| Part of a series on|
|Spectra and binaries|
“”You think intercourse is a private act; it's not, it's a social act. Men are sexually predatory in life; and women are sexually manipulative. When two individuals come together and leave their gender outside the bedroom door, then they make love.
|—Andrewa Dworkin, making an impressive series of crank points all at once|
Andrea Dworkin (1946–2005) was an influential American radical feminist and moonbat. Most of Dworkin's rhetoric follows the radical feminist line that gender is a social construct and its deconstruction will leave us all the same as each other (except for the dirty bits). However, Dworkin also made pseudoscientific claims that all males are violent manipulators and that all sex is rape.
Dworkin is primarily known for her crusade against
freedom pornography. Her activism added fuel to the anti-feminist fire by helping to provoke a split between pro- and anti-sex feminists and alienating liberals who were opposed to anti-pornography laws. Her later radicalism and sensationalism further alienated potential allies, but this did not prevent some of Dworkin's supporters from lionising her in their eulogies.
“”The common erotic project of destroying women makes it possible for men to unite into a brotherhood; this project is the only firm and trustworthy groundwork for cooperation among males and all male bonding is based on it.
In her book Pornography: Men Possessing Women, she argued that pornography is a misogynistic, dehumanizing industry. She also analyzed pornography as a form of sexual assault on women. Her anti-pornography rhetoric was translated into legalese by fellow radical feminist and lawyer Catharine MacKinnon.
These analyses have been extensively criticized by, inter alia, former ACLU president and feminist Nadine Strossen and Feminists for Free Expression, a group co-founded by Strossen. Feminists for Free Expression argues that, because different women "interpret pornography in different ways", there is no "feminist code about which words and images are dangerous or sexist", and any attempt to write such terms into the law impugns the free choice of men and women.
One of her more erudite enemies was the novelist Angela Carter, who in her book The Sadeian Woman argued that because sex was public and political, pornography was essentially political and revealing of power relations. To Carter, even a writer as misogynistic as the Marquis de Sade could be read as a radical political theorist, and she criticised the self-pitying victimhood of Sade's fictional victims like Justine. Dworkin condemned The Sadeian Woman, denouncing it as "pseudofeminist" and accusing Carter of "literary affectation" and contempt for Sade's fictional victims. Carter responded, "If I can get up the Dworkin proboscis, then my living has not been in vain."
Dworkin and MacKinnon's attempts to pass an ordinance based on their original model — which involved making pornography a civil rights violation rather than something criminal, and allowing people alleging harm by pornography to seek damages — failed in Minneapolis, Minnesota (passed by the City Council, vetoed by the mayor), but succeeded on the second try in Indianapolis, Indiana in 1984.
One large factor in the ordinance's later undoing was Dworkin and MacKinnon's unorthodox definition of "pornography." Pornography is generally recognized as being material that has been made with the sole intention of exciting the viewer sexually; one of the qualifications for restricting freedom of the press under the Miller test is that the work under dispute must lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. But the ordinance contained no exceptions for works with such value; in response to concerns that these sorts of works (examples cited were Ulysses and Iliad), could fall under the scope of the law, MacKinnon wrote:
“”If a woman is subjected, why should it matter that the work has other value?
In the case American Booksellers Association v. Hudnut, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the ordinance unconstitutional on the grounds that it constituted ideology-based censorship:
The Supreme Court affirmed with no further comment.
Canadian Supreme Court ruling
Her work got a broader audience in Canada, where in the case R v. Butler, the Canadian Supreme Court ruled, partly based on her work, that Canada's obscenity law was constitutional based on guarantees of gender equality. When the laws started to be used disproportionately against gay and lesbian materials, Dworkin was embarrassed and rapidly condemned this interpretation of her work.
It should be noted that Dworkin did not support the ruling from the start on the grounds that it affirmed an obscenity law, as she was strongly opposed to obscenity-based censorship; however, she did support the idea that free speech is a lesser concern than gender equality, and approved of the ruling insofar as it brought this idea into Canadian law. As she said in her statement:
“”In our neighbor nation to the north, Canada's Supreme Court has determined … that society's interest in sex equality outweighs pornographers' speech rights … We wish that U.S. constitutional consciousness were so far along.
Her opposition to pornography caused the pornography industry to swing into gear with a bevy of satire directed against her, including claims that she was anti-sex and misandristic. In an attempt to stop this, Dworkin sued everyone in sight, but her efforts ultimately failed; Catharine MacKinnon blamed this on the patriarchy in her eulogy to Dworkin, and called the satire libel.
Dworkin attacked virtually anything that she felt was tainted by male-ness or male supremacy. Some of her major beliefs are portrayed below:
Dworkin's writing has been interpreted as being overtly misandrist. Under the patriarchy as Dworkin perceived it, it is difficult to disentangle men from the privilege they all enjoy (whether or not they want to enjoy it) which is oppressive to all women (whether or not men intend to oppress them). Dworkin's patriarchy allows little space for the male feminist, other than to shun him. Her ideas have also been criticised for taking the position that men and women are fundamentally different and can never be equal, which is similar to the argument used by many anti-feminists to justify treating men and women differently.
For example, she argued that, in a patriarchal society, all men are enemies of all women:
Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman.
She also contended that men's influence is so insidious that even language is sexist:
Male supremacy is fused into the language, so that every sentence both heralds and affirms it.
On the other hand, Dworkin also made it clear that she was talking about men and women as products of socialization, not of biology; this is essential to take into account when interpreting her writing. She argued that the social construct of masculinity is the cause of men's violence toward women, and strongly opposed gender essentialism based on biological sex, particularly as a justification for bigotry:
Citing genes, genitals, DNA, pattern-releasing smells, biograms, hormones, or whatever is in vogue, male supremacists make their case which is, in essence, that we are biologically too good, too bad, or too different to do anything other than reproduce and serve men sexually and domestically. The newest variations on this distressingly ancient theme center on hormones and DNA: men are biologically aggressive; their fetal brains were awash in androgen; their DNA, in order to perpetuate itself, hurls them into murder and rape; in women, pacifism is hormonal and addiction to birth is molecular.
This allows for a more nuanced interpretation of some of Dworkin's most controversial quotes, which could otherwise be seen as gender essentialist or misandrist:
Men are distinguished from women by their commitment to do violence rather than to be victimized by it. Men are rewarded for learning the practice of violence in virtually any sphere of activity by money, admiration, recognition, respect, and the genuflection of others honoring their sacred and proven masculinity.
The same applies to her unusual redefinition of the term "manhood" to refer to toxic elements of masculinity, or institutions that promote male domination of politics & economics in the conclusion to her 1975 essay/lecture, "The Root Cause":
Only when manhood is dead — and it will perish when ravaged femininity no longer sustains it — only then will we know what it is to be free.
Some context for this is provided by earlier passages in the same essay:
...once we do not accept the notion that men are positive and women are negative, we are essentially rejecting the notion that there are men and women at all. In other words, the system based on this polar model of existence is absolutely real; but the model itself is not true. We are living imprisoned inside a pernicious delusion, a delusion on which all reality as we know it is predicated. In my view, those of us who are women inside this system of reality will never be free until the delusion of sexual polarity is destroyed and until the system of reality based on it is eradicated entirely from human society and from human memory. This is the notion of cultural transformation at the heart of feminism. This is the revolutionary possibility inherent in the feminist struggle. 
Ariel Levy also noted of Dworkin "how frequently and passionately she wrote about men -- male writers, male lovers, male family members", in particular idolizing her father.
Dworkin had very contested, very sensational views on marriage. She was a self-declared lesbian, but was married twice to men and swore herself to celibacy. Her first marriage to a Dutch anarchist did not go very well, as he clubbed her with blunt instruments and put cigarettes out on her, and she had to turn tricks for a time to get up the money to return to the U.S. from Holland. Later, she married a gay man named John Stoltenberg, author of a book entitled Refusing to Be a Man; this marriage lasted until her death in 2005.
She likened marriage to rape of women by men, asserting that in both cases the man claimed to "own" the woman and took the initiative, while the woman had to go along with him in every way:
Marriage as an institution developed from rape as a practice. Rape, originally defined as abduction, became marriage by capture. Marriage meant the taking was to extend in time, to be not only use of but possession of, or ownership.
As an extension of these beliefs, Dworkin believed that "battered women have the right to kill their batterer".
“”No woman needs intercourse; few women escape it.
Seduction is often difficult to distinguish from rape. In seduction, the rapist often bothers to buy a bottle of wine.
Due to the above, Dworkin is widely reported as having said explicitly that "all sex is rape". Dworkin never said quite those words. However, as Cathy Young remarked:
If a male writer had written book after book arguing that women were evil creatures whose sole purpose in life is to sexually manipulate and destroy men, would we spend a lot of time quibbling over whether he actually used the phrase, "All women are whores"?
Dworkin had no children, as should be obvious from her views on childbearing:
Childbearing is glorified in part because women die from it.
Dworkin was particularly opposed to Cesarean sections, which fit in nicely with her descriptions of sex as rape:
They cut directly into the uterus with a knife — a surgical fuck … the uterus of the whore entered directly by the new rapist, the surgeon, the vagina saved to serve the husband.
Caesareans are physically-demanding and sometimes-risky procedures that are often performed unnecessarily. However, women often undergo C-sections to alleviate the pain or risk of vaginal childbirth itself or because natural birth has ceased to be a viable option for any number of reasons. One can assume that the idea was not to rape the woman's uterus for the fun of it.
Left unstated in Dworkin's diatribes is exactly how humans are supposed to reproduce at all, or what a woman should do if complications make it impossible for her to complete a natural childbirth. Die, one would suppose.
Work with transsexuals, and studies of formation of gender identity in children provide basic information which challenges the notion that there are two discrete biological sexes. That information threatens to transform the traditional biology of sex difference into the radical biology of sex similarity… Every transsexual is entitled to a sex-change operation, and it should be provided by the community as one of its functions.
Dworkin has a reputation (particularly among people who never read her) as a fierce, savage person who hated almost everything, but people who knew her suggest this was to some extent an act or persona. Her friend Robin Morgan reportedly told her, "You’re a funny, funny, hilarious person, but you never let it through in your public persona. You never let the incredible gentleness and vulnerability of yourself through, and so consequently people see this fierce person living totally in her head."
There is a degree of confusion over differences between her public pronouncements and how she lived her life. For instance despite claiming to be a lesbian, it is unclear whether she had any lesbian relationships, and as mentioned she was married twice to men.
1999 rape controversy
In June 2000, Dworkin published an article claiming that she had been drugged and raped in a Paris hotel the year before. Despite the fact that feminists emphasise the importance of believing women who claim they have been sexually assaulted, her story was met with a surprising amount of skepticism by many feminists, even her friends, who believed she might have been having mental problems.
- "Dworkin, Andrea". 300 Women Who Changed the World. Encyclopedia Britannica. http://www.britannica.com/women/article-9124959.
- Honigsbaum, Mark. "Andrea Dworkin, embattled feminist, dies at 58". The Guardian. April 12, 2005. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/apr/12/obituaries.gender.
- Young, Cathy. "The Dworkin Whitewash". April 17, 2005. Hit & Run. Reason Magazine. http://www.reason.com/blog/show/109179.html.
- Dworkin, Andrea. Pornography: Men Possessing Women. 1989. The Andrea Dworkin Online Library. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/PornAList.html.
- Strossen, Nadine. Defending Pornography: Free Speech, Sex, and the Fight for Women's Rights. http://books.google.com/books?id=5abYVL2eXekC&printsec=frontcover
- Position statements of Feminists for Free Expression. http://www.ffeusa.org/html/statements/statements_pornography.html
- The Sadeian Woman by Angela Carter (2006) Virago. ISBN 1844083772.
- Justine, or the Misfortunes of Virtue by Marquis de Sade, translated by John Phillips (2013) Oxford University Press. ISBN 0199572844.
- "Rape and Trauma through Angela Carter", Charley Barker, Ethics and Trauma in Contemporary British Fiction, pp. 69-70
- "A New Kind of Being", Jenny Turner, London Review of Books, 3 Nov 2016, p. 8
- "Andrea Dworkin Has Died". Susie Bright's Journal. April 11, 2005. http://susiebright.blogs.com/susie_brights_journal_/2005/04/andrea_dworkin_.html.
- See the Wikipedia article on Miller test.
- American Booksellers Association, Inc. et al. v. William H. Hudnut, et al.. United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. 1985. http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/hudnut.html.
- MacKinnon, Catherine A. and Andrea Dworkin. "Statement by Catharine A. Mackinnon and Andrea Dworkin Regarding Canadian Customs and Legal Approaches to Pornography". August 26, 1994. The Andrea Dworkin Online Library. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/OrdinanceCanada.html.
- MacKinnon, Catherine A. "Who Was Afraid of Andrea Dworkin?". New York Times. April 16, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/16/opinion/16mackinnon.html?ei=5090&en=0b54a3eb2e26dcd9&ex=1271304000&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1229575874-d6woCB0/pHi9pcY+jk9ANA.
- Male and Female, Men and Women, Carol Sternhell, New York Times, May 3, 1987
- Weisburg, D. Kelly. Applications of Feminist Legal Theory to Women's Lives. 1996. Google Books. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dxISOPpZUhIC&pg=PA149&dq=Under+patriarchy,+every+woman's+son+is+her+potential+betrayer+and+also+the+inevitable+rapist+or+exploiter+of+another+woman.
- Friedman, Howard; Schustack, Miriam (2006). Personality: Classic Theories and Modern Research. Pearson/Allyn and Bacon. p. 471.
- "Biological Superiority: The World's Most Dangerous and Deadly Idea," first published in Heresies No. 6 on Women and Violence, Vol. 2, No. 2, Summer 1978. Copyright © 1977 by Andrea Dworkin. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/WarZoneChaptIIID.html
- "Men and Boys," Chapter Two of Pornography: Men Possessing Women, copyright © 1981 by Andrea Dworkin. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/PornMen&Boys1.html
- "The Root Cause." Copyright © 1975, 1976 by Andrea Dworkin. All rights reserved. First delivered as a lecture under the title "Androgyny."http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/OurBloodIV.html
- The Prisoner of Sex, Ariel Levy, New York magazine
- Dworkin, Andrea. "'They took my body from me and used it'". The Guardian. June 2, 2000. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2000/jun/02/society.
- Refusing to Be a Man: Essays on Sex and Justice by John Stoltenberg (1990) Plume. ISBN 0452010438.
- Dworkin, Andrea quote. QuotationsBook. http://quotationsbook.com/quote/25374/.
- "The Lie Detector". The Andrea Dworkin Online Library. The Andrea Dworkin Web Site. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/LieDetect.html.
- Dworkin, Andrea. Intercourse: Occupation/Collaberation. 1987. The Andrea Dworkin Online Library. http://www.nostatusquo.com/ACLU/dworkin/IntercourseI.html.
- Trans people have no dispute with feminists - they either support transgender rights or they do not, Paris Lees, The Independent (UK), 13 Feb 2016
- Dworkin, Andrea (1974). Woman Hating. New York City: E. P. Dutton. p. 175-186. ISBN 0-525-47423-4.
- Doubting Dworkin: The radical writer's dubious account of being drugged and assaulted does no good for rape awareness, Leah McLaren, Globe and Mail, March 30, 2017