Feminism Against Progress is a controversial book if you believe that the current set social set up is working. It’s a confronting but thorough look at how things have changed for women since pre Industrial Revolution times to now an whether that’s a good or bad thing. This get us to book number eight in the 24 in 2024 reading challenge.
Plot summary
This is non-fiction, so this isn’t a plot summary, per se. Harrington’s premise if that feminism is no longer serving the interests of women. She provides evidence that since the industrial revolution, women have been slowly pulled away from their embodied and meaningful role as women, and turned into ‘humans’ with no acceptance or understanding of their needs as women. Harrington has no problem with women being seen as human, but she uses the term to denote the removal of the gendered experience of women as crucial to their wellbeing and flourishing.
Harrington shows how the commercialisation of everything has led to love, marriage, family and sex all being turned into things that can be sold, or tied into the economy. She walks through the reduction in the quality of life many women experience, as they are pushed to keep up with men, no matter the cost.
In her conclusion, Harrington tries to explain how she believes women can reclaim their unique and powerful female role, while pushing back on the disembodied and commercialised version of feminism current today.
As a bit of a rating note, there is some use of the f word here, so giving you a heads up if that’s not something you’re okay with.
Controversial but compelling
If you already have similar views to Harrington, you won’t really find this work that controversial. But it’s certainly out of step with the wider narrative around gender, sexuality and what good is. Much like The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, this book is boldly questioning the sexual mores of today, as well as the technology that makes such a lifestyle possible.
Harrington draws on a wide range of sources, as well as her own life experience. It’s quite a saddening tale. Since the industrial revolution, work has been moved outside the home, changing the way women worked, had children and stood in society. While previously a woman participated in ‘cottage industry’ to great effect, now women compete with men in the wider market. Women’s work as caregivers has shifted drastically. From being a core pillar of success and survival, this role has now been outsourced where possible or dismissed as oppressive or meaningless.
Feminism seeks to redress this. But rather than championing women’s embodied experience, it has pushed for the removal of all differences between the sexes. Men and women are to be seen as exactly the same, and technology like hormonal contraception, surrogacy, IVF and abortion make this possible.
However, none of this is helping women. The reality is that women and men are different, and need different things to thrive and flourish. Rather than deny this difference, Harrington champions the acknowledgement of this difference. She wants support for each sex to flourish together in unique ways. She is not, I should add, asking for us stop women voting and shove them into kitchens. Rather, she wants society to drop the technology which promotes what she calls a ‘meat lego’ mentality on women’s bodies. Harrington asks us to radically commit to relationships and meaningful work that builds something for our future.
Intense conclusions for society
All of this is very compelling. Certainly, you end this book with the feeling that something must change if we want to build meaning and contentment in society. Harrington puts her solution to the crisis in three categories:
- Abolish Big Romance
- Let Men Be
- Rewilding Sex
Abolish big romance
Abolishing ‘Big Romance’ means, for Harrington, changing how we view romantic relationships. The current view of relationships is unsustainable, in that it seeks to place a relationship at the service of personal fulfilment. This is inherently unsustainable, as no one can fulfil us. We will always outgrow someone who we are with if we are only seeking continual happiness, excitement and freedom.
Harrington asks us to return to the idea of marriage as an indissoluble partnership building for the future. This means marrying with this in mind, having children and committing to working on the relationship. She takes aim at no-fault divorce, hook-up culture, anti-natalism and the sense that relationships are just about us and how we feel.
Let men be
Let Men Be is pretty self explanatory. Harrington says that we need to let men have their own spaces to develop as and with other men. Doing so will provide an outlet for male energy, a space where men can share their problems and give advice. This, in turn, helps to develop strong and balanced men who women want to commit to (and who want to commit to them). This is in line with the idea of marriage outside Big Romance.
Rewilding sex
Finally, Harrington advocates for what she calls ‘rewilding sex’. By this, she means not taking hormonal contraception. Her premise is that women who are not on birth control will be more in tune with their bodies, have better mental health and better control on when and with whom they are intimate. This will enable women to say ‘no’ to casual encounters that are unlikely to bring them enjoyment.
They will be more cautious and careful in the selection of who they sleep with. Harrington also notes that the ‘danger’ of pregnancy, the ‘all natural’ experience can bring more enjoyment to sexual experience. Rather than ever-intensifying kink, she posits that the simple act of engaging in intimacy with someone whom you know, want and with whom you may conceive a child has a intense and beautiful element.
Is this really possible?
I think Harrington’s points a good. They do hit at the heart of much that is harming women, and by extension, society. However, I think it will be very difficult for people to put into action Harrington’s call to radical relationships. In a world with such a strong pull towards the opposite, you really need to believe to make this work.
Those who hold to traditional Christian beliefs about marriage, family and sexuality are more likely to hold on. Because it isn’t just a political ideology that could become inconvenient one day. It’s something you believe to be true, regardless of how you feel about it, or whether it makes your life easier or more socially acceptable. For many people, living the lifestyle Harrington advocates will be very difficult, if not impossible to sustain. Because living this way requires sacrifice. Harrington acknowledges this. I certainly hope that people make the choice to accept the sacrifice in order to reap the benefits.
But if people naturally wanted to take the harder road, perhaps there would be no need for Harrington’s book.
Perhaps what we need is something outside ourselves to govern our actions and direct us to the greater good.
