The body is a site of impassioned, fraught and complex debate in the West today. In one political moment, left-wingers, academics and feminists have defended powerful men accused of sex crimes, positioned topless pictures in the tabloids as empowering, and opposed them for sexualizing breasts and undermining their �natural� function. At the same time they have been criticized by extreme-right groups for ignoring honour killings and other �culture-based� forms of violence against women. How can we make sense of this varied terrain?
In this important and challenging new book, Alison Phipps constructs a political sociology of women�s bodies around key sexual violence, gender and Islam, sex work and motherhood. Her analysis uncovers dubious rhetorics and paradoxical allegiances, and contextualizes these within the powerful coalition of neoliberal and neoconservative frameworks. She explores how �feminism� can be caricatured and vilified at both ends of the political spectrum, arguing that Western feminisms are now faced with complex problems of positioning in a world where gender often comes second to other political priorities.
This book provides a welcome investigation into Western politics around women�s bodies, and will be particularly useful to scholars and upper-level students of sociology, political science, gender studies and cultural studies, as well as to anyone interested in how bodies become politicized.
I’m a UK-based scholar, writer and teacher working in the area of gender, with a specific focus on sexual violence. I’m Professor of Political Sociology and Associate Head of Social Sciences, Politics, IR and Religion at York St John University. I’m also honorary Professor in the Centre for Women’s Studies at the University of York.
My latest book is called Me, Not You: the trouble with mainstream feminism and is published by Manchester University Press. My forthcoming book is called Sexual Violence in Racial Capitalism, and is also with Manchester University Press.
Feminism. A very loaded, amorphous movement that has always been contentious, divisive and as always, misrepresented. This book however, was not making any case to absolve the feminist movement from the stream of slander. It analyses four feminist topics and relates them to the overarching neoliberal and neoconservative values that infiltrate our lives. Phipps tries to show how seemingly straight forward definitions that feminists constantly use, such as 'choice' and 'agency' are not as direct as they believe. She demonstrates how the power structures, economic systems, history and many other factors construct how a woman makes her choice, and of course how the rest of the society interact with it and might as well by return, shape it. Expounding on topics such as 'sexual violence against women', 'gender and Islam', 'sex workers' and 'reproductive rights for women', Phipps shows how pervasive the neoliberal and neoconservative systems were in framing the debate around the issue both in the Western Left and Right. She also points out the contradictory alliance and overlap between Middle Eastern feminists and the Western Neo-Imperialist agenda, and between the Western Left and the Islamists, whose agenda puts women in a perpetual state of oppression. Generally the book is a self-reflective analytical account from a Left-Wing professor to her fellow comrades. While it was an eye-opener, the lack of solutions provided was a bit disappointing, for Phipps didn't suggest broad guidelines nor a clear position on what Western feminists, from a position of privilege, should do to help Middle Eastern (stifled) feminist movement. All while keeping it authentic and true to its main goals, without Orientalist/Imperialist undertones and without being reticent on some cultural/religious ideas and scripture that unequivocally oppress women.
Interesting book that helped me understand more of how feminism has been co-opted by neoliberalism and neoconservative values (and where they intersect). Wish there was an alternative framework presented + more solutions offered, rather than just pointing out all the flaws in the logic. Language was also a bit inaccessible to me at times.