"Like most little girls, I was raised to believe that virginity is a sacred gift a woman should reserve for just the right man. But college taught me that this concept is just a tool to keep the status quo intact. Deflowering is historically oppressive—early European marriages began with a dowry, in which a father would sell his virginal daughter to the man whose family could offer the most agricultural wealth. Dads were basically their daughters’ pimps.
When I learned this, it became apparent to me that idealized virginity is just a tool to keep women in their place. But then I realized something else: if virginity is considered that valuable, what’s to stop me from benefiting from that? It is mine, after all. And the value of my chastity is one level on which men cannot compete with me. I decided to flip the equation, and turn my virginity into something that allows me to gain power and opportunity from men. I took the ancient notion that a woman’s virginity is priceless and used it as a vehicle for capitalism."
Susannah Breslin's response on Slate's XX Factor blog made me chuckle, but maybe seemed a little harsh:
"How ... feminist? How ... empowering? Whoever invented women's studies must be gnawing at her wrists at this very minute. "Are you rolling your eyes?" Dylan wonders. Why, yes, I am, Miss Dylan! "But I'm not saying every forward-thinking person has to agree with what I’m doing," she continues. Thank God. "You should develop your own personal belief system—that’s exactly my point!" Ah, the wisdom of the young. She concludes: "These days, more and more women my age are profiting directly from their sex appeal, but I’m not sure other women should follow my lead." That would make two of us.
Until today, this sexual spectacle's onlookers have been attempting to discern where Dylan is coming from, personally and politically, but her essay makes it more than clear that her pseudo-feminist blathering is little more than a misguided attempt to conceal her mind-boggling idiocy. Suffice to say, I won't be bidding on her."I'm still working through how I feel about this whole issue, although my first instinct is to question whether this is really the most powerful and effective tool this young feminist could use to empower herself and her community. I could really give a shit what this woman does with her hymen, but touting this as a subversive feminist act is problematic for me. I mean, Queen Elizabeth had to use her virginity in the 16th century because she didn't have a lot of other options, but in this post-"sexual revolution" age, don't we have some more effective weapons in our arsenal? Wouldn't this woman's time and energy be better spent helping tween girls along a path towards empowered, self-confident sexuality? Or being an ally to rape victims or abused kids who will never get to make the choice about their first sexual encounter? Or writing a zine or a book?
Oh, yeah, those wouldn't pay $3.8 million dollars...
1 comment:
e, i am right with you! while i think it's cool to subvert patriarchal customs, such subversion isn't necessarily feminist. (if you define feminism as working to improve conditions for all--but not only--women, that is.) as she's trying to benefit from a sexist value, she's also reinforcing it, which doesn't do anything to discourage, for example, sexual abuse of children or shaming of (perceived) non-virgin women. her body, her right--but i don't see how it's feminist.
Post a Comment