Feminist Leadership: at what cost?

I’ve long thought it a bad idea to create great “leaders” who get to speak on behalf of feminism. Seeing Germaine Greer speak clarified my thinking on this score. I realised that the logical conclusion of encouraging the Famous Feminist phenomenon is 300 people sitting in a room listening very seriously and respectfully to a woman talk rubbish, some of it pretty dangerous rubbish. You see, the Famous Feminist is so fabulous that we should be grateful just to hear her opinions and we got plenty of them -random, rambling opinions about stuff. The Famous Feminist is so fabulous that she does not have to turn up with a structured, prepared speech that shows respect for her audience of mainly young women who want to know more about feminism, none of whom are getting paid to be at the event and many of whom have travelled a long way to be there. The Famous Feminist doesn’t have to concern herself with any of this because she’s fabulous and can say whatever she likes, knowing that we’ll clap at the end anyway.

We’ll clap, despite the fact that she tells us that vaccinating young girls against HPV is a patriarchal conspiracy to prepare them for unprotected sex, when it’s more likely to be a sad but necessary solution to a bad social situation. I’m all for discussing the issue of vaccines, especially around consent, but making basically the same argument as the religious right just isn’t helpful.

We’ll clap, despite the hideously inappropriate Darfur comparison in which Germaine asked how we in the UK could be so morally superior to the situation in Darfur when we have so much rape and violence here. No, the moral superiority aside, being a woman in the UK is not the same as being a woman in a refugee camp in Darfur and it’s not ok to use women in Darfur to make points about the UK situation.

We’ll clap, despite the racist comment that the government should be as frightened of “women” as they are of Muslims and black people, because apparently there are no Muslim women or black women.

We’ll clap, despite the statement that male rape (always said with amusing inverted comma hand gestures) is not as bad as the rape of women. I don’t really see how Germaine could know this. She also said that it’s easier to convict cases of male rape, except that there are hardly any because there is such a thing as homophobia which stops men from coming forward to report rape and which is even more effective if the man in question is gay and will have to endure homophobic attacks on his sexual history in court. Also, we really need to work from the assumption that all rape, all non consensual penetration of a person’s body in a sexualised context, is equally wrong. Edit: I spoke to my friend who works in a court last night and he said that in the three years he's worked there, he has seen exactly ZERO trials for male rape. This would imply that its not easy to try. 

We’ll clap, despite the completely unnecessary snide remark aimed at transwomen.

We’ll clap, despite the claim that the insults will get worse and worse as we get older, although those of us in the room who are lesbian, fat, disabled or just not conventionally sexually attractive like Greer was in her youth, already know this and some of us don’t remember a time when we weren’t being seriously insulted and even violently assaulted on the basis of our physical appearance.

We’ll clap, despite the fact that she says prostitution is the foundational service industry and compares being a smiling waitress to being a prostitute. No, being a waitress is not the same as being a prostitute, or anything like it. Fuck off.

And these are just the clangers I can remember.

And then we’ll clap some more, despite the fact that the Famous Feminist does not have to answer anyone’s question directly. Her response to all comers is, as a woman I met afterwards put it, “Which one of my favourite anecdotes contains similar words.”

Ok, she said some things I thought were pretty good too, in between my sharp intakes of breath, but she didn’t say anything new that she hasn’t already said in the Whole Woman or one of her many articles. She didn’t say anything other radical feminists haven’t already said.

But, you might say, lighten up: it’s just Germaine, she’s witty and entertaining and a real character and she’s written some good stuff in the past. Let it go. At least feminism happened, didn’t it?

No, because seeing Germaine crystallised some things we’ve been talking about in my feminist group for a while and it’s not just her. In a sense, it’s not even her fault. She’s a logical conclusion of the dominant feminist discourse in the current moment and that’s a bad thing which needs to be resisted.

We’re so used to hierarchies, to setting up powerful, authoritative feminists to speak for us and tell us what to think, so used to feeling that we should appreciate and admire these people, that we’re easily manipulated into a passive response to what they’re actually saying and doing. This is especially true for women because of the way we’re socialised and this is why it’s especially important that we resist the establishment of great authoritative feminist leaders who are allowed to speak for "us." In any case, we should be radically questioning patriarchal concepts like hierarchy, authority, leadership and role models, not simply replicating them within feminism. This isn’t really about Germaine Greer; it’s about the way we do things in feminism more generally.

Consider the recent problems with a certain rising young feminist leader’s book. People are arguing that it should be endorsed because at least, you know, it’s getting feminism out there, even if parts of it are, well, a little bit dodgy. So, as long as mainstream, white middle-class feminism gets to speak, it doesn’t really matter that the book is full of racist images? It doesn’t really matter that the author has a bad habit of not acknowledging other peoples’ work, or giving credit she could take for herself? None of that really matters because feminism happened, a feminist book has been published and we have a leader in the making who’s probably ok for the most part? So just endorse the book because feminism is happening.

No, the price is much, much too high. It’s not worth the loss of the important voices which we really need to hear as they stop speaking to us in total disgust at the way they’re being used and insulted. Moreover, as long as feminism gives the most credit and cultural space to the loudest voices with the biggest platforms, it will fail, because as long as we work within a hierarchical, racist, classist, homophobic system, the loudest voices will belong to the same kind of people, those who are most powerful and have the most access to the media. As long as we accept that great feminist leaders are necessary, as long as we go along with the hoops you have to jump through to create or become such a creature, we will tolerate the loss of many really important voices. We’ll keep on clapping no matter the price, even though that may ultimately be feminism itself.

Further reading:

Is Feminism a Movement?

Accountability

Anya speaks truth to power

Comments

[Zenobia]

The worst thing is, if a fabulous feminist like Germaine Greer comes out with this dangerous tripe people are going to take her pronouncements away with them and give them serious consideration. Whereas if one of the perceived 'enemy' says something perfectly sensible, s/he will get mercilessly pelted with rotten tomatoes and feminist sarcasm. Like when A.S. Byatt said that about the Orange Prize being sexist. Oh yeah, what does A.S. Byatt know about literature? She's obviously just bitter.

Reminds me of this guy D. and I used to know who took a liking to this slightly posh guy and a dislike to D., and when they were talking you could see his face go from a frown to a smile as he looked from one to the other. Quite mesmerizing.

[Winter]

Oh yeah, exactly. You can't blame people for taking it seriously because she is presented as a feminist authority. So they could be encouraged to buy into this really thoughtless, arrogant version of feminism or they could be put off for life.

And the higher into the feminist eschelons they go, the more liable they seem to be to say really stupid things. I mean, we also had Julie Bindel saying that anyone who disagreed with her views on lapdancing clubs could "Bugger off and stop silencing the rest of us," as if that was a reasonable feminist argument. And I don't see any sign of her being silenced recently, what with her Guardian columns and so forth.

[Zenobia]

Or they could be encouraged to buy into the thoughtless arrogant feminism, then reject it later in disgust and be put off for life. That was what The Whole Woman pretty much nearly did for me, I just felt like if Germaine Greer every actually met me or spoke to me she'd think I was one of the unwashed stupids anyway.

As for Bindel, I used to think 'at least she's done activism'. But what has she done exactly? Poured cement down toilets and scribbled on walls. Oh, that's taught the cleaners then.

[Michelle]

Hey Winter,

I've found your thoughts on this really interesting, and to an extent I agree with the problem of having feminist 'leaders'.

I guess I'm wondering what a positive alternative to that would be? Because to me, it's important for feminism to get 'out there' so to speak, so how can we ensure that happens? Should we have no leaders at all? 'Self-appointed' leaders? A collective voice? Or just give up trying to get a feminist voice into the mainstream (in which case the mainstream will appoint leaders and co-opt feminism anyway?) I'm just throwing some questions out there, don't feel obliged to respond.

[Winter]

Hi Michelle,

I will try and answer that question when I have a moment to think about it. I am aware that I'm being a bit negative here!

[Winter]

I guess I'm wondering what a positive alternative to that would be? Because to me, it's important for feminism to get 'out there' so to speak, so how can we ensure that happens? Should we have no leaders at all? 'Self-appointed' leaders? A collective voice? Or just give up trying to get a feminist voice into the mainstream (in which case the mainstream will appoint leaders and co-opt feminism anyway?)

I think we need a lot more critical analysis and discussion about exactly what kind of feminism we want to get out there and how we do it. And I definitely think we should stop being in awe of famous feminists. There are a few exceptions to the rule, but generally they are people who’ve had certain opportunities and advantages. A lot of women could do just as good a job and better. A woman who’s worked in a women’s refuge for 20 years is just as good a feminist as Greer, probably better. So I feel we really need to get some perspective on that issue. I’m not sure we should see them as “leaders.” They are contributors to feminism like the rest of us; it’s just that they contribute in a certain way. And at no point should they ever be considered above criticism.

I think I’m pretty sceptical now about the possibilities for getting the mainstream media to represent feminism properly at all, but if it must be done, I think those of us who do have access to the media should work really hard to promote the work of those who don’t. We shouldn’t try and speak for people and take the credit. We should point to the people who have been working on the issues all along.

In an ideal world, I think we should be creating our own independent media, which I guess we are to an extent, but I’d like to see more of it.

[Michelle]

I too have little faith in mainstream media being able to represent feminism properly and we do need more independent media (of the off-line variety, certainly!). And I agree that those feminists who do have access to the media should make it clear they are not 'the' voice of feminism and acknowledge the work of feminists who don't have that access/get that attention.

And I suppose thinking about this more, it is damaging to feminism if we make ourselves mainstream-media friendly- I mean, why bother with mainstream media at all if we know it is a lost cause? Of course, that leaves the media to appoint leaders for us.

I said in my first comment here that it's important to get feminism out there, but on further reflection the kind of feminism I would like to get out there is not the kind of feminism mainstream media would go along with anyway! So I suppose we should work at by-passing that system, and create our own via independent media and grass-roots networking.

[Lady S]

And the sad thing is that when you ask people in the UK about Feminism the first thing they think of is Germaine Greer =(

[Jender]

I loved this post. I found all the clapping deeply creepy, but couldn't put my finger on it as well as you did. There was a real sense that we had to clap to show our solidarity, and so much of the time I didn't agree with what was being said. And yes, GG really is what people here think of as feminism. I met a prospective student a few weeks ago who had thought she was a feminist until she read an article by GG. Whereupon she decided she couldn't be a feminist because she disagreed with GG. She seemed really pleased to hear that I did too. Anyway, let me say again-- GREAT post!

[Winter]

Hi Michelle,

And I suppose thinking about this more, it is damaging to feminism if we make ourselves mainstream-media friendly- I mean, why bother with mainstream media at all if we know it is a lost cause? Of course, that leaves the media to appoint leaders for us.

Yes, and you know, that's probably a big part of what's going wrong. GG is perfect for the media because she's loud, funny, outrageous and talks about feminism in a way that doesn't actually sound threatening. "It's just Auntie Germaine sounding off again. Get her another brandy." She says and does so many batty things that I doubt many people take her seriously; yet they think she represents feminism. That in itself is a problem.

[Winter]

Hi Lady S.

Welcome. Yes, I know, apparently the Whole Woman is the most read feminist book in the UK, which is kind of scary.

[Winter]

Hi Jender,

Glad you like the post.

There was a real sense that we had to clap to show our solidarity, and so much of the time I didn't agree with what was being said. And yes, GG really is what people here think of as feminism.

I know. It was a weird atmosphere. Some people were walking out. I heard afterwards that there were people having a lie down outside because they just couldn't cope. And I know at least one muslim feminist was really angry about the 'government must be as scared of women as it is of muslims' comment.

One of my friends was almost put off feminism for life by reading The Whole Woman so I sympathise with your student. GG is so dogmatic. Reading her, you feel like you have room to move, or breathe.

It was strange when she was talking about how women must show more solidarity with each other. Now, I totally agree with this point, but it was so odd coming from GG. I saw her on TV a few years back saying how she only ever had relationships with married men and when she got tired of them she liked to send them back to their wives smelling of her perfume! What exactly does GG think counts as solidarity?

If they were going to have a basically anti-porn/anti-prostitution conference, then I think they should have got someone like Professor Liz Kelly, who can at least speak about those issues very intelligently.