So...now what?

I found Levy’s premise of blaming female chauvinist pigs (FCP) absent in the second half of her book. Instead, Levy criticizes, and consequentially blames, other areas of U.S. culture/society that she believes bolsters shallow, anti-feminists, and chauvinistic behavior. I found myself nodding more and more in the latter half of the book rather than scribbling furiously in the margins. Of course there were still many points where I seriously disagreed or saw flaws in her arguments, but for the sake of conversation, and to avoid sounding redundant, I wish to expand on some of Levy’s more compelling arguments and respond to where she leaves us at the end of of her novel.

For one, I agree with Levy on the point that the majority of Americans have a narrow definition of sex and sexuality. Women, she argues, have been exposed to a commercialized conception of sex. Sex has been symbolized as “big fake boobs, bleached blonde hair, long nails, poles, thongs” and it has been portrayed this way so that we can, in essence, “sell” and/or “buy” sexiness/beauty. Similarly, this commercialized view of sex has led many American women to conceive sex as a performance for others or as a way to be a “real” “experienced” woman. Further, a woman’s want to have sex validates their “womanhood” which society equates to their sexuality. “How was I (in bed)?” becomes more important than “Did I have a fulfilling, enjoying sexual experience?” As a woman I can’t help but ask why we question ourselves when we feel ugly, delegitimized, or unfit by society rather than questioning society itself or the people who run it.

To my relief, Levy explicitly states the contradictions that surround sex, (particularly teenage sex), in the U.S. Sex is everywhere it evades our everyday lives and it is nearly impossible to escape it. On the other hand, we are supposed to passively acknowledge it. We are supposed to be sexual but NOT have sex or explore our personal sexuality in ways outside “raunch culture.” As Levy puts it, “Girls have to be hot. Girls who aren’t hot probably need breast implants. Once a girl is hot, she should be as close to naked as possible all the time. Guys should like it. Don’t have sex.” (158). Additionally, Levy then addresses the issue of abstinence-only education and how it adds to the problem. In doing so she finally makes long-overdue connections between societal trends and larger problems that also cause and lead to “raunch” culture. These connections not only help the reader understand the complexity of the situation at hand but allow for a dialogue that doesn’t blame one group more than another. In reality we are all guilty, even Levy, of perpetuating “raunch” culture and living out the pressures that society puts on us. Our guilt manifests itself in an “us versus them” manner; either we label people as “raunchy” or not, and the not-people are usually pointing fingers and saying “how can they act this way?” This brings me to my last point.

What choices do we leave women who do not fit into our limited definition of “sexy”? Since we are a dichotomous society when it comes to sexuality, women who don’t feel like they fit in with the “girly-girls” might automatically turn to the side of sexuality associated with males (or what Levy has called the FCP). In a vain attempt to fit in women may feel like they have to be “one of the guys” and thus engage in chauvinistic behavior. In my personal experience, I have constantly felt the pressure of this separation. In certain groups I reverted to my “girl-girl” side where in other areas of my life it was more “appropriate” to act like “one of the guys.” As I move to understand my sexuality in more complex ways and experiences, I feel this wall between the two areas breaking down. This, for me, has taken self-reflection, travel, feminist literature, and a college community to which I am indebted to my privilege as a white, heterosexual, and middle-class woman.

Levy offers us good points for analysis and further discussion. However, when I put down her book I was more confused than when I started. I’m afraid I’m left with no other option but to revert to old patterns of critique: Levy left us with no viable options or alternatives to the raunch culture she so thoroughly criticized. To add to that, the vagueness of her last sentence (an attempt at a solution?), made me groan out loud:

“I think- I hope- that what has appealed to some people about the book you are holding in your hands is that it espouses something that’s fallen out of favor in this country, but is badly needed: idealism” (212).

I’m left with a head-full of social ills, with a number of people/groups to blame, and yet no viable solution. Was Levy purposefully vague? What do you think “idealism” means for Levy? What do you think are some solutions/responses to “raunch” culture that Levy doesn't address?