Lots of readers will reject this novel without ever bothering to learn what it’s all about. I’ll start by saying what Parley J. Cooper’s The Feminists is not. It is not incel manosphere drivel written so some scared alt-right creep will have something to stroke himself to while fantasizing about dominance and power. It isn’t a red pill book. It really isn’t even misogynistic. It certainly isn’t some garbage extremist manifesto like The Turner Diaries. If you’re a loony Republican MAGA-type, it will probably disappoint you. If you’re a knee-jerk, overly-sensitive radical feminist prone to fits of rage at the patriarchy over the tiniest provocations, you probably won’t like it much either. But if you are level-headed and prefer to see things through to their proper conclusion before passing judgment, you will actually see this novel as an argument for sexual equality, power-sharing between the genders, and the saner elements of Second Wave Feminism.
The story takes place in Manhattan, 1992. America has just gone through a period of transformation where women and men have equal representation in government. But a small group of high-handed radical feminists are dissatisfied with this arrangement and seize control of the state apparatus, turning the country into a dictatorship with gender segregation, men forcibly placed into the most menial positions of the labor force, and sexual relationships between men and women are illegal without prior written consent from the inefficient matriarchal bureaucracy. This is where Keith Montalvo gets into trouble. After a dangerous liaison with a willing, nubile young lady, the radical feminist storm troopers chase him through the streets of New York after curfew. He escapes underground in the now-defunct subway system and meets up with a gang of urban guerrillas preparing to overthrow the female government with acts of terrorism, sabotage, assassination, and armed insurgency. And this group is not made up entirely of men. They have plenty of women who are just as dedicated to the cause. One of them is a sweet and saucy young woman named Angela who falls in love with Keith.
The villain of the story is the Thatcher-like Mayor Fredericks who runs New York City from her private mansion. As far as being a mayor goes, Ms. Fredericks is doing a terrible job. Food has to be rationed, curfews are in place, transportation is limited to public buses due to fuel shortages, the buses are segregated by sex, and the streets are patrolled by bully feminist soldiers who don’t like men. New York City has become a dystopia because the feminists in power are more concerned with their power trip than they are with managing the services needed to keep a society functioning. The American feminist president is not any better at leadership and the entire country is in shambles. The radical feminists prove to be incapable of effective leadership.
So far you might be wondering why I say this novel is not misogynistic. For one, the characters who are written with the most depth are two women, Angela and Mayor Fredericks. Angela is the daughter of a prominent radical feminist and, while her feelings about her mother are confusing and contradictory, she loves her all the same as can be seen near the end during the assassination attempt in the theater. Angela opposes the matriarchal government, but she doesn’t oppose sexual equality throughout all of society. Compared to her lover Keith, she is portrayed with far more depth and leadership responsibility in the rebel group than he is. Keith is little more than an ordinary action hero with a couple small twists, one being the revelation of his identity at the end of the story. The other twist being that when the police catch him, he becomes the damsel-in-distress of the story, the maiden waiting to be saved by the noble knight in a gender-role reversal whose freedom depends on the heroics of Angela and her gang.
Mayor Fredericks is also well-drawn with a fair amount of depth even though she is a character who lacks empathy and a sense of fairness, having the sociopathic traits that probably propelled her into political power in the first place. She becomes morally conflicted when she learns who the captive Keith really is. Without giving away the ending, I will say that her actions at the end redeem her and humanize her after all the evil things she did up until that point.
Speaking of redemption, the other character who redeems herself in the end is the feminist president of the United States. Although her role is minor in the story, a statement is made when she resigns, handing her power over to someone who is better qualified to run the country. What makes her sympathetic is that she puts the needs of her country before herself and sacrifices her powerful position for the greater good of society. She admits that she wasn’t a good leader. Unlike a certain bloviating idiot who just so happened to be the 45th president of our country, she is smart enough to know when to quit. So while this novel attacks a fictitious matriarchy, it doesn’t indulge in misogyny, it isn’t full of male chauvinism, and it largely refrains from even making ad hominem attacks on the adversarial characters.
Another reason this novel is more feminist-friendly than you might at first imagine is that the absolute worst character in the story is a man. Rinehart is a male who takes Keith on a mission to blow up the armory where feminist troops are sleeping. During the attempt, Rinehart tries to kill Keith. Fortunately he fails but he later abducts Claire, a spy for the guerillas who works in Mayor Fredericks’ office. What he plans to do with Claire can only be guessed at, but his speech to her proves him to be an incel type, a man who hates women because he feels he can’t get the sex he feels entitled to. Rinehart is violent and cruel and rhe author includes him the story to show us what a man is not supposed to be. Claire survives and goes on to be active in the planning and execution of the gang’s plots of terrorism and sabotage, another of the story’s strong female characters.
Most of the book is action-driven. It is written in the style of Hollywood movie from 1970s with wild and unpredictable plot twists, overblown combat sequences, gunfights, and a few good explosions all spiced up with a little family drama, a romantic subplot involving the two main characters, and a happy ending. It is essentially a gritty, action-packed thriller framed as a political statement about the need for sexual equality. If you are a fan of classic psychotronic cult films like The Warriors or Escape from New York, then this one is right up your alley.
I don’t think Leftist politically minded people have anything to fear from The Feminists. Certain radicals and extremists will be offended by anything that critiques the idea of a matriarchy, but more rational people will at least be sensible enough to detach themselves from the worst elements of the book like its being slightly dated in its method and meaning. And if you are still deeply offended by this book’s portrayal of feminism as you clutch your matriarchal pearls tightly enough to crush them, I say this to you: I have heard a lot of people say that the world would be more perfect if we had a matriarchy in charge. It is a dogmatic assertion and I don’t know if it is true or false. What I do know is that I have never heard any activists or theorists produce a realistic plan for establishing a matriarchy, running it, and defending it from the inevitable opponents who will try to tear it down. I have never heard a detailed description of what a matriarchy would look like. If you are not capable of providing these types of utopian details, then the opponents of your dreams will step in and take control; their version of your matriarchy will be one of dystopian nightmare. When that happens then you have already lost before you’ve begun. If your naivete and shortsightedness prevent you from reaching your goals, don’t blame it one anyone but yourselves. Sorry for my mansplaining, but sometimes outsiders can see groups of people more clearly than they see themselves. If that offends you, then so be it.
No comments:
Post a Comment