Riding the Second Wave

I’m one of those aesthetically minded readers who always judges a book by its cover. In this case, my vintage edition of The Female Eunuch was just begging to be handled on account of the provocative, trompe-l’œil image of a bodysuit gracing its front cover.

In spite of PC’s repeated praise of Germaine Greer’s writing style, it was the picture that finally won me over: It reminded me of the Jean-Paul Gaultier second-skin dresses I visited recently at the Montréal Museum of Fine Arts.

Guys, if you’re afraid of the “f” word (i.e., “feminism”) ‘cause you think that the writer of said type of book is out to cut your dick off, take heart. Greer actually bitch-slaps women for being patsies, or what she defines as “female eunuchs.”

WTF is a “Female Eunuch”? 

Female eunuchs, women who accept their traditional social conditioning and express a “castrated” sexuality, have everything to lose. Why? Their passivity is grounded in a pattern of inertia that wins over “new forms of desire and curiosity.”

To put it bluntly, women who deny their sex drive (using sex to barter or manipulate the men in our lives is an indication of this denial) end up feeling miserable. The life drive, the energy that incites to you action, that inspires you to be creative, is intimately tied to your sex drive. Oppress one and you’re messing with the other. In other words, Greer stands firmly against the desexualization of women in western culture, or the definition of the feminine (formalized by Freud) as “without libido.”

Sex as Knowledge 

You’ll be inspired by more of what she has to say about sex. In praise of active expressions of sexuality, she claims that sex acts themselves are “forms of inquiry,” i.e., legitimate means of gaining knowledge.

I’ve always known this – anyone who’s ever learned something new from a lover or participates in group sex will attest to the truth of this statement – but to see this idea in print was a revelation.

Promiscuous Women 

Here’s the part that really caught my attention though. In the chapter titled “The Ideal,” she discusses briefly the case of promiscuous women by outlining the implications of their struggle against the chokehold of social convention. Being one myself, I read on with keen interest.

This is how she defines the promiscuous woman:

1. A woman who decides to become a lover without conditions.

If non-monogamy falls under “without conditions,” then check.

2. A woman who feels “constant sexual desire, tenderness and interest in people.”

I’m an extrovert. I’m horny most of the time. Check again.

3. Her peer group’s opinions will usually side with the man who tries to "tame" her out of “love.”

Check. Again. (Note to self: Recall who sided with whom after the divorce and why.)

4. Others will condemn her open sexuality as a form of sex addiction, or accuse her of being unable to say “no” to sex.

Ok, so far no one’s insulted me to my face, but then again PC and I keep our nomo status on the down low. (With the exception of this blog, of course.)

Number five’s the winner: 

5. “She may limit herself to writing defenses of promiscuity, or even books about women” (!!!!)

I guess that explains why I’m writing this blog, lol!

Now you know why I love a good “feminist” book. To cite the wise words of Seamus Heaney: I read “to see myself, to set the darkness echoing.”