I got your book from B&N a couple of days ago & I'm really enjoying it. I especially like that the tone is more conversational than pedantic. I can't wait to share it with people. It's taking em awhile to read it though b/c I'm also reading Fight Like a Girl.
Kudos!

Bought your book, Jessica, and love it! Even though I'm in my 30s so not "young" in your terms, I have found it an interesting, informative and fun read. You did excellent!

Did you see that North Dakota passed its abortion ban?

I'm looking forward to picking it up, Jessica.

Keep fighting the good fight.
(And, shockingly I contributed to the salon thread. It's the same tired cliches and boring anti-feminist rhetoric you usually see, but I'm always happy to throw my two cents in)

Oh, and the letters at Salon are predictably anti-feminist and annoying
WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE MENZ!!!

Jessica, I'm new to feministing, but I can't wait to read your book! I get paid on Friday, and it's the first thing I'm buying.

I'm 18, and just beginning to really explore feminism. Anyone have suggestions for good feminist reads since I'll be at the book store Friday?

Congratulations. I read the interview on Alternet this morning. It was great to hear you talk about your intended audience and finally get to read an excerpt. Good luck with all the ensuing craziness.

Jessica, congrats on your book. I haven't read it yet, but just read through your Salon interview.

As an almost 45 year old, I want to say that I suspect your book is going to appeal to a lot of women my age and within a couple of years, up or down, particularly those of us whose parents came from one era (the 50s), followed what they thought they were supposed to follow, and then, boom, the 60s and 70s showed them so much more.

Way too long for a comment (oh, okay, it's because I'm doing the juggling thing between momming, blogging and paid work at the moment) right now, but my mother's actions indicated every day how torn she was between all the roles that were out there, that she could see but not pursue, because of loyalties to a different era. It's hard to explain in this comment box, but as the daughter of such a woman, I haven't found it - finding what I think represents my thoughts on feminism - to be any easier. I'm not even sure of the need for the word anymore - maybe we need new words?

I don't know - but I look forward to making time to checking out your book.

Again - congratulations (what resonated the most for me from the Salon piece was the "quiz" - now THAT, I totally got).

I bought it!!! It's going to be shipped to my dorm on April 28th, so excited! This means you should have a signing so I can get your autograph and I can tell you how awesome you are in person.
I'll definitely have a nice summer with all of these books I've got. I also bought a book about before Roe v. Wade when pregnant girls were sent away to have their babies and then their babies were put up for adoption.

g-wrose, get BitchFest!!!! It's great!!!

g-wrose;
Backlash by Susan Faludi. Changed my life.

I will check it out, but I have to say as a younger woman who stands more with the older women against a faux "sex positive" stance -- meaning it's nearly impossible to have a real sex positive stance in this environment -- I am disappointed in her espousing the view that boobie flashing at Mardi Gras or whereever is OK. It's demeaning in the culture, even if you think you're doing it of your own volition. And unfortunately that sort of act does reverberate in the lives of other women and how they are perceived.

Anyway sorry to be a curmudgeon -- i'm sure the book is otherwise as kickass as the site -- congratulations!

I liked the interview in Salon.

My favorite "I'm not a feminist, but..." line was in college course. "I'm not a feminist, but it kinda made me mad when Nietzsche compared women to cattle."

Anyway, I'd feel a bit like a jerk getting a book written specifically for young women, so I'll get a copy for the gf then sneak a look at it.

Also, "Tough Titties"? WTFsauce?

I haven't read it yet myself, so maybe this is addressed in the book -- but I noticed that on the Amazon discussion board, several people are complaining about the cover, which shows a naked, skinny white girl, and saying that image isn't helping the feminist movement. What are your thoughts on that (Jessica)?

Great interviews! I thought your comment in Salon about the so-called "girls gone wild" phenonmenon was right on.

I can't wait to send your book to my little sis (once she graduates from high school and gets out of my parents' crazy evangelical clutches...)

MD:

There was a big discussion on it here:

http://feministing.com/archives/005898.html

Good interviews- some of the comments are terrible, terrible, terrible.

We need to really work on educating people about sexual assault laws. Because clearly, they are not aware that alcohol is an intoxicant. It is written right into the law-alcohol is the #1 date rape drug. It's not about 'personal responsibility' its the FUCKING LAW.

Congrats on the book, Jessica- my copy should arrive from amazon any day... now I have to decide, do I read it myself, or give it to my lil sis for her sweet 16 this week?!? ;)

Oh - yes - really important about the boob-flashing thing.

College roomie from NOLA, I've been there for wild times and professional times. But the last time I was there was with a group of college buddies for our 40th bdays. Now - one friend decided to flash - because she wanted to. Married woman with two kids, MBA, bla bla bla. I wasn't into the scene and went to bed.

HOWEVER, I promised that if I lived to 45 with my boobs intact, I'd flash.

Why? Because my grandmother died of breast cancer at age 52 and my mother had breast cancer at 44 (survivor, she's 68). And to me, it was like a threat to destiny.

So - you know - each of us is different. But for me, it's like a flying a finger at fate. Not to mention, let's face it - 45 year old boobs? I'm not too worried about anyone actually looking at me. :)

just read one of the interviews with you, Jessica, regarding your book.

I'm positive that (as a newly thirty-something, you know as of late Dec.) many women out of their teens and twenties could use the information packed in here. Even some women in the MSW program. Sad, eh? They don't even know they're feminists. Well, it's final paper writing time for me- so... I'm off. Can't wait to get ahold of the book. And I'm thirty!

Looking forward to reading your book.

Check out this little gem -an independent documentary film about the experiences of a lesbian couple who went undercover as a heterosexual couple inside an Evangelical Organization - Faith of the Abomination - Now in post production.

http://faithoftheabomination.com/

Jessica, I am totally going to buy your book for my 15-year-old cousin. I loved the excerpt on Alternet - I think it's the perfect tone for the teens/twenties group you're aiming for. Great work.

Clicking on links, I found a complaint that said something like Jessica sold out to the patriarchy to get this book published. Since that was a long time ago, and this thread is current, I would like to note that the book is published by Seal Press:
http://www.sealpress.com/
NOT the patriarchy. Just for the record.
I hope someone brought that up way back when, but I just wanted to mention it.

g-wrose,

I'll second the plug for BitchFest. It's a great anthology of essays from the past decade, most of which appeared in Bitch magazine, one of my staple feminist news & culture sources. To Be Real: Telling the Truth and Changing the Face of Feminism, is another good anthology (published in 1995) that captures some of the themes of "third wave" feminism.

If you're interested in the history of feminism in America, I'd recommend Susan Evan's book Born for Liberty: A History of Women in America, which is a readable introduction to all the major names and historical events. (You can also just cherry-pick the chapters you're interested in).

Feminism is for Everybody: Passionate Politics, by theorist and poet bell hooks, is a slim little volume that's a bit dense, but good once you've got a little background. The chapters are thematic, so again you can choose what interests you.

I love Susan Brownmiller's memoir In Our Time: Memoir of a Revolution which gives an exhilarating personal account of 1970s feminist activism.

And Jessica,

Kudos for getting your thoughts out there. As someone who still feels vulnerable handing in papers, I imagine the angst surrounding publication of a book would be intense :).

I've read it once already, and "hand sold" it to a colleague at the bookstore where I work--a woman from my mother's generation who was an early subscriber to Ms. Magazine back in the day. I can't wait to hear what she thinks of it!

All the best.

g-wrose -
If you are in the mood for fiction go with A Handmaid's Tale by Margaret Atwood. In addition to being an awesome read, it will help with some references that the feminist blogosphere slips in every now and then.

Jessica - I thought the Salon interview was a nice preview of what to expect from your book. And I am totally with you on studying with the tv turned on to some aimless basic cable station.

I haven't picked up your book yet but I did see that the SF Chron interviewed you. Congratulations!

The comments over there really suck. Fucking people latching on, in typical fashion, to your awesome boobliness as evidence of frivolous nature of feminism.

Congrats again on the book, I'm looking forward to it.

Jessica,

Congrats on the books and as Kris Kerstoferson (sp?) said to Sinead O'Connor: Don't let the bastards get you down.

Your book is on my Amazon.com wish list and I look forward to reading it.

I read the comments over there but didn't see a way to post, I'll try again later but it's the same old same old of "men get attacked more than women" "NATURE MADE US THIS WAY, women have to be beautiful and men have to be powerful that's just the way IT IS!!!" "If a women sleeps with a lot of guys she's a whore, IT'S JUST THE WAY IT IS," and I love this one: "But she's using POTTY LANGUAGE! Whaaaaaa"

We need to brainstorm responses and facts to counter the "nature made it this way" bullshit they like to trot out 'cause once they have those toys taken away then perhaps they will pout in their corner while the rest of us have fun:)

Salon.com has been one of my fav websites for a long time, but the comments are hell on earth whenever the topic has anything to do with feminism or with race. They are also usually pretty awful whenever any woman publishes anything much at all.

This is partly due to a few individuals who seem to have chosen sitting around waiting to post anti-feminist comments at Salon as their true calling in life. However, there's a viscious circle about it, because some of them (not all, but some) are bullies who effectively intimidate other voices (I know I have been quite intimidated by some of them). This in turn creates an atmosphere in which milder forms of sexism start leaking out becuse no one thinks they are going to be called on it. I have never been spoken to as dismissively and pejoratively as I was in a discussion about -- of all things -- Black Snake Moan over there. I have to say , it rather effectively convinced me that it was not in my best interests to do too much posting there, at least on topics that tend to overstimulate the Angry White Males.

There's also a sort of "we're all above this feminist stuff" attitude that some of the so-called progressives have over there. I think they think it's hip.

I am curious as to why you think the comments at Salon are predictably anti-feminist.

It's the predictably I am curious about.

I would think that Salon, which I would guess has an educated, liberal readership (many from the West Coast?); whose editor-in-chief is a woman and feminist; and who publishes Broadsheet would predictably have a majority of pro-feminist comments.

I am just curious as to why you think it is predictable that they do not.

I am saying that because if it not predictable, then the fact that they do could be interesting and worth thinking about. But if it is predictable, then it makes it easier to dismiss the comments and not think about any truths the comments may hint at, even if they are expressed in a poor manner.

I didn't write the above!

My post appears to have been changed. I did not write the post about predictability.

Oh nevermind I misread the attribution. lol

Oh, I just meant that Salon's comments are known for antifeminism.

The "Editors' Choices" comments are... interesting. I'd be interested to see how they choose them, because ガガ ガガ ガガ's comments hardly seem worthy of being called "Choice", certainly not so much so that they should have tagged two of them as such. Meanwhile, thoughtful, intelligently written responses like the one at the top of page 11 get passed over.

Of the 8 comments currently tagged as "Editors' Choices" there are 6 are fairly negative, and only 1 is actually a positive endorsement of Jessica's book.

Love the language -- I shit you not! Like someone's older sister home from college, or a really cool aunt.

But seriously, there is always room on the shelf for an enjoyable read of an important subject. Like "The Girlfriend's Guide to Pregnancy," which is very funny and a breath of fresh air compared to all the sanctimonious pregnancy manuals out there.

Congratulations and I'll certainly pick it up!

I'm going to take the liberty of re-posting one of the better letters from Salon. Jessica, you should be busting with pride! When the inevitable criticism starts rolling in, just reread this one...

"...I am a women in the sciences, who has been interested in science since I was a wee tot, and who has butted her head against subtle sexism for her whole career, from science classes in high school to academic conferences now.

You know what, I would have loved to have had access to this book as a teenager. It would have saved me a lot of heartache, not because I would label myself as a "victim" as many people here seem to believe, but because it would have given me the strength and tools to recognize when it's not about me. It's really easy to internalize all the negative messages that society and my field can dump on women, especially when you are young and trying to make your way...

-- Fersure"

argh! i visit this site and salon.com regularly. i honestly can't handle the amazingly sh*tty comments on broadsheet on a regular basis. i read them today to get a better understanding of why their readers pounce on anything remotely feminist. it wasn't nearly as insightful as i'd hoped. really, salon readers, are you THAT convinced that all ladies want to accuse you of rape? you really think that the wage-gap is a myth? i know i should be posting these comments on their site, but i think my head would explode if i had to encounter the hateful reactions. it's really, really depressing.
a sidenote - as an owner of a feminist bookstore - if you can avoid barnes&noble & amazon.com -please support your local feminist/independent bookstore when buying Jessica's book! b&n are almost as hate-worthy as the salon commentary.
i heart you, feministing, and all your brilliant readers!

(sarcasm)GOD I love how predictable people are.(end) The feminist movement NEEDS to be profane, needs to be angry and needs to be blunt BECAUSE of these people! If we sat here and asked politely we wouldn't get squat, now would we? Men men men....blah blah blah. Women. Wemin. Wemyn. Wimmin!

I don't think characterizing feminism as "angry" is going to advance its political and cultural values, but I do understand how it can be frustrating. But in my experience, it's far easier to fluster and confuse a narrow-minded person, than it is a feminist so it's really an unfair fight. The only thing anti-feminists have going for them, is 5000 years of history, but not logic, reason, or the truth!

I am headed to the bookstore this weekend to pick up a copy of Jessica's book. Congratulations. It should be an interesting read, although I'm probably not the intended audience, it's nice to read progressive literature, IMHO.

in my experience, it's far easier to fluster and confuse a narrow-minded person, than it is a feminist so it's really an unfair fight

Aww, thanks Steven :).

Speaking for myself, I always try to be broad-minded, though I do occasionally fail and get flustered and/or confused!

I heard bell hooks speak last fall and one of the things she said that really encouraged me was that, in her experience, the feminist movement is much more self-critical and open to hearing and incorporating external criticism (though not always, I expect, in the way those critical persons would appreciate) than many other movements. I hope that, no matter how embattled we feel about the progress of feminism, we keep trying to hold on to that particular strength.

Jessicca in aid of you recent interviews can we have our own interview session? Like the commenters get to ask the Feministing team questions about Feminism and you guys answer on the site.

True, Salon has had a troll problem, which to its credit is product of its popularity and the lack of moderation. They've recently instituted controls designed to weed the trolls out. Compare today's comments to the comments that were left in the wake of the Noer Don't-Marry-A-Career-Woman post. It's gotten a lot better.

And, yes, Salon has a liberal bias, but I don't think liberalism is its defining quality. Salon prides itself on its independence, in a day and age when most news is delivered by increasingly few megacorporations. As a result, it attracts anti-establishment types, including liberals, but also including libertarians, at least one of whom added some interesting comments to today's discussion. I rather like Salon's comments. In the words of Joan Walsh, the editor of salon.com, it's not an echo chamber.

Also, obscure salon trivia: web traffic in its early days was driven by a sex column. They got rid of that five years ago. But salon was a mecca for horny guys, so maybe that's who these trolls are - a vestige of salon's past.

I became curious after reading the excerpt in the Alternet piece - what age group is this book written for?

Weetz, having read the book myself I would say it's for the high-school/college crowd (and us "grown ups" of all ages); I'd be more judicious recommending it to the middle-school and younger crowd. Not a blanket "no," but just a matter of knowing the particular girl (or boy) in question. Some kids that young are rarin' to go on politics and the wider world, some aren't. And as a side note, be aware that it does have swearing (!) and frank talk about sex (!!), which some parents object to--and which some kids, also, aren't comfortable with, yet. (I loved it Jess, so no offense meant, but it is something I get asked a lot as a bookseller when people are buying for teens).

As someone who grew up in the conservative Midwest, I would also add that it's definitely for a liberal crowd--i.e. "don't date anyone who's voted Republican :). Right on! But I think a lot of my nascent pro-feminist friends around West Michigan would get defensive. And defensiveness can shut down peoples' openness to taking in new ideas. Just be wise to how someone might take the tone when you hand it to them. Especially a younger woman who's grown up in a conservative family/church/area and may just be beginning to question the gender role she's been assigned to.

I would think that Salon, which I would guess has an educated, liberal readership (many from the West Coast?); whose editor-in-chief is a woman and feminist; and who publishes Broadsheet would predictably have a majority of pro-feminist comments.

Salon's comments run very liberal on most issues, but not feminist in the slightest. It's predictable because it happens there in every thread about women or feminism. As for why it happens? Well, I can tell you why I don't post there; because a small group of posters is more or less free to spew so much ignorance and misogyny that it's depressing to read. I prefer to think that most men don't hate me and regard me as an equal.

I have not as of yet read your book, and I only discovered you and your site yesterday, but the first thought that comes to mind is that you are not married (to either a woman or a man) or have children, so it is hard to take you as a serious feminist, because you are still capable of being a irresponsible, child like, care free spirited if you so choose. A woman without a spouse or family obligations cannot be safely as reckless as you present yourself to the world. You are described as a one-woman show, and a woman with no attachments can hardly exclaim that she is an example that most women can follow. Could you really expose you frontal side if you had children that would suffer the consequences of your actions? Could you go about not caring about you weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying? Could you really expect to keep a high paying job in corporate America if you refused to adhere to the often-painful social normals that few women dare to revoke? How can you live so flamboyantly while most women suffer horrible self-consciousness issues, and then call yourself a feminist? Unless you suffer like the average woman does, then you cannot behave as if you are a woman's woman much less a feminist.
First off I must admit that I am a straight man, but I am a feminist in that I think woman are superior to men, particularly in the field of decision making, rational thinking, budget handling, and in forming balanced planning to solve problems. But feminism cannot be flaunted until the structures in place that oppress women are torn down, and they will not be torn down by women who do not understand what it is to be a mother or wife, or what it means to have to do horrible things to themselves in order to survive. I see potential in you Jessica, but fighting with sophomoric antics and trivializing the suffering of those who cannot yet overcome the oppression they face, is not the place to start.

I saw the interview on Alternet this morning, grats!

On a semi-related topic, has anyone else noticed how conservative-troll-filled all of the Alternet comment threads have become? Really disappointing. Any actual discussion usually devolves into a virtual shouting match.

....and yes, I realize that this can be said about many online locales, but I've been a fan of Alternet for years, and I'm not pleased with this development there.

ooh BINGO! What did I win? What did I win?

Oh God. I can't imagine anything better than getting "I don't know you at all and I haven't read your book but here is my personal attack of you and your book in which I am going to pretend that I am very informed even though I already stated that I'm not" mail.

Ranter,

are you really saying that a single, 28 year old woman is "childlike" because she herself has not had children or been married, which still seem to be the only true qualifications for womanhood in this paternalistic society?

As a word, paternalistic is very hackneyed, but still an accurate descriptor of your attitudes, in my opinion.

Feminism is not about saying that women are better than men (no gender is inherently better), but it is about saying that a woman can be defined as something other than through her husband, children, or lack thereof.

Jessica, I pre-ordered your book on amazon, and about freaked out when it got here on saturday. I picked it up from the place packages go to (I live in a dorm...) on sunday morning and proceded to carry it around with me all day. I'm not done with it yet, but so far I love it. Good job!

Just got my copy of FFF yesterday. Haven't really had a chance to read it yet, but I've read enough of it to know that it doesn't water down Jessica's tone, which is a good thing.

I can't be bothered to read Ranter's posts, so I hope there isn't anything interesting in there.

Cheers,

TH

Wow, I totally loooove the one comment about how you can't be feminist if you're not married, with children, and a career. [/sarcasm] Here's the first thing we learn at art school: your first idea is always the shittiest. So feel free to think some more about this one, yeah?

I want ze book! I'll get it and then make a point of prominently reading it on my flight back home and freaking out all the Southern people at the airport. *snerk*

Ranter - that's interesting logic, to suggest that only married, child bearing women, are in a position to be feminists.

I also found it curious for you to suggest "Unless you suffer like the average woman does," you can't be a feminist.

That's absurd. Firstly, it's arrogant to assume you know anything about Jessica's personal life to be in a position to say she has never faced oppression or obstacles related to her gender that might prompt her to become a feminist.

Secondly, you create an artificial, rediculous standard for being a feminist. Feminism as a movement could never advance in your worldview unless more people suffer allowing them to have the "right" to stand up against oppression.

Thirdly, the whole concept of minority identity politics is that all women, blacks, and others face some common shared experiences and cultural realities. You are in no position to say "you're not a 45 year old woman, you can't be a feminist."

And really, how distorted can your worldview be if, as a man, you're going around telling 20-something year old women they can't be feminists? Doesn't that essentially prove everything Jessica's been talking about?

Oh that's right, you are discussing "sophomoric rants" that Jessica does to "trivialize suffering." How exactly does that work? So Jessica stands up for other women, and that somehow trivilizes there experience?

You sir, are the epitome of troll in that your sole objective is ridecule without any substantive merit.

TH, don't worry, there was nothing of interest in Ranter's post(s). Unless you count some comedy gold, that is!

I mean -with sentiments like *you can't be a feminist while all this OPPRESSION is still around, jeez!* and *you can't be a feminist if you're not trying to keep your man from straying* and *you can't be a feminist unless you give in to self-loathing and conform to narrow gender roles*? That's simply hilarious...you just don't come across that kind of irony every day.

Ranter said "Could you go about not caring about you weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying?"

Bwwhhhhaaaa hhaaa hhhaa hhaa!!!1!!!!!11!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is the true meaning of feminism.

Jessica! You are not concerned enough with your physical appearance to be a feminist!

Ranter, sorry to be the one to break it to you, but you are not a feminist.
You is in need of an edu-ma-cation.
Good luck.

Hi Jessica,

I met you last week at the panel you moderated and confessed that I'm an avid Feministing reader but a non-commenter. Well, here's my first comment after two years of devoted reading!

I just finished reading your book and wanted to say congratulations. I really love it. You've synthesized so much material in a really fun, accessible way. I think it's great and a perfect way to engage the audience you're aiming at. In fact, I'm going to save my copy for my niece and give it to her in, oh, seven years or so. I hope by the time she's old enough for it, references to things like Girls Gone Wild will just go right over her head (and GGW will be long gone), but I know that you've written so much that's timeless and necessary.

Great job and congratulations!

The only thing anti-feminists have going for them, is 5000 years of history, but not logic, reason, or the truth!

wow, steve. thanks.

too tired to post on that hellhole at salon. ok, maybe just one comment.

i was at the b&n today after buying some jeans and it looks fabulous and accessible.

Ranter's post is fascinating. I don't think I've ever run into some who buys into anti-feminist myths 110%, but still likes feminism. Weird!

Hey y'all, just wanted to say thanks for all the super nice words of support! (And in Ranter's case, a good laugh.) It's much appreciated. And chem_fem...I think that's a great idea. I'm thinking on how it could best work...if you don't see us act on it in the next week or so feel free to shoot me a "friendly reminder" email. ;)

I'm the salon commenter at the top of page 11! Thanks for the appreciation roymac. And thanks for writing this book, Jessica. I just found your site today, and it's amazing.

you are still capable of being a irresponsible, child like, care free spirited if you so choose

Oh, right. Because until you've gotten married and had children, you're not a grown-up. Single adults without children are just like children. We have no responsibilities. It's not like, oh, wehave to support ourselves, advance our careers, or tend to family members and friends, or anything like that. Nope, we just hang around on chaise longues all day eating bonbons. Excellent.

Congrats, Jessica!

Man, in 2 or 3 years I think my sister will be just ready for this. She's chest-ier at 11 than I am at 20 and is hating life in middle school. She keeps asking me why life is so much easier for boys, particularly when her period is making her throw up. Maybe 13 is a little young by some people's estimation, but she's bright and I think a perspective like this would make her feel a lot better. I know it would've made me feel better at that age.

But I'll be buying my own copy much sooner, don't worry ;)

It's amazing how many well-meaning but self-conscious men have told me that they can't possibly be sexist because they think that women are superior to men. I think they honestly believe this will get me to think well of them. I have known some extremely thoughtful men who had moments of insecurity when discussing gender opression and tried out that chestnut. They seemed very suprised when I suggested that this statement was just as sexist and in fact as patronizing and infuriating to many women as its opposite would be.

Dear criticizers
You completely mistook me. I did not and would never say that single women could not be feminist, but I stand by my word that to insinuate that women should pose "full frontal" in order to be feminist, is in my opinion sophomoric. No one can take an exhibitionist seriously. Mainly my point is that I can't take a woman (or a man) seriously as a feminist until they start to address the issues of suffering that is caused from the Inequitable standards that are set upon women as mothers, wives, professionals, and laborers. How can someone who looks as good as Jessica looks and acts as recklessly as she supposedly does, be taken seriously as a feminist before she has even begun to really know how most women have really suffered. The strongest feminist of this world are single mothers who managed to stand on their own 2 feet and beat the odds society stacked against them, after their husbands walk out on them to chase younger women. That is not to say that Jessica can't be an outstanding women, and I am sure she is one, but to promote recklessness (like full frontal) is not the best way to promote feminism. However I did buy her book today, and I am finding it a great read.

PS
I thought feminism was about promoting sisterhood, empowering women, and breaking down the barriers and social norms that oppress women.

Jessica,

I found this site after seeing the debacle after the Clinton photo.

First, you're too concerned with your appearance to be a "real" feminist. Now, you don't have reason to be concerend with your appearance, so you're not a "real" feminist. Or you're too pretty to be dumped.

How can someone who looks as good as Jessica looks and acts as recklessly as she supposedly does, be taken seriously as a feminist before she has even begun to really know how most women have really suffered.

You know, it's hardest on the pretty girls to be taken seriously. It's hard for the pretty girls to show that they are tough as nails, educated, and aiming for the top - because old men like patronising them and pretending that they are just something to look at.

Want to watch a woman struggle to make it? Make her pretty.

I don't see how Jessica is reckless. She supports herself, has worked for some serious organisations, and also wrote a book by the age of 28. So she can't be a feminist unless she married a jerk? Great experiences with pro-women men can't show her the value of feminism through a positive angle?

It is complete crap to judge ideas based on the characteristics of the person presenting them. Men have done that to women for years to discredit them, which tends to be a fairly reliable method when the ideas themselves don't leave a lot of room for attack but aren't particularly appealing to the misogynist in question.

Dear Jessica
As I read more of your writing I realize that "trivializing" was a bit harsh to explain that I do not think that you give enough attention to the issues of bad marriages, unfair divorces, single parenthood for women, glass ceilings, or the general tone that women must be subservient to their men (in either relationships or in the workplace). All those issues I just mentioned are as equally important to the feminist movement as respecting your sexuality and enjoying orgasms. I am not against single women enjoying life (everyone has the right to enjoy their youth), but there is a time when we all have to grow up and face, and hopefully change, the reality of oppression. bearing your boobs, or encouraging other women to bear their boobs, isn't going to change anything. Change will only come when the system of oppression itself is confronted (and I really don't think exhibitionism is a form of confronting the oppression, or at least not in western society).
PS:
You didn't answer any of my questions:
Could you really expose you frontal side if you had children that would suffer the consequences of your actions?
Could you go about not caring about your weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying?
Could you really expect to keep a high paying job in corporate America if you refused to adhere to the often-painful social normals that few women dare to revoke?
I'll guess I'll just have to keep reading your work to find out.

Ranter: thinking women are superior to men = antifeminist.

Why do I get keep getting attacked by commenters. Duhh... because I wrote an attack comment. Since Jessica Valenti aspires to be a leader in the feminist movement, she is open to be under attack even by fellow liberals. I questioned her, because I do not think her message is strong enough, and I think some of her antics are the wrong example to set. I like her work, but I have my reservations.

My line was "but I am a feminist in that I think women are superior to men, particularly in the fields of decision making, rational thinking, budget handling, and in forming balanced planning to solve problems."

Sure, I will agree with you Aideen that saying women are superior to men was probably not well worded, but I would like to see more feminine leadership, because I feel that women are superior to men "particularly in the fields of decision making, rational thinking, budget handling, and in forming balanced planning to solve problems."

I wasn't attacking you, ranter, I was just saying that thinking women were superior to men is not a position that many feminists would advocate. I don't disagree with you, but I don't personally advocate assigning certain characteristics to a particular gender, good or bad.

Ranter - You seem to be primarily concerned with Jessica's "antics." I think you are a little big confused here. I don't believe that Jessica is advocating that women go around flashing their boobs at people. That's not really the point of her book. The "Full Frontal" in the title is a metaphor; she's not actually saying that all young women need to take their clothes off in public to be feminists.

Oh, and I'll answer the rest of your questions from my own point of view:

Could you go about not caring about your weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying?

There's nothing incompatible between feminism and caring about your weight and looks. But the idea that a woman's duty is to keep a man from "straying" is offensive to both men and women. Women should take care of their health for themselves and out of consideration for their partner. Men should do the same. Neither one should say "I'm leaving you and the kids because you gained 20 pounds and don't polish your shoes as often as you did when we were dating."

Could you really expect to keep a high paying job in corporate America if you refused to adhere to the often-painful social normals that few women dare to revoke?

What "social norms" are you talking about? Wearing skirts and heels? In that case, the answer is, "yes", I fully expect to keep my high paying corporate job despite the fact that I don't wear skirts. I consider a tasteful pantsuit and cute flats quite adequate.

I do not think that you give enough attention to the issues of bad marriages, unfair divorces, single parenthood for women, glass ceilings, or the general tone that women must be subservient to their men (in either relationships or in the workplace). All those issues I just mentioned are as equally important to the feminist movement as respecting your sexuality and enjoying orgasms.

This site talks about a shit-ton more than just respecting women's sexuality and orgasms. One might get the impression that you haven't really read much of the writing here...
You'll find writing on: International issues facing women, Reproductive Rights, Educational issues, General Health issues, Racism, Activism, LGBT issues, money issues, and, yes, Sex, amongst other things.

If you want people to take your criticisms seriously, it might help to take a moment to read through the archives before you start. A cursory glance through the archives... hell, just glancing at the main page... should show that the women of feministing have much broader concerns than "sexuality and enjoying orgasms."

Ranter, if you don't like the topics covered in Jessica's book, why not write one of your own? Or better yet, read the book (or even a damn description of it) before deciding you know what it's about.

I don't think Jessica has claimed that FFF is supposed to be the absoluted source for all feminist issues. Instead, it is intended to introduce women, particularly young ones, to modern feminism in a casual, non-textbook way - sort of like Feminism 101 from your big sister. Certainly the issues you list are important ones, but I believe Jessica is trying to reach a target audience whose major concerns aren't likely to be marriage, divorce, and family.

I think others have addressed most of the problems with your earlier comments, but I do have to ask one thing: Since you, as a man, will never be a single mom or face any of the obsticles women face or truly know how most women have suffered, how can you claim to be a feminist or consider yourself to be in any position to define feminism?

I can't believe that we're sitting here explaining to this guy what a metaphor is and how worrying about "keeping a husband from straying" isn't feminist and that you should read a book before you act like you did. Oh, and that before you criticize a blog for not dealing with certainly topics, you should actually READ THE BLOG and see that oh wait, it DOES actually deal with all of those topics. Can't we just ignore him and wait until he's banned?

I know this is a bit late but I used to be a regular commenter on Salon until the trolls just got to be too much. They literally compromised the quality of the Salon experience. I still read some articles but when I read the one on Jessica's and started reading the anti-feminist letters that came with it I just rolled my eyes and went to some other article. I understand Salon prides itself on free speech and anti-censorship but i think all the trolling has discredited them majorly and has discouraged balanced readers who are generally interested in the topic at hand rather than spewing hate. The site is not enjoyable because of those stupid trolls. But Jessica, consider yourself lucky even though some letters were very anti-feminist. The worst in Salon are when any articles are written on Muslim women. They attract the most trolls, racism and hate-filled posts. It's utterly shocking.

We need to brainstorm responses and facts to counter the "nature made it this way" bullshit they like to trot out 'cause once they have those toys taken away then perhaps they will pout in their corner while the rest of us have fun

Ask 'em if they wear glasses or contact lenses. They do? But NATURE MADE THEM with crappy eyesight! Who are they to go against NATURE! Do they wear shoes? BUT NATURE MADE THEM WITHOUT SHOES! Why would they go against NATURE!

Oh...because they don't see why they should suffer cut feet and not being able to see for no good reason? Well...I agree. No need to suffer unnecessarily, no matter what nature does.

Ranter - you're basically saying that Jessica is not a feminist because she's not Superwoman. If you can't see how messed up that is (are you Catholic, incidentally?), I can't explain to you that normal women (you know, who achieve blogger fame and write books before their 30th birthdays) need not suffer to get respect.

Jessica's supposed to spend more time on certain subjects? Her life sounds pretty jam-packed right now. And why WOULD she spend time on subjects that she doesn't know much about? What's wrong with having a feminist site "by and for young feminists?" She's doing quite well with the piece of the feminist pie that she's chosen to take on. Why bash her for not taking it all?

As a hagged out mother of two, I can say with authority that Ranter is full of sh*t. While it's true that motherhood and its attendant obligations give one a different perspective, that perspective is no more valuable than that of a single individual. Moreover, single women are on the receiving end of 100x more sexist BS than married women. They're objectified more, evaluated according to f'ability. But you don't know about that, do you Ranter? Judge first, ask questions later.

PS. Finally got Salon registration and did my best to post some love.

Jessica--
I think your book looks interesting. I read the articles at alternet and salon, but as other commenters have said the amount of hate, misogyny and anti-feminism CONSTANTLY on BOTH of the sites always keeps me from commenting there (and makes their sites way less enjoyable).

Ranter:"How can someone who looks as good as Jessica looks and acts as recklessly as she supposedly does, be taken seriously as a feminist. . .."

That reminds me both of Rush Limbaugh saying that feminism was created to help "ugly" women in society, or Ann Coulter saying pretty girls are always on "her side" (both implying attractive women automatically aren't feminists).

Oenophile said: "Want to watch a woman struggle to make it? Make her pretty."

OR NOT PRETTY. Just make her a woman. :(

That's the point of feminism, ranter, wanting to make things better for women whether pretty or ugly, heterosexual or not, mothers OR NOT, etc.
(Ranter also says "could you go about not caring about your weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying?" Lets put some heterosexism on the anti-feminist sundae! Duh, not all women WANT to be with men, and for that matter, not all men are that appearance oriented. My fiance cares way more about my mind than my looks).

Why would you want to ban someone who is interested in the topic? Don't you think that it is anti-progressive to ban those that question the subject matter?
Maybe I shouldn't make a donation either.

Ranter: it's not anti-progressive to ban douchebags that use this gem of a sentence: "Could you go about not caring about your weight or looks if you wanted to keep a man from straying?"

Ranter, I had a post full of links that's hung up in moderation right now, but if you're really interested in the topic, you can do some reading. You came in swinging- you admitted that you hadn't read the book, but you felt entitled to come in with all kinds of criticisms about Jessica's relationship with feminism, and the site. If you're interested, take some time to read through the archives before you get critical of the site and the writers of the site. You act like the only thing the site talks about is sex and orgasms, but looking at the main page right now I see: a post about Native American women and rape, a post about the Freedom of Choice Act, a post about racial segregation, a post about women's rights in Iran, a post about Equal Pay Day and the wage gap, a post about the Willie Mae Rock Camp For Girls, a post about the abortion ban in ND, this post, another post about the wage gap, this time as it relates to college grads, a post about misogyny in music, a post about abortion in China, a post about transgendered students and prom... I'm halfway down the main page, and not a single post about orgasms or flashing, or embracing sex or whatever.

If you're interested, click on some of the tags, and read the site. There are some really great posts in here about all kinds of different issues facing women. If you're only seeing posts about orgasms, it's because that's what you've decided to see.

Ranter,

Check out the feminism 101 blog. I think it's called "Fianlly, feminism 101" just google it.

Ranter, from your variety of posts and their lack of internal cohesion, it suggests to me that you are looking for a fight and do not (hopefully) even really believe the things you are writing. Either that, or you genuinely know nothing about feminism, women, this website, or Jessica but, as you yourself admitted, still felt entitled to "attack" and judge her based on some very loose associations to the book's title and isolated parts of her interview. Either way, you're not looking too good here. Yet, you've STILL gotten some very patient and gracious commentors to provide helpful links and information and sensible answers to your mobius-loop-like questions, including the fact that Jessica's book is NOT all about sex and is certainly not about exhibitionism. It is also geared toward young women and thus the subject matter may reflect issues of greater relevance to them than marriage and childraising.

Given others' graciousness thus far, you've really got nothing to complain about, and threatening to "not make a donation" or using the old "anti-progressive" chestnut is really not making anyone but YOURSELF look rigid and unwilling to have a discussion. But I do thank you for such lines as "could you really expose your frontal side," which have given me a good laugh.

"Change will only come when the system of oppression itself is confronted." - Ranter

Again, the sweet delicious irony. If only the system of oppression weren't so darned defensive about being confronted!

Ranter,

I believe that "Full-Frontal Feminism" means that the FEMINISM is full-frontal and in-your-face, not the feminist's body.

I also suggest you heed everyone else's advice and actually read the blog. One of the reasons I love coming here is the many posts on women's issues internationally.

I just realized my post seemed like I was saying Ann Coulter was pretty -- I wasn't -- I was saying SHE says that "all the pretty girls are on my side," implying BOTH that she is pretty and that pretty girls aren't feminists

I have been reading Jessica's book, and the blog for the past day and half. I do think there is potential here, but I still find it rather sophomoric. Also the discourse is either fan approval or unconstructive arguments. I haven't made up my mind yet of whether or not to give a donation (or recommend it to others), but I will keep looking at the site.

Ranter, I can't really answer your "questions" because I honestly have no idea what you're asking or trying to say.

And you can keep bringing up your quandry over whether or not to donate--but it's not going to make me take you more seriously.

I could care less if you take me seriously, but I am trying to decide if I can take you seriously (I am not the one with a site or a book).

Ranter translation: I am so important that you need to KNOW that I haven't decided whether to take you seriously, Jessica! You, with your own site and book and career dedicated to feminist issues - the existence of which CLEARLY makes it difficult to discern *which one of us should be taken seriously here*.

I guess I can assume that you Charity take Jessica seriouly. I am curious to know why? Since I stated clearly that I don't care what people think of me (or take me seriously), why would you equate that to mean that I hold myself in importance? My only concern is with the feminist movement and this site. My presence is irrelevant, but feminism should be of huge importance to you.

OmG, don't ban Ranter. He's funnier than vaudeville.

OmG, don't ban Ranter. He's funnier than vaudeville.

jessica: congrats on the book, the graceful handling of the good the bad and the ugly in response to it, and of juggling all the many things you seem to do and handling them with constant awesomeness. unforts, i blew my self-determined weekly book allowance on girlbomb, so yours'll be next week. can't wait, i mean it.

and as an unmarried (potentially for keeps, for whatever that's worth) twentysomething feminist with no babies but a whole lot of responsibility--you and your website open my world and challenge me on the daily.

word.

Ranter is a what about the menz and priority troll.

I got a copy in my hot little hands today. When I have more money, Killing Rage: Ending Racism and Teaching To Transgress by bell hooks. g-wrose, Listen Up is an awesome third wave anthology.

My thanks to everyone for the suggestions!!!

I actually found this site, Feministing, THROUGH that interview on Salon last week and have been exploring ever since. I'm now addicted and have Full Frontal Feminism in my waiting list at Amazon. ahaha, yes, "tough titties". Wonderful title.

I actually found this site, Feministing, THROUGH that interview on Salon last week and have been exploring ever since. I'm now addicted and have Full Frontal Feminism in my waiting list at Amazon. ahaha, yes, "tough titties". Wonderful title.

Oh, look, I posted twice the same thing. whoops.

dd- teaching to transgress is a really good book- i love bell hooks!