“Post–feminism” is the word in air quotes lingering among my women’s studies colleagues these days. We don’t know what it is or how to use it, and we don’t know if we’re in it, but we know it makes us uncomfortable. Hence the air quotes.
Admittedly, my discomfort borders on identity crisis. If we’re indeed in a post–feminist era, what am I working toward exactly? What is a Ph.D. in Women’s Studies? These are questions I prefer to put out of my mind when I’m working on a SSHRC application…
This identity crisis came to a head last night when I tucked myself into bed with a glass of wine and my laptop to indulge in the latest aired episode of CW’s Gossip Girl. I sank deep into guilty pleasure land, ignoring the irritating voice in my head telling me that my infatuation with an American teen drama series about “Manhattan’s elite” is entirely problematic. So is overlooking plot and character development in favour of drooling over the designer fashions paraded by clear–skinned actors.
Is this what post–feminism is all about? The confusion of desires that dries us of the impetus to be political? The woman characters in Gossip Girl are irresistibly glamorous. They are young, rich, doe–eyed, shiny–legged fashionistas who traipse about the Upper Eastside of Manhattan looking for a scandal at a charity ball. Their bodies are adorned with glittery gowns and leather bags that cost more than my semester’s tuition. To my sadness and shame, I find it impossible to watch an episode without lusting after that representation of femininity. What makes it all the more confusing for me is I can’t imagine admitting this in a doctoral seminar for fear I would be cast into the pile of the abhorred patriarchal dictators and white supremacists, and maybe rightfully so.
Anyway, determined ignorance was bliss last night until the plot of this week’s episode hit a little too close to my dissertation topic. Blair Waldorf’s internship supervisor, the work-a-holic superwoman of W fashion magazine fame, up and quit her job one morning (the morning after breaking what we can assume was a sexual dry spell) to run off with a man and rekindle her true passions, “Eat–Pray–Love style”. How romantic.
Uh oh. Is this the only alternative for women in a post–feminist (non)movement? Kick ass in a man’s world (and be single, hollow, snarky and practically asexual) until you burn out and run off to India, presumably to be warm, open and womanly? A contentious debate among third wave feminists since Susan Faludi’s Backlash, it disturbs me to think that we haven’t come very far at all, and a post–feminist era is certainly not going to help. As I nervously gulped the rest of my wine, Gossip Girl’s narration haunted my self–care time: “They say the universe has a great sense of humor. That sometimes having your dreams come true can feel like a nightmare.”
Amanda, I love your dark roast. I particularly enjoyed this latest post as I to indulg in determined ignorance to get off on a self care high that involves watching (and reading) things that utterly fly in the face of my feminist values. Maybe we are in a post-feminist era; an era in which feminists are do not resemble the bra burning type that were infamous during the second wave but rather bare semblance to the ga-ga pheminists mentioned in your first post. I cannot offer a solution to this problem as one seems impossible in this hyper-capitalist time. I do look forward to your posts as you struggle to figure one out.
ReplyDeleteJustine McNulty
I hear ya, Justine. And thanks for the props. Feminist times are certainly a'changin. I look forward to discussing with you.
ReplyDeleteInterestingly, last night my stress was alleviated slightly by some observations from my dad... If only he's post his comments! :)
An entertaining post. Not having seen GG, I'm assuming that it does not reflect reality. It's appeal, I would guess, is much like the appeal of Greek mythology, or wrestling. We imagine ourselves as powerful archetypal characters in a fantastic world. I don't think that participation in such flights of fancy diminishes one's worth in the real world. I used to be confused by the fact that girls seemed to gravitate to these fluff role models, especially after all of the hard-fought battles of 60s and 70s feminists against the portrayal of women as sex toys for men. But what I didn't realize is that these "fluff" women are powerful simply because of their sexuality. Is this worse than men being powerful simply because of their muscles? Are the characters any more real than Batman? The world still has problems that neither sexuality nor muscles can solve, but it's fun to visit other worlds sometimes.
ReplyDeleteI guess for me, the issue is... if I feel powerful because of my sexuality, that is, if I'm deploying sexual power, I undermine my other forms of power (i.e., intellectual, spiritual, emotional, creative, physical) even to myself. I'm not sure that power must be conceptualized so singularly or unilaterally, but I do feel that I run the risk internalizing a certain objectification if I think of myself as possessing sexual power above all others (therefore feeling insecure and unhelpful in other spheres. Paralyzed even).
ReplyDeleteRoundabout way of saying that I think it's a slippery slope from momentarily celebrating sexuality and sexual power (living in another world) to feeling that is one's only source of power, the latter of which leads to all sorts of problems of willing subordination (as I'm sure you witness in the hallways of your school).
Interesting debate!
I suppose it must be said that any utilization of a part of oneself to feel powerful, to get that rush of feeling really good about oneself, is fraught with danger. This is of course because buying into some socially perpetrated illusion such as "thin is beautiful" means that you've missed the real foundation of who you are, and are instead intoxicated by that which will in the end disappoint. As Buddha pointed out, the root of suffering is desire or attachment.
ReplyDeleteWhen one can simply BE oneself, content to be who you are, and yet do the right actions as consistently as possible, founded in a basic trust in yourself and the universe, then one can enjoy feeling attractive and sexy without becoming motivated by it, or needing it as a fix. I guess the catch is being in search of a professional identity, one founded in an aging ideology of liberation, while being subject to the pressures felt by any newcomer who would like to get ahead in their chosen institution. You are however demonstrating a nice blend of introspective self-consciousness and creative, critical thinking that encourages me to believe you will sort it out! :)