An Apolitical Booktok is a tool of the Patriarchy (among other things)
We are not empowered or made safe by silencing critical thoughts and "political" discussions, but by protecting our space and right to have and express them.
I woke up thinking about this, so naturally I had to write an essay.
Here is my argument for why Booktok should not be the “politics-free space” over a dozen ladies of a specific demographic have tried to push for lately (especially in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s election.)
Dear fellow white women of the non-disabled cisgender variety who do not want “politics” on Booktok, a public social media platform…
We cannot make the argument that booktok should be a politics-free space, while also praising Romance and its subgenres—such as romantasy—for being a woman-led genre for women, by women, about women.
One reason we praise this kind of women-centric work in the first place is because of the politics of social hierarchies that relegated women to positions of disadvantage. Positions that still saw them doing a lot of labour related to things like writing, in fact, without the credit, recognition, and pay. Many of the most esteemed authors in history have relied on the conveniently placed women in their lives such as sisters, daughters, and wives to help them write and publish their works, while those same women took care of the children and kept house. What’s more, women of colour and disabled women and trans women are women, and If it’s a genre for by and about women, they are included in this umbrella.
We cannot make the argument that booktok should be a politics-free space, while also pointing out the fact that some criticism of romance and its subgenres—such as historical romance—is rooted in sexism and misogyny.
One reason we are driven to defend ourselves and our taste in literature and the literature itself is because patriarchy devalues romance—has been seen as frivolous, silly, and not of much literary merit. The stigmatization of romance novels is a political issue, and celebrating it’s de-stigmatization as a big step forward for feminism is political too. Such stigma and devaluing of women’s imagination is something due, at least in part, to sexism. Additionally, marginalised women’s stories are often devalued not just because of sexism, but because of racism, ableism, and other prejudices; if we’re to defend women-led works and spaces, we need to make space for those conversations too.
We cannot make the argument that booktok should be a politics-free space, while also praising Romance and its subgenres—such as fantasy romance—for telling stories about strong female characters taking on the patriarchy.
Patriarchy is a social and political system that supports and enables positions of authority being primarily held by men, and places women at a disadvantage on the social heirachy (among other things). Many of us read these books about women kicking ass and taking down sexist men and love it for many reasons, one being that a lot of us know and understand what it’s like to be victims of and have to navigate that same system and similar scenarios. This includes when women of colour discuss the racial issues of a work, and when disabled readers discuss the disability and ableism in a work. Our struggles are linked and intwined.
We cannot make the argument that booktok should be a politics-free space, while also praising Romance and its subgenres—such as erotic romance—for being reflective of women’s desires in a society that has historically and still, to some extent, shames women for having them, as well as victim-blaming women when they’re taken advantage of and assaulted.
What’s your body count? How many men have you slept with? Did you say no? What were you wearing?
Romance explores different forms and manifestations of desire, and is often praised for depicting relationships where the man really cares for and respects the female protagonist, where the man values her pleasure equally if not more than his own, a distinct different to our real world society in which “men can’t find the clit” is a teeheehaha joke amidst studies confirming that women are not reaching orgasm as often as their male partners.
Disabled women are often depicted as sexless beings who feel no desire and are not objects of desire; a genre like Romance with disabled characters is an inclusive and brilliant challenge of that ableist stereotype, and it begets conversation.
We can agree that Romance and its subgenres are important tools for showcasing women—showcasing fierce women confronting the patriarchy and subverting gendered expectations. So, isn’t the essence of these stories inherently political? Aren't we celebrating the commentary on societal power dynamics and politics that we’re familiar with in real life?
If we on Booktok—or anywhere really—uphold these narratives as empowering and subversive and transformative, are we not explicitly endorsing the politics built into them?
How then, can we try to enforce a “no politics” rule in a space where these books are discussed in these ways?
I think silencing political discussions on BookTok is in itself a very political act, and one that doesn’t actually help anybody. It deprives us of the value that comes from engaging with the ideas these books embody, the ideas that so many of us love and praise these books for.
When we silence some of us, we lay the ground work for silencing all of us; Where does it end?
If Booktok is a no-politics space, we can no longer talk about many of the reasons we love these books; we can no longer talk about the ways they challenge gender stereotypes or reflect the struggles of women or challenge the expectations we also want to and do challenge in real life.
If Booktok is a no-politics space, are we not replicating what Patriarchy has historically done: suppressing and silencing female voices and silencing our perspectives by limiting our spaces of expression? We are not empowered or made safe by silencing critical thoughts and "political" discussions, but by protecting our space and right to have and express them.
If Booktok is a no-politics space, we create a space that isn’t safe for anybody. Not even you.
I used very straight languages and reffered to straight, cisgender romance as a grounding for this post as an intentional way of framing this discussion, not as an accidental or intentional way of ignoring queerness, queer voices, and queer perspectives. All my love <3