you're reading...
Pre-2008 Posts

Dispelling More Myths About Andrea Dworkin

Andrea Dworkin in her 20s

Andrea Dworkin when she was young

I guess I am going to have to have a special, running series here devoted to dispelling myths about Andrea Dworkin.

Over at Alas guest blogger Blue wrote a post critical of the last article Andrea Dworkin published before she died, an article about her struggles as a disabled woman. In general, Blue criticizes Dworkin’s essay for not being as politically astute or radical, in Blue’s opinion, as Dworkin’s specifically feminist writings were. She also remarks, almost offhandedly, that she isn’t much a fan of Dworkin in any event. Others join in with the same sentiments. Criticizing Andrea Dworkin seems to be unfailingly good times for lots of people. But beyond that, as Delphyne commented, why pretend some essay doesn’t match up to radical feminist writings someone isn’t that impressed with in the first place? Sort of like me criticizing a Susie Bright article on radical feminism for not being Susie Bright enough! My point in writing such an article would be what? To explore the ways Bright’s new article, which I don’t appreciate, might be more or less of what I already don’t appreciate about her other articles?

So much of the Alas thread just seemed like it mostly had to do with — again, some more, still, but whatever — discrediting Dworkin because… because why. Because she was human, I guess. Not a goddess. Not perfect. Not even alive any more, for that matter, gone to her grave, where we are all going to go one day. There seems to be a sort of morbid, almost sour grapes-like, fascination (as in, “You can’t die, I haven’t finished criticizing and attacking you yet!”) with discrediting Andrea by exploring all of the ways her writings and acts might possibly have been “inconsistent,” or even (or maybe hopefully or gleefully) , gasp, hypocritical. Because of course th rest of us, including her critics, never act or behave or think in ways which are inconsistent or hypocritical, no, no. Everyone’s feminist execution is impeccable and flawless.

I think both radical feminism and Dworkin have been and continue to be fundamentally misunderstood by most feminists. Sometimes I feel as though Dworkin’s work is intentionally misunderstood and mirespresented. Delphyne expressed that perfectly in the Alas thread; what she said there is well worth reading.

But I will say this: Dworkin was a writer. Writing was her life’s work. One thing pretty much all writers do is, they process their experiences in their writing as they are having them. I am a writer, too. I often have the experience of not really knowing how I even feel about a thing until I begin to write about it. Even when I write about something, and begin to make sense of whatever it is I am writing about, my first writings will be just the beginning of an ongoing process of working my ideas through. There will be more writings, more processing, more making sense of things. I have often had the experience of someone grabbing me by the metaphorical collar and saying to me, in so many words, “But didn’t you write thus and yay over here last year/five years ago/10 years ago?” Well, yeah, I did. I’m a writer. I write everything. I write my whole entire life and have for decades, everywhere I can write it. But what does what I wrote there, at that stage of my process, have to do with what I’m writing here right now, at this stage? No one can ever be shut up to what they said or wrote at any given moment of their life, but particularly not a writer, who has dedicated herself to writing for all of her life and writing her life. All we can say about this essay is, this was Andrea Dworkin, beginning to make sense of the experiences she described. She wrote about being oppressed as a woman over almost 40 years’ time. She lived as a woman and girl for 58 years. Her writings reflected her increasing radicalization as a woman and her ongoing process, thought, analysis, critique. She had been disabled for a comparatively short period of time; she’d been female forever. Had she lived to write more about her disability, her writings would have reflected the ongoing working through of her ideas, making sense of her experiences. What sense does it make to grab at this one essay she published on this subject and attempt to compare it with 40 years of political writing and activism on women’s issues?

I posted the article Blue linked to to my boards shortly after Dworkin’s death and then posted a few of my responses as follows:

My favorite parts:

“The sidewalk is heavy with pedestrian traffic. They are so unselfconscious, these normal walkers. They have different gaits; they move effortlessly; each dances without knowing it. I used to be one of them. I want to be again.”


“I learn three rules in my occupational therapy classes: never hold on to anything that moves; if it rains or snows, stay inside, even if that means cancelling doctors’ appointments (to those medicalised this is nearly profane); and kick the cat – if a cat curls up in front of your feet, kick it away. I learned to use my crutch to kick the cat. I will go to hell for this.”


“Doctors tell me that there is no medical truth to my notion that the rape caused this sickness or what happened after it. I believe I am right: it was the rape. They don’t know because they have never looked.”


“I am supposed to lock it when I walk and unlock it when I want to sit. The brace is worn under my pants leg so no one can see it. Each manipulation is distinct: in public locking it makes me look as if I am masturbating, and unlocking it makes me look as if I am fondling my thigh.”

HA! (Obviously my commentary!)


“John had been told that I was dying. I forgot that in hospitals when one is dying, nurses abrogate the rules. John was allowed in after visiting hours; nurses would pull the curtain around my bed and let him lie with me. This was my happiness.”


What a writer, goddamn it, the woman was amazing.

I think as these quotes evidence, this was an essay in which Andrea was beginning the long process of making sense of her situation, her disability, her life. This wasn’t a scholarly essay or an editorial or even an opinion piece. It was a lament, it was mourning, it was rage, above all it was so very, very human, as Andrea Dworkin quintessentially was, complete with wry humor and self-deprecation and allusions to her deep love for her husband. How bizarre, in this context, to chide her for the “less than political” content of the piece, as though she isn’t allowed to publish anything that is not political if she wants to! By the same token, how bizarre, in this context, to chide her as though everything she wrote were not political in the most deeply personal, and honest, and powerfully moving, and therefore, radically feminist, of ways.

If someone would like a list of all of the ways that Andrea Dworkin’s beliefs and behaviors were “inconsistent” at any point in time, hell, I could provide a lengthy list. But her critics’ turn wou be next. Everybody who is honest can provide a lengthy list of their own inconsistencies, hypocrisies, and so on at various points in their lives . We all have them. So what? I will never provide any such laundry list about Dworkin, and one reason is, she never laid claim to any sort of perfection, to perfect consistency, or to anything remotely superhuman or angelic and never expected the same of any other woman. That being so, what’s up with these ongoing attempts to discredit her as though she had? Dworkin’s writings changed the world, and will continue to change the world, in large part because she was willing to write with absolutely scrupulous, passionate honesty about what it means to live as a woman in this world. She took the risks, and the hits women take when we dare to lay it all out there, sparing nothing. It’s hard for anyone to argue with the truth of women’s lives; there is really no argument but to call us liars (as many are more than willing to do, as feminists commit not to do). Women’s truth-telling is powerful. For this truth-telling Andrea Dworkin will always be hated, and so these attempts to discredit her will continue wearyingly and tiringly on. The truth is just too great a threat to a male heterosupremacist world to allow to allow it to go unchallenged.

Pony, I’m sorry for the treatment you received over there . You didn’t deserve it. I’d have supported you, but honestly, Dworkin being dead now, especially, I can hardly bring myself to hang around anywhere where her blood — even though she no longer has any — appears to be in the water. Her work, her life, her writings speak for themselves and will continue to. They really don’t need any defense (which is not to say I fault you for trying, good on you for it.) But if her writings do seem to be under attack, my experience is, any defense will fall on deaf ears. I don’t have the energy for that kind of fighting any more.




11 thoughts on “Dispelling More Myths About Andrea Dworkin

  1. Andrea Dworkin’s writings changed my life dramatically. In turn, it’s changed the lives of those in my family, my friends; she is an incredibly powerful writer. Agreeing with every point she made, or even taking every point literally has nothing to do with it; she challenges every silent assumption and belief I carried without even knowing it, and opened my mind to sheer QUESTIONING. I still cry over the fact that she’s gone. I’m crying right now. Anyone who wastes time picking on those accomplishments are sick, jealous fucks, as far as I can tell. They’ll never have the world gaping at their sheer audacity the way she did.

    Posted by Pramiti | September 24, 2006, 7:19 pm
  2. As a woman raped I know why she did what she did about her rape.

    As a woman disabled and left to manage recovery and rehabilitation on my own while men disabled reap huge insurance and work disability settlements which motivate the juggernaut of medical services on their behalf, I know why she was *where* she was during the time between incident and death, and I know why she died.

    She was a woman.

    Posted by Pony | September 24, 2006, 7:22 pm
  3. I love you, Heart. Thanks so much.

    Posted by Laurelin | September 24, 2006, 10:47 pm
  4. Thank you so much for this Heart. I know exactly what you mean about not wanting to become involved when Dworkin’s blood is in the water. It happens so often as well, and it is very depressing when it’s feminists who are doing it. Of course it’s possible to criticise her, but like you say it’s possible to criticise *anybody* but Dworkin receives more consistent, ongoing, unkind criticism than almost anybody I can think of. Would a male writer who had become disabled in later life and written a piece like this have received the same reception? Would he have been chided for being not political (or apocalytic!) enough? I’m not sure that he would.

    “She took the risks, and the hits women take when we dare to lay it all out there, sparing nothing.”

    Exactly. And because she did this she made a demand on her audience to take sides and a lot of people really resent being put in that position, even if we all know that she’d have their back when they needed it. That’s one of the reasons her writing was so political.

    Posted by delphyne | September 24, 2006, 11:08 pm
  5. Heart: “Sometimes I feel as though Dworkin’s work is intentionally misunderstood and misrespresented.”

    Yes, yes, yes. Doing this is much easier than doing what Andrea’s writing requires people to do. It turns the world upside down and your brain inside out; it makes us see things we don’t want to see; it makes us believe things we don’t want to believe– all of which compels us to move through the world differently, say things no one wants to hear, do things no one wants to do, NOT do things everyone else is doing. Bashing, misunderstanding, misrepresenting, blaming, and just plain lying about Andrea are much easier than waking the hell up, because that would require change, action, making a different world.

    Posted by Melissa | September 25, 2006, 1:38 am
  6. I’ve been reading some of her on-line essays since Friday night.

    Melissa: “it makes us see things we don’t want to see;…compells us to move through the world differently.”

    I think you’ve just defined radical.

    Posted by Pony | September 25, 2006, 2:38 am
  7. I began reading Dworking in the early nineties. At the time, I felt overwhelmed by her writings because I could acknowledge the truth in her works and it was painful to see that such a great writer was putting into words what I had felt for years but was unable to verbalise or even admit. How callous to try to bring a woman down when she is dead, and cannot defend herself, she was dying when she wrote her last essay. Feared because she spoke the truth, I am now passing her books on to my daughters and friends. No one can erase what Dworkin has done for women.

    Posted by sparklematrix | September 25, 2006, 7:49 am
  8. >>>>They’ll never have the world gaping at their sheer audacity the way she did.

    Posted by Jeyoani | September 25, 2006, 5:47 pm
  9. I really appreciate what you, Heart, said about writer consistency. It never fails to amaze me how writers seem to be held to some strange concrete footing which disallows their growth and change as human beings. Not only that, I can be glaringly inconsistent in one essay, much more over time. We each have very unique mistures of views and thoughts and ideas that, inconsistent as they may be, are our own and which serve to move us along and shape the new ideas that come. My goal is not to “be consistent” but to be fully human. Once a writer begins to double check herself for “inconsistency” it rings the death knoll for her writing. Just speak your thoughts, your truth, your experiences and to hell with what others want to claim about you. Andrea Dworkin never claimed to be a “perfect feminist” much less a perfect person, nor did she ever want, I don’t think, to be “consistent.” How boring and stagnant!

    Posted by Sophia | September 25, 2006, 11:54 pm
  10. That thread has degenerated into attacks on Dworkin’s mental health and insinuations that because she was mentally ill that her story about her rape was untrue. It’s very hard to understand how feminists can treat another woman like this when women are consistently accused of lying or being mad whenever they talk about male violence, particualrly sexual violence. Don’t they notice this?

    Posted by delphyne | September 26, 2006, 1:15 am
  11. Thanks, Heart. I stopped reading Alas and other non-radical/anti-radical blogs a long time ago simply because of this sort of thing. Because Dworkin’s work means so much to me, I can’t help but take it personally when her critics hold her to impossible, unfair standards. She’s the easy target, the feminist everyone loves to hate.

    Because Dworkin was SO uncompromising in her activism and her unwavering courage to speak truth to power about women’s oppression, AND because she was one of so few people who are actually willing to do so, she has been the natural target for those who ARE willing to compromise.

    Posted by Sassafras | September 29, 2006, 2:57 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog Stats

  • 2,600,142 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.


The Farm at Huge Creek, Michigan Womyn's Music Festival, The Feminist Hullaballoo