Just bought my daughters a book with a very feminist outlook

I saw a bit in the Guardian about this book:
Girl Up!



So I bought it for my 12 year old daughter.  I want her to be confident and smart and to know what consent really means but if I tried to tell her myself she wouldn't listen. 

I know you guys probably haven't read it,  but I'm interested in people's opinions.  I'm a little worried that the author is s bit enthusiastic about having sex, but my daughter's only 12!

I'm a little worried that the author is s bit enthusiastic about having sex, but my daughter's only 12!

I took my daughter to see Laurie Penny at a talk/book signing when she was 14 and I squirmed a bit. But she was great.

I admire Laura Bates. She just sort of started up the Everyday Sexism project from her laptop.

It is difficult, like with a 12 year old....Dad's not quite a superhero any more. So if you say, "Hey here's a book," they may raise an eyebrow.

Oh yeah, she certainly is pretending very hard that she doesn't care.  "I don't know, I've got a long list of books to read..."  I don't believe it for a second! 

My daughter had read 1984 in school and was commenting on it.

I am not that big of a fan....Orwell, through his writing, publicly wrestled with a lot of the problems of the planned state - he could hardly ignore the Soviet Union.

But I read this great piece comparing 1984 and Brave New World, which I had never actually read. But I thought it would be a good idea for her to read it as sort of an antidote.

So after bugging her, she said she couldn't finish it and gave it back to me. I grumbled, and then read it myself. The message is good, but it is written terribly.

So now when I suggest something, I have to be very careful or she throws it back in my face.

I skimmed through it first and saw that it was pretty subversive , just the kind of thing that would have interested me at that age.

Me? Not a fan of Orwell but I really liked Brave New World

Me? Not a fan of Orwell but I really liked Brave New World

I liked BNW in that it shows a very repressive future might arise without an angry, beady-eyed guy with a moustache running the show. We can choose to say live in a gated community with strict home owner association rules and end up with a situation pretty much the same. Who is worse, a petty association president or a commissar? One could argue that at least with the former you could sell up and leave....a bit more difficult when the State is doing the squeezing.

But as in BNW, if society polices itself strongly enough, if for instance obesity becomes so looked down on that a person can't get a job and is sneered at and mocked*, how is that different than some sort of state mandated dietary regime?  We don't need a guy with a moustache, we take care of it ourselves.

Just as aside, my daughter was assigned Lord of the Flies shortly after 1984, and it makes similar points, that left to our own devices we can concoct a pretty repressive society....and it sort of conveniently dodges the sex question.

But my complaint about BNW is that it starts out with about twenty pages of a baby factory tour and accompanying sciencey talk, nothing happens for a long time.

*see I opened myself up for charges of hypocrisy by using that "beer-gutted Archie Bunker" line the other day...

Just to touch on the Lord of the Flies thing. It is mighty convenient that Golding decided to use an all male set of characters. I mean one could approach it from the angle that the English male boarding school experience itself says an awful lot, it almost surely plays into this whole thing.

But would it have been a different book if it had been a mixed sex bunch? It probably would have been, and as good a book as LotF is, it could have then approached some of the difficult questions regarding sex.
__________________

Edit: I catch myself being an idiot too much....

Were Simon and Ralph lovers? I had forgotten totally that sex/love is possible without females present....

Those are good insights.  I completely agree that we have a tendency to nickel and dime our rights and liberties if given the chance. 

Still, we do have to fear the moustache guy who would like to run the show, especially if his name is Trump.

By the way, what's your take on Clinton /Sanders?  I agreed with much that Sanders said and I'm as left as he is, but I worry that he couldn't beat Trump.  I am glad Hillary is almost the nominee just for that reason.  She should beat Trump handily.

You know I was just thinking that Trump's hair might actually be like "a moustache" in the same sense.

Regarding Clinton/Sanders....I am woefully ignorant....I peek at the polls. Too, I am no fan of Bill Clinton....I grew up around southern hucksters....which is what he is. So Hillary suffers a bit in my mind just due to association.

But she is very intelligent and experienced, and she probably doesn't like Bill either.

I need to bear down and read up on it all. I am a bit ashamed actually.

I sometimes think that the visceral hatred that so many people have for Obama and Hillary Clinton is all about racism and sexism.

I sometimes think that the visceral hatred that so many people have for Obama and Hillary Clinton is all about racism and sexism.

I couldn't agree more.

I'm sorry but that's generalizing. I am a woman and Hispanic and I didn't vote for Obama and there's no way in HELL in voting for Clinton. I have my reasons for my total dislike of them both and it had nothing to do with sexism or racism. But it's okay to hate ok to have a "visceral hatred" for Trump or Bush. Ok...

I'm sorry but that's generalizing. I am a woman and Hispanic and I didn't vote for Obama and there's no way in HELL in voting for Clinton. I have my reasons for my total dislike of them both and it had nothing to do with sexism or racism. But it's okay to hate ok to have a "visceral hatred" for Trump or Bush. Ok...

You're a Trump supporter? I'm just curious as to why...

I sometimes think that the visceral hatred that so many people have for Obama and Hillary Clinton is all about racism and sexism.

Completely untrue. I'm more than capable of forming a political opinion based on more than race and gender. I tend to base my political opinion based on policy, and my dislike of Obama and Clinton had nothing to do with his skin colour and her gender.

Why do people seem to think that people who oppose these two are immediately racist and sexist?? I find this completely offensive.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Completely untrue. I'm more than capable of forming a political opinion based on more than race and gender. I tend to base my political opinion based on policy, and my dislike of Obama and Clinton had nothing to do with his skin colour and her gender.

Why do people seem to think that people who oppose these two are immediately racist and sexist?? I find this completely offensive.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I personally don't like Clinton, the fact that a lot of her campaign funds come from really shady sources like dictators and other unsavoury world leaders is horrifying.

What are some of the policies of theirs that you don't like?

Also, Jimbocz didn't say everyone's dislike of Obama and H Clinton was due to racism and sexism, but that 'so many people's' is. I'm not sure what the rough breakdown of that would be as I'm sure the amounts would vary person to person, but in my mind that's probably 60-75%? A good majority at least.

As to racism... We are seeing, because of Donald Trump's campaign, that there is a LOT more racism in the US towards blacks, hispanics & latinos (they're different), Muslims and other minorities that many of us didn't realise was still a major factor. If you've read Harper Lee's To Set a Watchmen, you may be feeling a bit like the Scout character. (It's not a well written book by any means, but it was the precursor to To Kill a Mockingbird.)