complex. With an interplay of male/female roles, hierarchies and jealousies...I imagine...

About sex and gender. Philosophical theories.

In feminist philosophy, this distinction has generated a lively debate. Central questions include: What does it mean for gender to be distinct from sex, if anything at all? How should we understand the claim that gender depends on social and/or cultural factors? What does it mean to be gendered woman, man, or genderqueer? This entry outlines and discusses distinctly feminist debates on sex and gender considering both historical and more contemporary positions.


Conclusion
This entry first looked at feminist objections to biological determinism and the claim that gender is socially constructed. Next, it examined feminist critiques of prevalent understandings of gender and sex, and the distinction itself. In response to these concerns, the entry looked at how a unified women’s category could be articulated for feminist political purposes. This illustrated that gender metaphysics — or what it is to be a woman or a man or a genderqueer person — is still very much a live issue. And although contemporary feminist philosophical debates have questioned some of the tenets and details of the original 1960s sex/gender distinction, most still hold onto the view that gender is about social factors and that it is (in some sense) distinct from biological sex. The jury is still out on what the best, the most useful, or (even) the correct definition of gender is. — Sex and Gender - SEP

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polk_Salad_Annie
"Polk Salad Annie" is a 1968 song written and performed by Tony Joe White.[1] Its lyrics describe the lifestyle of a poor rural Southern girl and her family. Traditionally, the term to describe the type of food highlighted in the song is polk or poke salad, a cooked greens dish made from pokeweed.[2] Its 1969 single release peaked at No. 8 on the Billboard Hot 100. In Canada, the song made No. 10 on the RPM Magazine Hot Singles chart. Elvis Presley's version also made the song popular.

***

Polk Salad Annie - Elvis Presley

Some you all never been down South too much
Some y'all never been South too
I'm gonna tell you a little story, so you'll understand what I'm talking about
Down there we have a plant that grows out in the woods and the fields
And it looks something like a turnip green
Everybody calls it Polk salad
Now that's Polk
Salad
Used to know a girl that lived down there and she'd go out in the evenings to pick a mess of it
Carry it home and cook it for supper, 'cause that's about all they had to eat
But they did all right
Down in Louisiana
Where the alligators grow so mean
Lived a girl that I swear to the world
Made the alligators look tame
Polk salad Annie
'Gators got your granny (shook, shook)
Everybody said it was a shame
For the mama was working on the chain-gang
A mean, vicious woman
Ah!
Everyday before suppertime
She'd go down by the truck patch
And pick her a mess of Polk salad
And carry it home in a tote sack
Polk salad Annie
'Gators got you granny (Ooo)
Everybody said it was a shame
Because the mama was working on the chain-gang
A wretched, spiteful, straight razor toting woman
Lord have mercy
Sock a little Polk salad to me
You know what
Her daddy was a lazy and no-account
Claimed he had a bad back
All her brothers were fit for
Stealing watermelons out of my truck patch
Polk salad Annie
'Gators got your granny (shook, shook)
Everybody said it was a shame
Because the mama was working on the chain-gang
Oh
He sock a little Polk salad to me
You know what need a meal mention
You sock a little (hey, hey, hey, yeah, yeah)
Sock a little Polk salad to me
You know what need a meal mention
Sock a little Polk salad you know what need a meal
Chang chang a chang chang
Chang chang a chang chang laga la la
Chang chang a chang chang laga...

Poke salad is correct. Polk is wrong.

I think what matters is the context and the way in which Elvis sings this song.
He sexualises it.
Watch his use of mike, thrusting fingers and I think he sings ' suck' rather than 'sock'.

In a January 17, 2014, interview with music journalist Ray Shasho, White explained the thought process behind the writing of "Polk Salad Annie" and "Rainy Night in Georgia".
I heard "Ode to Billie Joe" on the radio and I thought, man, how real, because I am Billie Joe, I know that life. I've been in the cotton fields. So I thought if I ever tried to write, I'm going to write about something I know about. At that time I was doing a lot of Elvis and John Lee Hooker onstage with my drummer. No original songs and I hadn't really thought about it. But after I heard Bobbie Gentry I sat down and thought … well I know about polk because I had ate a bunch of it and I knew about rainy nights because I spent a lot of rainy nights in Marietta, Georgia. So I was real lucky with my first tries to write something that was not only real and hit pretty close to the bone, but lasted that long. So it was kind of a guide for me then on through life to always try to write what I know about.[4] — Polk Salad Annie - wiki

Here's the original. No hyper-sexual male gyrations to distract from the story and social context of poor Annie. The singer/composer is no less masculine than Elvis but shows a little bit more understanding and compassion. He wrote about what he knew. Elvis was being Elvis. Or was he?

Tony Joe White - Polk Salad Annie

An interesting transformation from 'lady' to 'crone'. Do any of the labels apply? — Amity

It was a nod to Mary Daly's Gyn/Ecology, she calls middle aged and up women that make their own sets of norms "crones", especially if they criticise or re-evaluate patriarchy.

Initially, I thought you were having a bit of a laugh. — Amity

I try to make my jokes serious on here.

Not sure whether the intention was to subvert 'patriarchal feminine sexuality' - whatever that is. — Amity

I'm sure you know what it is if you've flirted with blokes before and felt like you were following a script. Every time one ought to do something for one's partner because it just seems right, a norm is at work.

The dynamic at play in the scene is a "chase" phase, where a man courts a woman and/or a woman invites a man to court her. She positions herself as an object of desire in an attempt to oblige the man to take her up on the offer, and he does what he can to keep the offer for the chase ongoing. It's in that dynamic that "no", rejection, denigration to keep someone at arm's length are all standard moves of the game.

Sally positions herself as an object of desire through the orgasm fake, and simultaneously denigrates Harry's sexual dalliances as trivial. What he has is construed as bad, and she shows him what he's missing. That equates herself as an object of desire with what Harry is lacking - sexual fidelity with her. It's an invitation to chase for the "something more" of a committed relationship.

Harry clearly gets turned on, and denigrated.

Is it the expectation that a woman isn't a woman unless she is married and has kids? — Amity

That's the final level. If you imagine desire as a process that ends in a woman being a housewife with kids, and the norms which guide her there - make her desire that - that's a norm in patriarchy. Or at least proximal to one. It cuts deeper than the end point though, how people flirt, what people's sexual expectations are. This affects what people desire and why; like wanting men being tall to fit in a "protector" role ("I just like tall men!"), or women being polite and supportive ("She just makes me feel at home!").

Perhaps a prime example of the masculine - wanting to 'sow his wild oats' before a settled monogamy with all-important kids. — Amity

Indeed. And he's using that trope, that he's capable of it to denigrate what Sally's got to offer (what she wants to happen). That's shame and creation of desire. She blows it out of the park by showing him that he could have mindblowing mega sex with her through how hot she fakes the orgasm. While making it also a fake. Shame, creation of desire etc.

The scene may as well be:
Harry: "What you want isn't good for me, what can you offer?"
Sally flusters.
Sally: "What I have is mindblowing, and your bad choices so far preclude it"
Harry flusters.

Is it that the quip supplied by Crystal is only about the desire for an orgasm, or even a simulation? — Amity

I get the impression that she's had a long life and really wants to have, or have had, what Sally has just shown. I interpret it like she really wants to be sexually satisfied but life in general, relationships included, haven't done it. Or I dunno maybe she just got horny hearing a beautiful woman convincingly orgasm.

Is it surprising that a woman of a certain age ( a 'crone' ?!) still has sexual drives/needs? — Amity

To me? No. I think people like to forget middle aged people are often horny as hell. I think what you said comes into it - "beauty fades" more for women (or so it's seen). Though "MILF" and "Cougar" are always popular search terms on porn sites. Motherhood and spinsterhood are also sexually objectified, equality!

It was a nod to Mary Daly's Gyn/Ecology, she calls middle aged and up women that make their own sets of norms "crones", especially if they criticise or re-evaluate patriarchy. — fdrake

Intriguing. I had never heard of Mary Daly before. I'm wondering how you came to know her and her work. Via an interest in feminism or language. Both?
From wiki:

In Gyn/Ecology: The Metaethics of Radical Feminism[18] (1978), Daly argues that men throughout history have sought to oppress women. In this book she moves beyond her previous thoughts on the history of patriarchy to the focus on the actual practices that, in her view, perpetuate patriarchy, which she calls a religion.[17]

Daly's Pure Lust: Elemental Feminist Philosophy[19] (1984) and Websters' First New Intergalactic Wickedary of the English Language[20] (1987) introduce and explore an alternative language to explain the process of exorcism and ecstasy.

In Wickedary Daly provides definitions as well as chants that she says can be used by women to free themselves from patriarchal oppression. She also explores the labels that she says patriarchal society places on women to prolong what she sees as male domination of society. Daly said it is the role of women to unveil the liberatory nature of labels such as "Hag", "Witch", and "Lunatic". — Mary Daly - wiki

How on earth is using a term like 'witch' liberatory? Because there is no longer the threat of male persecution? Nevertheless, it still has negative connotations. Who wants to be called a 'hag'?

Interesting, how the term 'witch-hunt' is used by those being investigated for gross dismeanours.
Think Trump and Johnson and their supporters.

Former US president Donald Trump frequently used the term on Twitter, referring to various investigations[166][167] and the impeachment proceedings against him as witch-hunts.[168][169][170] During his presidency, he used the phrase over 330 times -wiki.

What effect does this have on justice and those who would uphold the law?
Is there a deep-seated male anger or fear of women becoming too powerful?
So, the ex-PM and President might present as victims (witches) but really it is those who hunt them down who are the evil witches who will kill the MAGA dream.

This, of course, is nothing, NOTHING like the terrors historically experienced by women. Perpetrated systematically by men in power. Patriarchy in practice. Just one example:

In the North Berwick witch trials in Scotland, over 70 people were accused of witchcraft on account of bad weather when James VI of Scotland, who shared the Danish king's interest in witch trials, sailed to Denmark in 1590 to meet his betrothed Anne of Denmark. According to a widely circulated pamphlet, "Newes from Scotland," James VI personally presided over the torture and execution of Doctor Fian.[63] Indeed, James published a witch-hunting manual, Daemonologie, which contains the famous dictum: "Experience daily proves how loath they are to confess without torture." Later, the Pendle witch trials of 1612 joined the ranks of the most famous witch trials in English history. — Witch-hunt - wiki

Witch-hunting was Global. Victims tortured and executed on sometimes the flimsiest of excuses.

Even in modern times:

A 2010 estimate places the number of women killed as witches in India at between 150 and 200 per year, or a total of 2,500 in the period of 1995 to 2009.[139] The lynchings are particularly common in the poor northern states of Jharkhand,[140] Bihar and the central state of Chhattisgarh.

[...] In India, labeling a woman as a witch is a common ploy to grab land, settle scores or even to punish her for turning down sexual advances. In a majority of the cases, it is difficult for the accused woman to reach out for help and she is forced to either abandon her home and family or driven to commit suicide. Most cases are not documented because it is difficult for poor and illiterate women to travel from isolated regions to file police reports. Less than 2 percent of those accused of witch-hunting are actually convicted, according to a study by the Free Legal Aid Committee, a group that works with victims in the state of Jharkhand.

The importance of free, legal aid. Not always available to the poor and powerless. And yet, the likes of Johnson take from the taxpayers' purse to pay for their defense. Criminal. The privileged male.

***

I'm sure you know what it is if you've flirted with blokes before and felt like you were following a script. Every time one ought to do something for one's partner because it just seems right, a norm is at work. — fdrake

Oh yeah, I am that flirty, bewitching female. Males succumb to the sprinkling of my magical prowess. Driven to lust and beyond. And so it is, the female has the power. For all of 15 minutes.
If some script is followed, any honeymoon period is soon over. Faces change. Bodies age.
History repeats with little change. Even in the rom-com genre. Physiology. Biology seems to rule.
We are, after all, human animals.

..."beauty fades" more for women (or so it's seen). Though "MILF" and "Cougar" are always popular search terms on porn sites. Motherhood and spinsterhood are also sexually objectified, equality! — fdrake

I'll have to take your word for it. I'm too much of a lady to go searching on porn sites. Then again, for the sake of research...

'm wondering how you came to know her and her work. — Amity

I found their book in a charity shop. The pun in the title made me pick it up. The prose kept me reading it.

How on earth is using a term like 'witch' liberatory? Because there is no longer the threat of male persecution? Nevertheless, it still has negative connotations. Who wants to be called a 'hag'? — Amity

She uses the term, in that book, as a myth making+historical exercise. Roughly, part of the story around witches is that they were killed for their heretical knowledge. Which was false, as there was no magic. Daly turns that around, witches were indeed holders and sustainers of heretical knowledge - their status in society let them see the contours of oppression all women face. So she sees the witch as a mythical and real figure, as a woman who undermines the oppressive structures of society through wise action. It's a new flavour of womanhood, for her!

The book is also feminist theology, some of it comes from confronting highly conservative Catholic theologians and priests at various conferences with this material. Affirming the value of witches in that context, I think, is a delicious rhetorical move.

Oh yeah, I am that flirty, bewitching female. Males succumb to the sprinkling of my magical prowess. Driven to lust and beyond. And so it is, the female has the power. For all of 15 minutes. — Amity

That's part of the story, yeah. We both know it's not true, even when it feels true!

I must say that I find it ironic that discussions about the essence of masculinity - or its absence - tend to orbit around the effect masculinity has on women through patriarchy. The cynic in me sees this as an internalisation of the men=active/women=passive dichotomy within feminist discourse. Of course the essence of men is the effect they have on women, despite that being a resentful/misogynist trope! And it's ultimately reductive.

Not saying you are doing this by the way, just that these discussion tend to terminate in the discussion of patriarchy, not the space criticising it opens up for men and women. A book like Connell's "Masculinities" takes this extra step for men, do you know of any which conceive of a a new femininity after patriarchy? Or find the seeds of a new femininity like Daly does?

I think what matters is the context and the way in which Elvis sings this song.
He sexualises it.
Watch his use of mike, thrusting fingers and I think he sings ' suck' rather than 'sock'. — Amity

He certainly does sexualise it, you can hear the female screams from the audience and see the approvals/appreciations from his female backing singers for the moves and gesticulations he makes.
He also certainly does say suck and not sock.

Just like Meg in the Harry met Sally scene, they both connect food and eating with sex.

But I think Meg/Sally, faking a gratefully receiving female, in awe of male sexual prowess, as all females are supposed to genuinely experience and demonstrate gratitude for :lol: , was in fact demonstrating how easy it is for a female, to fool an individual male, regarding their perceived masculine sexual prowess.
This ecstasy donated by men, that causes women to reach heights of pleasure that have been hitherto, unknown to them, must be acknowledged before, during and after the sexual act. The patriarchal, manly man will accept and acknowledge nothing less. Any woman who does not show such appreciation, every time such a manly man is even just in the same room as women, is not in touch with, and does not understand what real femininity is, from the manly man masculine pov. Such women are probably not 'fully' heterosexual. Meg/Sally was just demonstrating how easy it is to play that role.

Some theistic fables, even back up such manly men self-images of masculinity, as Yahweh itself, turned Adam's first wife Lilith into a snake, for disobeying its demand to let Adam be sexually dominant over her. Lilith insisted on sitting atop of Adam. Adam was underneath her. Yahweh would not put up with that. :lol:
I wonder how Yahweh's supposed wife/consort, Asherah reproduced? A goddess who supposedly gave birth to 70 other gods, including BAAL, who I think is refurbished for use as Satan.
She was the consort/wife of other top gods besides Yahweh, such as El, Anu, and Ugaritic. :scream:
In those days Asherah was called the mother goddess of fertility, in todays celeb world, the paparazzi would call her a slut goddess.

But the competition aspect of final exam systems is very very negative, towards the mental health of the majority of able and less able pupils imo. — universeness

Anyhow, a couple of points, the first is yes, competition wasn't eliminated, but, as I said "purposely downplayed". That is, the result, winning or losing, was made less important.

But this wasn't done in order to get more entrants (my initial concern was that being less competitive would result in less entrants because I was also looking at it overly superficially). In fact, the idea of adjusting the activity purely on that basis rather than focusing only on what would make for a good activity parallels the idea of entering such an activity to "win" as opposed to participate. — Baden

Very good points! Lesson in life.

I am interested in seeing how creativity develops without the "risk" of losing -- What would happen if we remove the restrictive best, and focus, instead, on "I got this!" attitude by everyone.
A variation of that victory cry is "Let's do it!" (This cry implies they know what they're doing, and they've got the drive to do it).

Education should cater to those being educated and not to the needs of commerce.
Educational qualifications being little more than currency, is just a horrible state of affairs.
Finding your personal vocation is what matters, not who you are better than at what?
Personal identity states such as gender, sexuality or age should not dictate or preclude you from a particular career path.

I found their book in a charity shop. The pun in the title made me pick it up. The prose kept me reading it. — fdrake

Do you think Daly would appreciate having a gender-neutral pronoun applied to her?
I read of one feminist who said something to the effect that after all the decades of fighting for recognition, why would she want to be called 'they'? Doesn't that reinforce invisibility?
Another discussion perhaps.
So, you were drawn to the book...because you already have a strong interest in gender theory and language and theology? Or just because.

The book is also feminist theology, some of it comes from confronting highly conservative Catholic theologians and priests at various conferences with this material. Affirming the value of witches in that context, I think, is a delicious rhetorical move. — fdrake

Daly sounds like someone that should have a thread of her own! Touches all the hot spots.

I must say that I find it ironic that discussions about the essence of masculinity - or its absence - tend to orbit around the effect masculinity has on women through patriarchy. The cynic in me sees this as an internalisation of the men=active/women=passive dichotomy within feminist discourse. Of course the essence of men is the effect they have on women, despite that being a resentful/misogynist trope! And it's ultimately reductive. — fdrake

Yes. I've been wondering about how we talked of 'opposites' earlier. Questions were raised as to what is 'Masculinity' or a 'Real Man' as opposed to what?
@Moliere gave his view that it was the transition from boyhood to man/adulthood that was most relevant. If I remember correctly.

Another 'opposite' to be considered - a 'Fake man' or perhaps a 'Real Woman' or 'Femininity'.
Then 'Feminism' with its focus on the fight against patriarchy. Not passive but active. Not only concerning females but males and others affected by such a system.

Did we talk of 'Masculinism' - whatever that is?

adjective
1. advocating for men’s rights, in opposition to feminism, and supporting traditional gender roles:
Nostalgia for a bygone era inspires core masculinist ideals of femininity and manliness.
2. maintaining the superiority of men over women:
masculinist hiring practices;
masculinist and patriarchal bias in politics.
noun
3. an advocate of men’s rights:
Masculinists are asking the police force to allocate resources specifically for male victims of domestic violence. — Masculinist - dictionary

***

Not saying you are doing this by the way, just that these discussion tend to terminate in the discussion of patriarchy, not the space criticising it opens up for men and women. A book like Connell's "Masculinities" takes this extra step for men, do you know of any which conceive of a a new femininity after patriarchy? Or find the seeds of a new femininity like Daly does? — fdrake

I don't know what such discussions tend to do or how they end. I get the impression that @Moliere has lost interest. Perhaps, for him, his questions have been answered adequately...
I'm glad that you and others have continued to respond. A serious but fun conversation.
Enjoyable and seductive new dance steps to take to another level?

As a newcomer to the field of 'Critical Femininities', I have no idea whether there could be any such thing as a new 'femininity after patriarchy'. What would that even look like...
There will always be seeds planted but what, where, how, when, why, and by whom?
Daly, I don't know enough about. At first glance, seems quite the mad hag :fire:

Here's something I found after a quick google:

ABSTRACT
Critical femininities examines femininity through a nuanced, multidimensional framework, moving beyond femininity as a patriarchal tool, to instead consider the historical, ideological, and intersectional underpinnings of femininity, particularly those that contribute to femmephobia. While Critical Femininities is often deemed an emergent area of scholarship, this framing is both paradoxical and, conceivably, inaccurate. Rather than being a nascent field, interdisciplinary scholars have contributed to Critical Femininities for over 60 years, whether or not they labeled their research as such. Arguably, Critical Femininities is a field whose emergence can be traced back to the second wave of feminism or even earlier. However, while Dahl (2012) notes that the question of “what is femininity” is as old as de Beauvoir’s (1949) Second Sex, there is a continued lack of scholarly endeavours not only in terms of how the question of femininity has been addressed, but also in terms of how this question is integrated within research. In this article we theorize why Critical Femininities has remained in a continuous state of emerging without recognition for its contributions as a field. We argue that the field’s stalled emergence can be explained by the tendency to view femininity as unidimensional, anti–intellectual, and infantile. Moreover, we see this stalled emergence as a product of the masculine epistemological centre that informs the very fabrics of society. In response, we aim to facilitate the continued growth of the field, and to make visible the taken–for–granted presence of masculinity that remains pervasive within gender theory and epistemological frameworks. — Critical Femininities - A 'new' approach to gender theory

Do you think Daly would appreciate having a gender-neutral pronoun applied to her? — Amity

She probably wouldn't, no. I think there's something in Gyn/Ecology to that effect. "They" as an attempt at gender neutrality = a psyop to cover up men as the default subject = erasure of women's erasure.

So, you were drawn to the book...because you already have a strong interest in gender theory and language and theology? Or just because.

Personally? I read a lot of that stuff.

Daly sounds like someone that should have a thread of her own! Touches all the hot spots. — Amity

Yes. And she'll be in the 70s radical feminist transphobe dumpster fire too, probably.

Questions were raised as to what is 'Masculinity' or a 'Real Man' as opposed to what? — Amity

Is this the right question? For "real man" it makes sense to think of what a non-real man would be, a fake man or whatever. But there's nothing essential to being a man that would define it in opposition to another category, right? If the quality of being a man means you've got an antipodal (set of qualities) to another category (like woman, boy...), what places a man in an antipodal relationships with that other category needs examined. It might be a "coming of age" for the opposition of boy and man, it might be a gender stereotype for the opposition of man and women, who knows.

I'd rather say that being a man commits someone to no essential qualities - social, biological, performative. We know it can't be willies, chromosomes, cologne, assertiveness, violence or detached cognitive styles since you can remove each from a man and they stay identifiable as a man. Nor does it commit someone to special virtues - things which are virtues for men are virtues for people in general. All that there is to being a man is counting as one... you might call this no-man-ilism (nomanilism).

At that point, the discussion turns entirely on norms of expression, aesthetic styles, and the social status those both afford people. Only particular norms and social conditions would enable an opposition between a man and between another category. Like people get antsy around people who "count as men" using "women's" bathrooms, even though those people often don't "count as men" in most social circumstances. Having erectile dysfunction might make you not "count as a man", various things. The social, the biological and the aesthetic all intermingle here into an inexhaustible clusterfuck of overlapping criteria and milieux. And in that regard, no one is going to complain about a bloke using a men's bathroom if they need to use viagra to get it up... The traits which sometimes count as being necessary for masculinity activate at different times, and in that regard even what is essentially excluded from manhood is contextually volatile.

. The social, the biological and the aesthetic all intermingle here into an inexhaustible clusterfuck of overlapping criteria and milieux — fdrake

:up: :lol:
Cue glazed eyes or strabismus :nerd:
Previously, I paid little attention whenever talk turned to 'patriarchy' and 'feminism'. Gender issues.
However, my eyes have been opened. Thanks to you, others, and especially @Moliere for triggering questions and thoughts in this most informative discussion.
Important not only for the individual but for today's politics. How they turn. So easily backward.

Personally? I read a lot of that stuff. — fdrake

Have you written anything? Apart from on here...

Have you written anything? Apart from on here... — Amity

Boring essays and technical reports.

Boring essays and technical reports. — fdrake

Did you consider them boring when you wrote them? What made them so? Subject matter, style...?
Lack of choice or passion? But what now...?

Your writing here has been magnificent. Strong, sensitive, even sensible. Seductive and sexy as it
shines and probes; illuminating different or new ways of thinking, and questioning.
I'm surprised you haven't written an essay elsewhere.

Inspired and a bit fired up by your question re 'new femininity after patriarchy' I turned my attention to essays from the female perspective. Wondering if what matters is the way we talk and think. The importance of language in how the world can be changed. How useful would the terms 'femininity' and 'patriarchy' be in a new societal structure?

Anyway, this is only a fumbling start. I found this:
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20191216-essays-by-women-how-do-you-use-your-rage

Still sleepy, I read the title as 'How do you use your image?' and then thought:
Why 'rage'? Is it catchier than 'outrage'? Wouldn't that be a 'turn-off' for some?

The old adage ‘the personal is political’ is finding truly exciting new applications. The feminist women’s essays of 2019 combine stringent forensic analysis with fearless movement in and out of autobiography. The personal is elbowing its way rudely into the discourse, and altering the definition of being rude. In the process, new kinds of personhood are being created.

As Rebecca Solnit says in The Mother of All Questions, 2017: “There is no good answer to how to be a woman; the art may instead lie in how we refuse the question.”
[...]
Rebecca Solnit, who published the collection of essays Whose Story Is This? in 2019, has been a superb essay writer for decades, and is certainly one of the most eminent feminist writers alive. She has written on many subjects other than gender politics; she is an environmentalist, political activist, art critic, historian. She is a genuine public intellectual. One of her better-known essays is the sardonic Men Explain Things to Me (2008), which gave rise to the term ‘mansplaining’.

In 2019 Rachel Cusk published a collection of essays called Coventry, which spans about a decade of her work. Although she is arguably a literary giant, she has won few awards, probably because she very wilfully sidesteps categories.
[...]
Volume three was an unflinching look at the aftermath of divorce, truly a sidestep too far. She writes that what others call “cruelty” she calls “the discipline of self-criticism”. The third book got such an ugly response that she mused about her “creative death . . . I was heading into total silence”.
Almost mockingly, in the Outline trilogy, her latest set of books, she embraces silence and passivity. Faye, the anti-heroine of those novels, is like a radio dish, absorbing everything around her in what has been called ‘violent’ detail, and giving almost nothing back. This non-personality throws everyone around her into relief, and especially men, who cannot resist a feminine vacuum. Faye is no-one, but Cusk’s life is woven into her in playful ways. No more presenting an easy target. — Essays by women - 'How do you use your rage?' - BBC Culture

[my emphases]

There's so much more to this article including the journalists who broke the Harvey Weinstein story and helped catalyse the #MeToo movement. The ‘Non-disclosure agreements’ as a way to de-personalise female targets and stop them from telling their stories.

Reaching the end, I find the answer to my question above: 'Why 'rage' ?'.

Penguin this year reissued Sister Outsider, a collection of Audre Lorde’s essays. She described herself as a “Black, lesbian, mother, warrior, poet”, and firmly grounded her politics in personal honesty. Her strange, lyrical, visceral prose defines her as one of the gods of feminism and political activism.
In one of her essays she asks, “How do you use your rage?

The emphasis is on 'your'.
So, what is your story and how would you tell it? If at all...
The question can be answered by anyone, if so desired. To rage or not to rage?
Would it, does it help?

So, what is your story and how would you tell it? If at all...
The question can be answered by anyone, if so desired. To rage or not to rage?
Would it, does it help? — Amity

For some reason, I'm thinking of the short-story extravaganza and @Noble Dust and Marilyn Monroe.
No, it was @_db and the discussion here:

https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/12312/amnesis-by-_db

Also, others who might write semi-autobiography with a focus on the male/female relationship.
Like @Tobias and @180 Proof. Not sure that any reflect feminism but femininity...masculinity.
Love and sex more than rage. Perhaps elements of fear...?

And then @hypericin's micro story with a no gender-specified narrator. We made assumptions:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/13839/new-sun-by-hypericin

***
Follow-up re stories and fiction. Links. Mostly for myself - to be read later
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_literature

[...] Feminist science fiction is a subgenre of science fiction (abbreviated "SF") focused on theories that include feminist themes including but not limited to, gender inequality, sexuality, race, economics, and reproduction. Feminist SF is political because of its tendency to critique the dominant culture. Some of the most notable feminist science fiction works have illustrated these themes using utopias to explore a society in which gender differences or gender power imbalances do not exist, or dystopias to explore worlds in which gender inequalities are intensified, thus asserting a need for feminist work to continue.[12]

Science fiction and fantasy serve as important vehicles for feminist thought, particularly as bridges between theory and practice. No other genres so actively invite representations of the ultimate goals of feminism: worlds free of sexism, worlds in which women's contributions (to science) are recognized and valued, worlds that explore the diversity of women's desire and sexuality, and worlds that move beyond gender.

— Elyce Rae Helford[13]

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_literary_criticism

[...] More contemporary scholars attempt to understand the intersecting points of femininity and complicate our common assumptions about gender politics by accessing different categories of identity (race, class, sexual orientation, etc.) The ultimate goal of any of these tools is to uncover and expose patriarchal underlying tensions within novels and interrogate the ways in which our basic literary assumptions about such novels are contingent on female subordination. In this way, the accessibility of literature broadens to a far more inclusive and holistic population. Moreover, works that historically received little or no attention, given the historical constraints around female authorship in some cultures, are able to be heard in their original form and unabridged. This makes a broader collection of literature for all readers insofar as all great works of literature are given exposure without bias towards a gender influenced system.[7]

[...]
When looking at literature, modern feminist literary critics also seek ask how feminist, literary, and critical the critique practices are, with scholars such as Susan Lanser looking to improve both literature analysis and the analyzer's own practices to be more diverse.

For @Moliere - a follow-up to our discussion at the discomfort of being seen as a 'feminist'.
History from the 17th century on:

Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the majority of pro-feminist authors emerged from France including François Poullain de La Barre, Denis Diderot, Paul Henri Thiry d'Holbach, and Charles Louis de Montesquieu.[1] Montesquieu introduced female characters, like Roxana in Persian Letters, who subverted patriarchal systems, and represented his arguments against despotism. The 18th century saw male philosophers attracted to issues of human rights, and men such as the Marquis de Condorcet championed women's education. Liberals, such as the utilitarian Jeremy Bentham, demanded equal rights for women in every sense, as people increasingly came to believe that women were treated unfairly under the law.[2]
[...]
American sociologist Michael Kimmel categorized American male responses to feminism at the turn of the twentieth century into three categories: pro-feminist, masculinist, and antifeminist.[10][11] Pro-feminist men, believing that changes would also benefit men, generally welcomed women's increased participation in the public sphere, and changes in the division of labour in the home;[11] in contrast anti-feminists opposed women's suffrage and participation in public life, supporting a traditional patriarchal family model.[11] Finally, the masculinist movement was characterized by men's groups, and developed as an indirect reaction to the perceived femininization of manhood. — Men in feminism - wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men_in_feminism

***
Perhaps the label 'profeminist' or 'pro-feminist' sits better?
If there has to be a label...

Oh I don't mind the category Feminist, insofar that I get to express what I mean. And in philosophical discussion the norms are such that you can clarify yourself, so in philosophical discussion Feminist fits the bill.

But in real life most people who aren't familiar with feminism think that a man calling themselves a feminist is trying to get sex -- most people interpret the expression as a kind of virtue signal for partners rather than a serious political or philosophical commitment with a whole body of thought behind it. And all I really mean are the books and ideas and politics, so it's just easier to not call myself a Feminist and stay at the level of books and ideas and politics.

Though there's something about Feminist thought that brings what was traditionally thought to be a personal affair into the open, into the public: Family relations, and in particular, patrilineal property inheritance and control over that property while living, and how that relates to one's identity. So I can't stay at the level of books and ideas -- I have to engage in politics, which necessarily means I am involved, rather than it just being some ideas.

So it'll come out eventually. I don't mind that, insofar that I get to say what I mean, though. I certainly am inspired by the Feminist writers! At the very least I think it makes sense to pay homage to them.

Also @Amity. This is personal reflection upon Moliere's excellent points.

But in real life most people who aren't familiar with feminism think that a man calling themselves a feminist is trying to get sex — Moliere

Yes. And I've met several who believe men calling themselves feminists is an inherently entryist ploy to subvert women's institutions and discourse.

the expression as a kind of virtue signal for partners rather than a serious political or philosophical commitment with a whole body of thought behind it. — Moliere

Yes. And also in my experience this is generally what it is (for men and women). Expressing feminist views is a hobby, living by them isn't. And requires considerably more effort. I'm thinking on the spot here, but I can think of two different flavours of "personal is political" struggles. The first would be when a societal norm imposes itself upon a person (or group), the second would be when a person has internalised a norm and it's become egosyntonic.

To contrast, consider a hetero couple raising a child. Childcare costs are so expensive they can price out median income families. Because men tend to be in better paying jobs/roles than women, it can make financial sense for the woman to quit her job and take on the societal role of a tradwife, despite it being one with considerably less financial and social capital. The couple's beliefs won't let them avoid the costs that this devil's choice presents them.

But what if the norms traditional household become the couple's desires over time. And all their passionate, and maybe even virtuous, beliefs were annihilated by the merciless logic of capital and patriarchy. Who they were has been replaced by who they needed to be, moral convictions be damned. Capital and patriarchy go hand in hand. To work against this, it would be to psychically reimagine yourself and live by another set of values. To find profound discomfort in your own life. It is a hard sell.

That's a transition from finding oneself profoundly alienated from society due to intellectual convictions, to largely feeling in accordance with due to practical necessities. No matter how strong a belief is, it doesn't cut it.

There can also be a reflexive pathologisation of women who choose to live more traditionally in patriarchy-critical spaces. Something must be wrong with you if you want to live unjustly. I don't find that a fair judgement btw.

It's relatively common place to have "the personal is political" discussions about housework sharing, it's less common to have these discussions about the psychosexual aspects of patriarchy. People libidinally invest in these norms as much as they socially enforce them. Fantasies of submission to masculine authority, fantasies of being that man, thinking about how consent works in a long term relationship.

Luckily the latter, interpersonal kind of "feminist praxis" can be engaged in without the norms of society crushing you. So long as a space of relative equality can be created between men and women, these things can be talked about and acted upon. In the conditions where that cannot happen readily - a workplace, a boardroom, a hiring decision -, you need advocacy and collective action. That's why ideas are never enough by themselves.

And also, unfortunately, why things are slower to change than any right minded human being would like.

But in real life most people who aren't familiar with feminism think that a man calling themselves a feminist is trying to get sex -- most people interpret the expression as a kind of virtue signal for partners rather than a serious political or philosophical commitment with a whole body of thought behind it — Moliere

I had never thought of that aspect. And really struggle with it, never having had that kind of experience.
I've always admired men who have the guts to stand up and be counted as a feminist. So, I suppose yes, I can see how a male might self-describe as a feminist to show good character or social conscience if he desired the approval of a feminist (female/male/other). However, action and behaviour count more.

And all I really mean are the books and ideas and politics, so it's just easier to not call myself a Feminist and stay at the level of books and ideas and politics.
Though there's something about Feminist thought that brings what was traditionally thought to be a personal affair into the open, into the public. — Moliere

That is the challenge. When any theory meets the real world and practices. So, any understanding becomes more meaningful with regard to change. Of course, you are involved. Why else would you read the stuff and think in the first place?

So it'll come out eventually. I don't mind that, insofar that I get to say what I mean, though. I certainly am inspired by the Feminist writers! At the very least I think it makes sense to pay homage to them. — Moliere

It sounds like a guilty or dirty secret. What freedom lies in coming out the closet; speaking your mind, and engaging with others who want to advance positive change in society. And not be made to feel less of a man, or to be shamed by the ignorant.
You've done heaps more than I have when it comes to reading and reflecting.
So yes, I have more to learn, thanks to you! Excellent work :clap: :100:
If that doesn't sound too condescending...
***

Yes. And I've met several who believe men calling themselves feminists is an inherently entryist ploy to subvert women's institutions and discourse. — fdrake

Again, your experience is more extensive than mine. Where did you come across this behaviour?
Any examples and how successful are such ploys?

I can think of two different flavours of "personal is political" struggles. The first would be when a societal norm imposes itself upon a person (or group), the second would be when a person has internalised a norm and it's become egosyntonic. — fdrake

Thanks for the link.

Capital and patriarchy go hand in hand. To work against this, it would be to psychically reimagine yourself and live by another set of values. To find profound discomfort in your own life. It is a hard sell. — fdrake

Grateful for your clear descriptions; helpful in imagining tough situations and decision-making.
It's difficult to stick to principles when circumstance throws reality in your face.

That's a transition from finding oneself profoundly alienated from society due to intellectual convictions, to largely feeling in accordance with due to practical necessities. No matter how strong a belief is, it doesn't cut it. — fdrake

I wonder how many on TPF have lived through this process. You? I've never held beliefs so strong that have resulted in being 'profoundly alienated from society'. The nearest is a fairly typical experience of loss of faith in the religion of upbringing. I simply stopped attending church and was never challenged by my parents. And I never felt a strong atheism, so never challenged them.

There can also be a reflexive pathologisation of women who choose to live more traditionally in patriarchy-critical spaces. Something must be wrong with you if you want to live unjustly. I don't find that a fair judgement btw. — fdrake

I'm now thinking of female Republicans and a film... was it 'Mrs America'?
There's nothing wrong with women who choose to live traditionally. Just don't enforce it on others.

It's relatively common place to have "the personal is political" discussions about housework sharing, it's less common to have these discussions about the psychosexual aspects of patriarchy. — fdrake

Indeed. I remember a scene where the woman clearly didn't want sex but her husband did.
She laid back and let him. I guess because of her beliefs. Based on Christianity? Given her obvious lack of desire and passionate action, he must have known. What was this, other than 'relieving' himself? Or a power move. Animal.

So long as a space of relative equality can be created between men and women, these things can be talked about and acted upon. In the conditions where that cannot happen readily - a workplace, a boardroom, a hiring decision -, you need advocacy and collective action. That's why ideas are never enough by themselves. — fdrake

How long will it take before people can relax and know that any hard-won rights or equal responsibilities will not be overturned by extremist politicians? Never.

And also, unfortunately, why things are slower to change than any right minded human being would like. — fdrake

The madness continues...

Mrs America