Hey @greercase@lemmus.org I've pinned your post, apologies should have thought of this before! Feel free to advertise it anytime you want as well
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2025
27 points (100.0% liked)
WomensStuff
682 readers
86 users here now
Women only trans inclusive This is an inclusive community for all things women. Whether you're here for make up tips, feminism or just friendly chit chat, we've got you covered.
Rules…
- Women only… trans women are women, and transphobic or gender critical talk isn’t allowed. Anyone under the trans umbrella (e.g. non-binary, bigender, agender) is free to decide whether a women's community is a good fit for them.
- Don’t be a dick. No personal attacks, no aggression, play nice.
- Don’t hate on groups, hatefilled talk about groups is not allowed. Ever.
- No governmental politics, so no talk of Trump actions etc. We recommend Feminism@beehaw.org for that, but here is an escape from it.
- New accounts or users with few comments may have their posts removed to prevent spam and bad-faith participation.
founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
For Herland:
Do you think this work is told from a feminist perspective? Why?
The author is clearly coming from a feminist perspective, and the narrator alludes to having developed a more feminist perspective many years down the road, but most of the book is told through the narrator's original, decidedly misogynistic point of view.
Do you think the authors gender or gender identity affected their choice of subject, writing style, or perspective character?
Absolutely. She chose to write about a feminist utopia through the point of view of a self-assured young man who believes women are naturally lesser than men. I think the character of Van was useful for setting up prejudiced assumptions that the Herland citizens could easily thwart. In a way it's more effective than a female main character would've been.
Does the narrators gender or gender identity affect the work? If so, how?
Yes. It's obvious she thinks women are capable of much more than western society permitted at the time this was written. I do think she overestimates women's ability to cooperate uniformly in working toward the common good. It's a nice thought but it ignores human nature, so the culture she's created seems very alien.
Did this work change your opinion on anything? If so, what and why?
Not really, but it was interesting to see how a society without men might function. The author clearly put a lot of thought into some of the logistics. Other parts had too much hand-waving - particularly, parthenogenic reproduction, but only when you really want to have a baby. I know the author needed a way for such a society to perpetuate itself but I thought that bit was pretty ridiculous.
Overall this was an interesting read, and I've started reading the follow-up, called With Her In Ourland. I do think it's unrealistic that any large group of people could be so harmonious as Herland, and the emphasis on the supremacy of motherhood didn't sit well with me. Not everyone wants children or thinks that a society geared toward raising children as well as possible would be a utopia.
Ooh I'm excited for this month! Herland looks interesting and I'm looking forward to watching Thelma and Louise again. Thanks Greer!
Agree all around!
I love everything about this post, thanks for your efforts! I fucking love Thelma and Louise so I'm really happy we're talking about it.
Thank you for YOUR efforts! Glad to see the interest is still here!
I want to get involved this time, I had a tricky month last month and only got around to even watching K-pop demon hunters last night past the end of the month, it arrived too fast. I'll make sure to get this in early :P
If you want, feel free to go back and post your thoughts. I'll still read any new top level comments. Or you can just read and/or respond to other people's comments if you like! I included some highlights at the end of this post, and maybe next time I'll have to feature them more prominently, but Dandelions comment actually made me reassess my feelings on the movie a bit, so definitely some nuggets there imho.
Definitely no pressure to participate every month. Sometimes things get busy, but I'm looking forward to reading your thoughts this month if you end up participating!
Please post suggestions for next month as a reply to this comment. One suggestion per comment please, but feel free to comment multiple times.
For books: The Beauty Myth by Naomi Wolf.
I've never read it but it sounds interesting. Here's the synopsis from Amazon:
The bestselling classic that redefined our view of the relationship between beauty and female identity.
In today's world, women have more power, legal recognition, and professional success than ever before. Alongside the evident progress of the women's movement, however, writer and journalist Naomi Wolf is troubled by a different kind of social control, which, she argues, may prove just as restrictive as the traditional image of homemaker and wife. It's the beauty myth, an obsession with physical perfection that traps the modern woman in an endless spiral of hope, self-consciousness, and self-hatred as she tries to fulfill society's impossible definition of "the flawless beauty."
just finished Thelma and Louise
spoilers
Do you think this work is told from a feminist perspective? Why?
Yes, for whatever flaws or hypocrisies might exist with this film in terms of its message and values, it absolutely is told from a feminist perspective - the story over and over centers the way women are subjugated (though, from a particularly middle-class, white, and cis perspective). In this film men are mostly dangerous, dishonest, and abusive. The central plot revolves around rape, and domestic abuse is explored. The writer of the film was a woman who explicitly wrote the film based on her own personal experiences, and those of her friend Pam Tillis (who is a country musician), and I suspect if not feminist she certainly would think of her film as being about women's struggles in society.
At times the movie even felt like an exploitation film written for white, middle class women. 😅
Do you think the authors gender or gender identity affected their choice of subject, writing style, or perspective character?
Absolutely, since it's written based on the author's personal experiences, her life as a woman informed everything about the movie.
Does the narrators gender or gender identity affect the work? If so, how?
While I don't remember a narrator, I do want to say I felt there was a real male influence on the film, it's a Ridley Scott movie and many scenes feel lifted straight from Bladerunner (like when Harvey Keitel's character was going through data entries on a computer). There is a patriarchal presence in the film which felt juxtaposed to its plot, a kind of patriarchy that criticizes another form of patriarchy, that the women just needed to trust men and their system and they would have been protected, etc.
Did this work change your opinion on anything? If so, what and why?
will come back to this, but it did shift my view on Ridley Scott some 🤔