Our Shared Shelf discussion

Yes, Caitlin Moran isn't perfect. I'm surprised at the negativity this book is receiving here, though. It's a damn funny book. There's very little about trans people because this is an autobiography with feminist commentary, and the author doesn't know any (or doesn't mention if she does). She defends trans rights and criticizes people against them. I think that's the important thing, not whether or not she uses some distasteful words about everyone. I don't agree with her on plenty of things, but that's okay in a book like this. It's her analyzing her life from her grown-up, feminist perspective.

I also think it's wonderful to see such a loud, bold woman writing a funny book. Women aren't "supposed" to be rude in their humor and I think Moran is proving anyone who thinks that wrong. I hope I don't seem hostile. I just don't understand what everyone is so very upset about. I'm gay and I think some gay jokes are funny. I'm mentally ill and I laugh about it all the time. It's all right to laugh at yourself. This is a pretty intersectional book club so far. After The Color Purple, I'm happy to have something that makes me laugh aloud. It's not a feminist manifesto, but it's good in its own way.

How about this thread can be for people who do like it to talk about what they like, and people who have problems with it can talk about those in another thread. Maybe those who don't like it don't have to pretend they do, but they can find a different thread to talk about that, and not "yuck on the yum" of the people who would like to hang out in a more positive space.

I think we can both enjoy the book while constructively criticizing its weaknesses, and additionally, we can accept it for what it is without being obligated to like it just for what it is.

I happened to like this book for a number of reasons despite many legitimate criticisms from others, as well as things that I personally didn't appreciate. As a polemical memoir, it is successful, but despite this success, I can see why many people would be disinterested in it, given the number of funny feminist memoirs by white women there are on the market. Some people may have reached peak white lady memoir (that's a joke, just to clarify since it's hard to translate over the internet, but the point still stands!) ;)

I had specific reasons for liking this book. As a music scholar, I appreciate Moran's background as a culture critic, particularly her start at Melody Maker and subsequent focus on rock and pop music. The pages she spent discussing Lady Gaga were particularly enjoyable for me, as well as discussions of other musicians, and even the frequent references and the setting of some of her memories.

I also have a deep appreciation for her very graphic depictions of pivotal moments in a woman's life, often considered taboo to discuss publicly in too much detail. While she still employs humor in those sections, the tone definitely shifts; the material is darker, heavier, and simply disgusting. I love it! (view spoiler)[I'm referring specifically to her graphic discussions of menstruation, masturbation, and drug use, but especially her first childbirth and later abortion. (hide spoiler)] I know she is not the first or only writer to do this, but this is one thing that, in my opinion, we can't get enough of. These issues need constant exposure to be normalized and to erase the stigma!

I have to agree with you Katelyn the gore of the book is excellent!! It makes me laugh. I understand all the criticism from the other discussions, but Moran is funny and has a funny way (in a good way) of looking at life. So she's not a Scholar in Woman's History, who cares. She brings a light-hearted perspective to a very serious subject and sometimes that is needed to remember that life is not as bad as it could be. Not to make light of women being the unsung heroes of the universe, we need to be respected more for what we have to offer, but remember it is ok to laugh and enjoy life.

Can you enjoy this book without being defensive?
(the cissexism is not just using a specific slur, but ignoring that not everyone who has a vagina and/or is female-read identifies as a woman)

I like what Katelyn mentioned in the spoiler though.

I agree with Leanne. I read this book last year and I haven't been able to read it again for the club, but I remember it as a funny book. Now I have doubts about my memory because I see a lot of angry people! Of course I didn't agree or relate or even like everything she says, but that's not her goal anyway.

I read some months ago and I don't remember where, that sometimes calling yourself "a feminist" can be dangerous because it puts you on the spotlight and then you're criticized for everything you do that doesn't seem "feminist".
"How is she making a juice for her husband? She said she's a feminist!" - That's actually a pretty stupid example, but (I hope) you know what I mean. I think that's what happens with this author.

Nobody says she's not a feminist, but she's not intersectional. If you don't understand what bothers people, that's likely your privilege, or even internalized negative messages about a different dimension of discrimination you experience.
It's okay when something isn't relatable on an individual level, but not on a systematic one. Does she only care about white able-bodied women? (yes)

@ the OP, if you can laugh about homosexuality and mental illness, more power to you! Just make sure this doesn't hurt other people by contributing to stereotypes about them or pressuring them to "lighten up".

Oh well I'm out of this thread. Let me just post this review https://feministtexicanreads.wordpres...

But should all the books Emma suggests on a feminist book club be intersectional? I think we all should have intersectional awareness, but I don't understand how the problem here is with this specific book and not with the book selection in general.

The problem is that when you're not being actively inclusive, you're passively exclusive.
Reading such a cissexist and ableist book is a wasted opportunity. Emma has a powerful platform but didn't use it responsibly in this case, especially with her massive endorsement of the book.

This choice attempted to address other problems with book selection like the availability of audiobooks and translations. It's also the first non-American book chosen so far. I'm grateful for the effort but I find many positive reviews disturbing.

so I grew up in a bubble.. then I went to a very conservative college that valued traditional gender roles.. I didn't even know what postmodernism or feminism was until a few years ago.. (don't hate me!) and I'm also new to this group.. I'm a total egalitarian in my marriage and I can relate a lot to this book, even thinking back to my worldviews as an adolescent.. before I had a word for it..I was a feminist. And I'm loving this book!

I think Emma's done a great job with picking intersectional books thus far, and that this was a chance to lighten up and have a good laugh. I'm very interested in the other, more serious threads posted, and I'm pretty critical of some of Moran's views (LOVE the comment on this thread about being critical of things we like!) but I think it's okay to enjoy the book anyway!

Glad to see some other people are having a chuckle at the book, too.

I guess the point here is that when we talk about humour, people have different tastes about it or different ways to perceive it, especially if the words used are bold, or strong, or have a negative meaning. I agree that this is a book that fits in the comedy or humour tag, yet I didn't like it. I respect people who said that loved it, yet I would expect to be respected because I didn't like it, and didn't like certain expressions.
(english is not my mother tongue, so I'm struggling to try to explain my opinion in the best way possible).

Marina wrote: "Nobody says she's not a feminist, but she's not intersectional. If you don't understand what bothers people, that's likely your privilege, or even internalized negative messages about a different d..."

I went to the link and it was awesome. I combed through a few more posts, and am practically crushing on her now. Thanks for posting the link!

There's very little about trans people because this is an autobiography with feminist commentary, and the author doesn't know any (or doesn't mention if she does)

It's been almost 2 years since I read this, but IIRC she does mention her close trans friend who attended her wedding. Personally I didn't feel that it was presented in a "some of my best friends are..." sort of way.

Also I wonder if some of her writing sounds differently to American ears than to British ones. Two people divided by a common language isn't just a cliche. When my British friend tells me I'm "common as muck," it's not like an American calling me "trailer-trash" or some other classist term.

I'm neither defending nor critiquing her on this point since I'm reluctant to get into this debate. I try to be an ally and just STFU and listen as much as possible.

So going into this book I had no clue how I would feel about it after all the differing reviews and comments I was reading. Right now I am about halfway through the book and I absolutely love it so far. I think Moran does a great job incorporating her personal experiences into the book and she makes her points in ways that always make me laugh. True, it has crude language which I saw many people comment on, but I grew up in Jersey and live in Brooklyn, NY now so crude language is a way for life for me. Haha. the book is heavy on the British terminology, but I have not had an issue with that and I think the book translates well for American readers. True, I have had to look a few terms up but that just means I get to learn something new!

As for the comments that have been made about how the book is more like how to be a white woman than how to be a women, well I just think that is because Moran is writing from her point of view. She is writing from personal experience so she can really only write about what she knows. However this is not something I even thought of until reading certain comments, so I don't think it would have crossed my mind without being brought to my attention.

I think you need to go into this book knowing it will be blunt, and crude, and humorous. I feel like that is just her way of speaking, and coming from the area I do it is something I can relate to. I can identify with a lot of what Moran says and I love that she does it all with a sense of humor. So yeah, for what it counts for, my personal opinion is that I am really enjoying the book so far and I am happy Emma chose it. :-)

I definitely agree with you, Colleen! And Cynthia, that's a great point about British vs. American language. The two British people I've known both swore like sailors and thought nothing of it--it seemed less personal.

I certainly do not agree with everything she says but I did enjoy some chapters. I am not quite done with the book yet but so far it's been okay. (view spoiler)[ The fuzzy chapter gave me a lot to think about. I loved how open she was about "wanking" thought that was refreshing even. And I loved how she finally got rid of Courtney with help from her sister and when he's standing there being a best all she says is can we keep the maracas. (hide spoiler)] All in all it's not the best thing I've read but in a lot of ways its a breath of fresh air. Some of the issues in the book are not discussed by women I've encountered quite so honestly and after this I'm sit here wondering why not? My biggest take away so far is approaching things that you are not (view spoiler)[100% sure are sexism by just saying hey that was rude. (hide spoiler)]

I don't love the book and I'm not upset I'm reading it either. And I do lose a lot by the Bristish stuff but I don't mind if I care enough I look it up otherwise I just keep reading its easy enough to get the gist of it. I am also not catching all the humor and wondering if that's maybe because of the British English but again that's okay, I can recognize it in a lot of places as humor, but don't find it particularly funny myself.

So whose responsibility is it, then, to tell intersectional stories and provide intersectional analyses?

I enjoyed reading the book. I agree with what she had to say on some things.

That seems to unfairly place the burden on certain groups. White women should be just as capable and responsible for doing intersectional work, even if they are straight, able-bodied, middle-class, etc. In fact, they should do even more work, since they have likely been complicit, unknowingly or not, in multiple oppressions. There is a distinct difference, after all, between being a "white feminist" and a feminist who is white.
Her experience does not have to be intersectional (though if she does discuss class issues, it seems it is a bit), but her analysis should be. What is the use of a feminism that isn't? I can't find any.

Laurelei wrote: "That seems to unfairly place the burden on certain groups. White women should be just as capable and responsible for doing intersectional work, even if they are straight, able-bodied, middle-class,..."

Well, I would question where in this book it would have been appropriate for her to discuss issues outside of her experience, as it is structured primarily as a memoir.

I think feminists with privilege need to use their platforms to expand the playing field for women in general to be successful. It would be inappropriate for a white woman to discuss experiences that are not her own, especially to profit off that, and to come across as a savior or as if she is trying to speak for minority groups. The larger problem is that there aren't enough opportunities for women who are not the quintessential privileged feminist to have the spotlight.

The main issue with Moran's work is that her humor does not always translate, and her language is at times careless, and this results in a feeling of exclusion.

I think one could feasibly write in a memoir of why one's experiences are not intersectional. If it's an issue of isolation -- why?
I think the idea that white women shouldn't write of experiences that are not their own is different from discussing these issues in general. You should not appropriate experiences, but you should not stay silent, either. I certainly would not want a man to never address sexism -- I just would not want him to speak for me. Two different things. If a man never addresses sexism for fear of "white knighting" me, he will stay silent, and play the same role as men who are indifferent to my struggles. One can discuss sexism, racism, classism, etc., without being inherently exploitative. To not do so is a cop-out.
From reading the responses of other group members who have read this book, as well as the reviews in general, I cannot agree that the main problem relates to her sense of humor/language. I think her book is symptomatic of larger issues.

Laurelei wrote: "I think one could feasibly write in a memoir of why one's experiences are not intersectional. If it's an issue of isolation -- why?
I think the idea that white women shouldn't write of experiences ..."

I think it's a very fine line. I guess I'm just not convinced that every book on feminism, regardless of genre or topic, throw in a disclaimer... When does that just become lip service?

I agree that the problems with the book are symptomatic of larger issues, absolutely. Cultural and systemic issues to which her book contributes, but I think by the very nature of such issues, the individual is not wholly responsible for missteps. For that reason, I don't fault Moran 100% for her memoir lacking in these areas, but criticisms are still legitimate and necessary. Has anyone read any of her subsequent books? I'd be curious if she took these criticisms and learned from them. If not, that's when I think she becomes absolutely responsible for contributing to harmful white feminism.

Laurelei wrote: "I think one could feasibly write in a memoir of why one's experiences are not intersectional. If it's an issue of isolation -- why?
I think the idea that white women shouldn't write of experiences ..."

This makes me think that every white woman should go adopt a WOC or other minority pet just to be able to fulfill some criteria that a certain kind of person demands - or else your memoir is total crap. If it makes sense to throw in a disclaimer of all the people we include in our comments, by all means, but pushing some things into a memoir just because? Yeah, not for me. Don't you think it shines through that a person really doesn't know what she's talking about?

Because in my case I seriously would have to go to a Go club to adopt a Chinese person to fix the Asian issue, to a salsa club to adopt black people to fix the black issue, or to some club for sexual minorities to adopt one, any, to fit yet another minority checkbox. I find this insulting. I should befriend people when it makes sense, when there is a mutual friend barometer going off for both, and not to create some fake facade that isn't even true. Just read my input in the White Perspective thread for more on my immediate surroundings and how few POC we have here still. Not all white people can magically fulfill these "standards" when writing a memoir/autobiography and honestly it boggles my mind that it was suggested at all.

In the end, this is an autobiography. We all follow our own paths and learn at our own pace. This was written in 2011 and she posts quite frequently about transgender issues on her Twitter. I think looking at it critically is a good thing, but inclusivity can't be forced. It has to be learned.

Melle wrote: "In the end, this is an autobiography. We all follow our own paths and learn at our own pace. This was written in 2011 and she posts quite frequently about transgender issues on her Twitter. I think..."

If writing on feminism in general, then yes, intersectionality should be not only pondered but actively mentioned. If writing a memoir as a person, who does not meet any POC in everyday life ever, not so much. Of course it depends on the angle and what one wants to write about, but if I write about life as a scientist, and there has been not a singe POC ever as a colleague, it's hardly a hurtful, racist act to "exclude" POC.

Aglaea I'm trying to work out where these misunderstandings are coming from. So I'm going to try asking some questions.

1. Do you think intersectionality is primarily about race?

2. Do you think discussion of race is only relevant or necessary if there are people of african or asian descent present in a society or group?

3. Do you think a person has to be of african or asian descent or know someone who is in order to understand how racial thinking operates?

So glad to see the comments by Laurelei. Vulgar language is mostly a personal preference (although I think feminist writers should be careful with the c-word because it can be triggering for certain groups like trafficking or rape/assault/abuse survivors, and idk how trans women feel about it?) anyway, i don't think she should've invented experiences (though privileged people should consider whether their memoirs really matter so much). but insensitivity is a bigger issue. really it doesn't take a genius to realize that the book will be alienating towards trans and disabled people at the very least, or that the remark about the Vietnamese girl was racist. heck she could've cooperated with activists to make sure she didn't fuck up.

btw don't know about trans activism but i've previously posted a screencap of her tweets where she says she "couldn't give a shit" about having woc on her show.

also, given the most commonresponses/defense against the criticism...
-is it really a 100% memoir? she does seem to give advice on what's okay and what isn't, at least wrt striptease, pole dancing etc. for me the book would be less problematic if she didn't actually tell people what to do.
-speaking of that, just an honest question: does she have a personal experience with striptease etc? or in general, is it okay for someone with a uterus to write about abortion if they've not had one? (view spoiler)[i know that she's had it and describes it. btw does she realize that some of the readers will be ttc, infertile or traumatized by a previous abortion or miscarriage? or even happy parents, especially those who fought hard to have their child. i know that these groups are privileged in the context of abortion, in the sense that their tragic stories are heard, and sometimes assumed to be more common than they are. but still, i hope she considered their feelings or told them to skip the chapter (hide spoiler)]
-http://www.patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyf... do you think her feminism is what this article describes as "difference feinism"?
-who is this book really for? it's clearly not a good introduction to feminism, and experienced feminists will at most get some new things to say to those who are hesitant... would it not be much better off as an actual memoir, only telling things about her life and feelings, without all the preaching?
-many have said that they've disagreed with her about many things but still enjoyed the book. don't you think that the dignity of trans, black and certain other groups of people is not a matter of opinion?

Uh, where in the world did I even write the word "disclaimer"? I meant that if you grow up never knowing people unlike you, that would be a formative part of your character, especially if you eventually move somewhere less sheltered. The absence of difference is still meaningful. Anything else about "adopting a PoC" is a weird misinterpretation of what I said, and is a bit mind-boggling, frankly.
Anyway, Marina and Bunny posted great points that I know I will reflect on.

Furthermore, having a non-intersectional background does not prevent one from employing an intersectional analysis on said background and feminism. I lived a few years in a sheltered area, but racial, gender, and class politics still mattered, because white, male, middle-class people still have these identities. If I were to write about this time using the lens of social justice or intersectionality, I could analyze the way "whiteness" functioned with class to produce a certain politics. It really doesn't seem that bizarre or difficult to me to consider such issues, even when living in a homogenous society, if I proclaim to have a feminist analysis.

@Aglaea, excluding POC or trans people is not only about not having them represented. It's also not realizing that they will be among your readers, for example not acknowledging that feminism indeed fails some people (not speaking of cis men here), who have every right not to call themselves feminists. omg if she has to say that something is wrong and not okay, it should've been about TERFs, but of course she quotes them instead, grrrr. also how about acknowledging that some black women prefer the term womanism, and how they're NOT the problem. the problem are white cishet women who don't feel like they need feminism.

Laurelei wrote: "Uh, where in the world did I even write the word "disclaimer"? I meant that if you grow up never knowing people unlike you, that would be a formative part of your character, especially if you event..."

We've discussed disclaimers in this thread and other threads.

Bunny wrote: "Aglaea I'm trying to work out where these misunderstandings are coming from. So I'm going to try asking some questions.

1. Do you think intersectionality is primarily about race?

2. Do you think discussion of race is only relevant or necessary if there are people of african or asian descent present in a society or group?

3. Do you think a person has to be of african or asian descent or know someone who is in order to understand how racial thinking operates?"

1. Do you think intersectionality is primarily about race?
No, and I don't believe I've ever stated such either? What made you ask me? I believe we have quite a few different intersectional topics going here already, and in case you didn't notice, I mentioned sexual minorities in my earlier comment. I could have mentioned disabled or other, too, but felt the one example showed I do know it isn't just about race. No?

2. Do you think discussion of race is only relevant or necessary if there are people of african or asian descent present in a society or group?
No, but the comment section would probably not be enough to cover exactly all races and other groups with intersectional needs, so I picked the three first that came to mind, probably because there have been some discussion on said groups recently. I don't believe I've ever insinuated that racial discussions are only relevant when more races than one is present. Have anything I've ever written insinuated or claimed this? Because even in the White Perspective thread I've written numerous times how racism is growing worrysomely in a country where most of the population is the "original" one.

3. Do you think a person has to be of african or asian descent or know someone who is in order to understand how racial thinking operates?
No. Do you believe I'm stupid? Because these questions sure come across as insinuating such. Do you notice how you sort of speak down to me? Like I'm slow at grasping what you mean? Or not paying attention? You've done it before, you know, but I chose not to make a big deal of it, but your tone can be rather superior, even if you don't mean for it to be so.


A memoir is a memoir. Based in personal experiences. One shouldn't have to distort one's experiences by creating synthetic constellations with people of various groups, just to please some other group aka reader audience. Are people seriously not grasping what is being said here? I'm not the only one to say it, but Katelyn did, too, only her words were less confrontational. Good lord. Go harp at her, too.

And by the way, few are honouring OP's request, but you had to come to complain, school, and educate also in this very thread. It's rude.

I'm still in the first half of this book, but I think it's important to note that not every feminist book needs to contain every single aspect that one thinks is a key aspect of feminism. A book, particularly a memoir-style one such as "How To Be A Woman," can have a narrow (or even isolated) focus and still bring merit to the table. After all, it's a small piece of a much larger affair!

Personally, I have been thoroughly enjoying the book so far. I am a white woman so, naturally, I may relate more to her experience than certain others. I do believe in criticizing things we enjoy, yet I also believe in focusing on the positive aspects contained within the main ideas of a work. For me, doing so opens up a lot of opportunity for reflection, expansion, and discussion beyond just the literature itself.

I look forward to completing the book so that I can more specifically and elaborately discuss it, but even what little I've read so far has prompted a good deal of thought-provoking discourse.

I want to thank the Swedish translator (I assume) for using a less inflammatory language and less offensive similes without losing Moran's blunt voice.

There was a lot in her life and upbringing that I couldn't identify with, but I enjoyed the book anyway. She put the spotlight on some female issues that are normally not talked about in that way. It was very obvious that she was writing to her younger self and not considering other viewpoints, but I found her sufficiently amusing to be able to overlook those faults.

I agree with the points that Marina, Bunny and Laurelei made here.

Nevertheless, after finally finishing the book even though people who I'm friends with said I should stop reading if it makes me so upset, I was able to find some chapters right at the end, which were written well and did not have that much offensive comparisons in them.

I especially liked one of her last chapter, which was about abortion . I was particularly interested in her explanation of why she as a mother had an abortion as I had never thought about this situation.

I appreciate reading this book for the book club, as I was able to think about how I view equality and participate in interesting discussions, which were the result of the controversies in the book. I'm glad I was able to read until the end because it was worth reading the chapter about abortion.

This quote really resonated with me:

(view spoiler)["And - as a woman reconciled in her own body - I feel I can argue with anyone's god about my right to end a pregnancy. My first conception - wanted so badly - ended in miscarriage, three days before my wedding. A kind nurse removed my wedding manicure with nail-polish remover, in order to fit a finger-thermometer for the subsequent D&C operation. I wept as I went in to the operating theatre, and wept as I came out. In that instance, my body had decided that the baby was not to be and had ended it. This time, it was my mind that has decided that this baby was not to be. I don't believe one's decision is more valid than the other. They both know me. They are both equally capable of deciding what is right." (hide spoiler)]

I agree with virtually everything the OP said. I think we, as feminists, tend to get so caught up in making sure everything is intersectional and inclusive that sometimes we forget that not everything that we write or say is going to be that way.

Ms. Moran's book is a memoir, based on her personal experience, and her personal experience is as a white, cis-, able-bodied, average woman. It's OK for her to write a memoir that is meant to resonant with other white, cis-, able-bodied, average women.

We should be smart enough, and compassionate enough, to acknowledge this and discuss it without resorting to disparaging her for not being a "real" feminist. We can discuss what we don't like about her book, or her humor, or her brand of feminism, without attacking her. And in the end, we're ALL better feminists for having read this book because it brings to light two things. First, it shows us the perspective of a certain type of woman...and that's valuable. Second, it shows us where that perspective can be lacking, and guides us to find perspectives that are different. And that's also valuable!

Marina wrote: "So glad to see the comments by Laurelei. Vulgar language is mostly a personal preference (although I think feminist writers should be careful with the c-word because it can be triggering for certai..."

Marina, I take a lot of offense to one of your comments.

You said, "...(though privileged people should consider whether their memoirs really matter so much)"

I read this and feel that you're saying cis-, white, middle class women shouldn't write memoirs. Please correct me if I'm wrong. While I understand the idea that we need to hear more voices OUTSIDE that range...you're, in essence, trying to silence a whole lot of women whose perspectives are very valid and worthwhile.

No two people are the same. Just because we've read a lot of perspectives from privileged women doesn't mean we've heard it all. And if you're tired of reading about it, there are many many other books out there from different perspectives. This is the glory of being alive in 2016.

And while on the topic of privilege...everyone in this discussion is privileged. We're on a social media site on the internet...that makes us wealthy. That makes us living a life of comfort compared to too many others. To say that women of privilege should consider whether their memoirs really matter so much...from a point of privilege...is incredibly entitled in my opinion.

Aglaea wrote: "And by the way, few are honouring OP's request, but you had to come to complain, school, and educate also in this very thread. It's rude."


Ah well, I tried, but I guess it's just not possible for me to talk with you on this subject. Every time I try you take offense. Every different thing I try is wrong. So I guess I will give up.

All I was saying is that privileged people (especially white cishet men) should be aware that they can get published more easily than someone less privileged. That there are still too many books with racism, misogyny, ableism, anti-LGBTQ+ sentiments in them, exactly because so many of us have the luxury of choosing when we want to be intersectional and inclusive, and when we just want to have a little fun. Our support only matters if it's part of everything we do, not if we promote trans rights when speaking of trans people but then use cissexist language when speaking of feminism.

I tried to stay away from this thread but I just find it too upsetting how people put their own enjoyment above the dignity of other people. by all means, discuss the positive things, but don't frame it as "just my opinion". do you even realize that you're saying this is a chance for white cis people in the group to have a laugh, while the underprivileged are generally not going to enjoy the book?

Marina I feel like we are seeing white fragility in action here. Do you know about that concept? Ever since I learned about it I have found it really helpful in understanding the sort of defensiveness and dismissal that often greets attempts to talk about privilege and intersectionality.

Marina wrote: "All I was saying is that privileged people (especially white cishet men) should be aware that they can get published more easily than someone less privileged. That there are still too many books wi..."

You're right about the publishing issue, and I agree with what you say there. I think our difference of opinion comes from the fact that you see reading this book as somehow detrimental to the dignity of other people. Many of us do not see it that way. Reading a book that is not all-inclusive can be a wonderful learning experience for reasons I listed in a comment above (it both makes us aware of the holes in some people's perspectives and gives us reason to look closely at those perspectives...both the good and the bad).

I'd also like to point out that there were discussion threads about people being turned off of bell hooks' book because of her religion. And people were upset about The Color Purple because of sexual violence triggers. These are all valid complaints and anyone who doesn't want to read those books is within their rights. That doesn't mean we shouldn't choose them as book club choices. There is still value in these books. And I think the same is true of this one from what I've read.

Bunny wrote: "Marina I feel like we are seeing white fragility in action here. Do you know about that concept? Ever since I learned about it I have found it really helpful in understanding the sort of defensiven..."

Bunny, are you accusing me of 'white fragility'? If so, I would appreciate if you said so. Your comment is a little confusing as is.

I don't mean to come across as defensive. I think this is a legitimate discussion we should have. Something that I've noticed in this book club, as well as in other fortums, is that sometimes we (as feminists) tend to be very sensitive when it comes to inclusiveness and intersectionality (as we should be)...but it gets to the point that we blind ourselves to seeing the good in things.

It's OK to not like this book, or to not like Ms. Moran, but that doesn't mean her book (or her) is objectively bad. She sounds like she really believes in the fundamental tenants of feminism, even if she's wrong on certain points. It's important to remember that when we discuss her work.

Sherrie why would you think of me talking about white fragility as an accusation? Would you ask me if I was "accusing" you of speaking English? Or "accusing" you of owning shoes? When I want to talk about racial thinking it doesn't mean I'm accusing everyone in the vicinity of some shameful personal failing or demanding that they immediately repent their heinous sins against humanity. I display white fragility myself. It's part of being raised white. I'm not accusing anyone. I'm observing that the topic of race makes people and white people in particular, very defensive and uncomfortable and that the ways that discomfort gets acted out are kind of predictable and can be observed and understood.

It's not about accusing people. It's about seeing patterns. Patterns that we can recognize and try to figure out. Other people have written about these patterns. For me, it helps to understand the patterns because then I can recognize when I'm doing it and try something else.

Basically when people here say "you're attacking Moran, but if I wrote a memoir it also wouldn't include POC or trans people because I don't know any", i wonder why they'd even want to get it published?
edit: i wrote this before seeing other messages.

Bunny wrote: "Sherrie why would you think of me talking about white fragility as an accusation? Would you ask me if I was "accusing" you of speaking English? Or "accusing" you of owning shoes? When I want to tal..."

I ask because your comment came, seemingly, out of nowhere while I was discussing something with Marina. It felt rude and pointed. I apologize if that wasn't the case.

You are claiming that you're observing people being defensive about race. Can you give an example of that happening in this thread? Because I haven't seen it.

I think the notion of "white fragility" is spot-on. I apologize for bringing up my critical points in this thread, but I *have* been reading all of the threads on Moran for this month and I have been so upset by the white defensiveness and outright hostility that I see. I felt I personally could not let the whole "yeah, it's not perfect, it's a bit exclusive, but it's funny!" idea be discussed without addressing what I believed was problematic with that. A (debatable) touch of humor and experience that is overwhelmingly over-represented in feminist theory and mainstream media cannot be the standard we set, I hope. Being "somewhat feminist" and "a little insensitive" is not good enough for me.

Marina wrote: "Basically when people here say "you're attacking Moran, but if I wrote a memoir it also wouldn't include POC or trans people because I don't know any", i wonder why they'd even want to get it publi..."

If I wanted to write a memoir, and I didn't know any POC or trans people (not the case, but let's pretend)...that wouldn't stop me from believing my perspective, my experiences, and the things I DO know about have value. I could talk about my experience as a woman with a PhD in STEM. I could talk about my experience as an American traveling abroad. I could talk about growing up poor in WV and now living as an upper middle class professional in DC.

My experiences have value. Nobody has led the life I lead. I'm privileged in many ways but I've also been discriminated against in many ways. I think this is true of most of us living in the modern world and I'm not going to keep my experiences to myself simply because I'm white and heterosexual.

The fact that you believe someone should keep their experiences silent because they're not intersectional enough is insulting. It's demeaning even. Fortunately, I have the confidence of my privilege, age, and experience not to get upset...but imagine saying that to a young, impressionable girl. You're telling her that her voice doesn't matter because she's not black. Or she's not gay. Or she's not whatever. That's not cool.