Page 84 - Šolsko polje, XXIX, 2018, št. 3-4: K paradigmam raziskovanja vzgoje in izobraževanja, ur. Valerija Vendramin
P. 84
šolsko polje, letnik xxix, številka 3–4
As says Sara Ahmed, here is the postfeminist phantasy, which prais
es individual success stories, and that is “that an individual woman can
bring what blocks her movement to an end”, that there is no more sexism
nor sexual oppression as feminism has done away with all this and hence
“eliminated its own necessity” (Ahmed, 2017).
Moreover, to head towards conclusion, “defining ‘feminist’ as ‘a
woman who lives the life she chooses’ is great if you’re a woman who al
ready has choices” (Zeisler, 2017) —which means if you stand on a cer
tain rung of the social scale. Furthermore, somebody may look as if he or
she has made a free choice when in fact he or she enacts powerful cultur
al norms, hereby the agency of the less powerful is diminished and that
of the powerful elite enhanced (Thwaites, 2017: pp. 64, 65). The issue of
power and power balance invariably must enter here: the quite appro
priate “definition” of feminism is that it is “fundamentally about reset
ting the balance of power” (Zeisler, 2017), which, in turn, means, that it
“makes people who hold that power uncomfortable” (ibid.).
However, most of the problems that have necessitated feminist move
ments are still very much in place and, at the same time, there is a consum
er embrace of feminism: “The fight for gender equality has transmogrified
from a collective goal to a consumer brand” (Zeisler, 2017). And, moreo
ver, “substracting misogyny from pop culture is not the same as adding
feminism to it” (ibid.) —to which one must agree, although it would re
quire some finer points and insights into the role of the social media and/
or internet that are particularly dominant in this regard.
So, we do witness a move towards “feminism” as a part of media dis
courses, but this does not mean that the media themselves have become
feminist, rather, they incorporated some feminism ideas, they emptied
them of their radical force, as says Rosalind Gill, and they are selling them
back to us as lifestyles (Gill, 2007: p. 41). Gender politics is somehow dis
located, feminist activism has been replaced by less confrontational forms,
such as gender mainstreaming. In society at large, “the post-feminist wave
gives way to neoconservatism in gender relations. The new generations of
corporate-minded businesswomen and show-business icons disavow any
debt or allegiance to the collective struggles of the rest of their gender
while the differences in status, access and entitlement among women are
increasing proportionally” (Braidotti, 2005: p. 3ff). Popular and consum
er culture through the lenses of which the success of girls and women is in
terpreted, brings new (renewed) forms of (post)feminist dependencies. As
succinctly put by Andy Zeisler, “there is a very fine line between celebrat
ing feminism and co-opting it” (Zeisler, 2017).
82
As says Sara Ahmed, here is the postfeminist phantasy, which prais
es individual success stories, and that is “that an individual woman can
bring what blocks her movement to an end”, that there is no more sexism
nor sexual oppression as feminism has done away with all this and hence
“eliminated its own necessity” (Ahmed, 2017).
Moreover, to head towards conclusion, “defining ‘feminist’ as ‘a
woman who lives the life she chooses’ is great if you’re a woman who al
ready has choices” (Zeisler, 2017) —which means if you stand on a cer
tain rung of the social scale. Furthermore, somebody may look as if he or
she has made a free choice when in fact he or she enacts powerful cultur
al norms, hereby the agency of the less powerful is diminished and that
of the powerful elite enhanced (Thwaites, 2017: pp. 64, 65). The issue of
power and power balance invariably must enter here: the quite appro
priate “definition” of feminism is that it is “fundamentally about reset
ting the balance of power” (Zeisler, 2017), which, in turn, means, that it
“makes people who hold that power uncomfortable” (ibid.).
However, most of the problems that have necessitated feminist move
ments are still very much in place and, at the same time, there is a consum
er embrace of feminism: “The fight for gender equality has transmogrified
from a collective goal to a consumer brand” (Zeisler, 2017). And, moreo
ver, “substracting misogyny from pop culture is not the same as adding
feminism to it” (ibid.) —to which one must agree, although it would re
quire some finer points and insights into the role of the social media and/
or internet that are particularly dominant in this regard.
So, we do witness a move towards “feminism” as a part of media dis
courses, but this does not mean that the media themselves have become
feminist, rather, they incorporated some feminism ideas, they emptied
them of their radical force, as says Rosalind Gill, and they are selling them
back to us as lifestyles (Gill, 2007: p. 41). Gender politics is somehow dis
located, feminist activism has been replaced by less confrontational forms,
such as gender mainstreaming. In society at large, “the post-feminist wave
gives way to neoconservatism in gender relations. The new generations of
corporate-minded businesswomen and show-business icons disavow any
debt or allegiance to the collective struggles of the rest of their gender
while the differences in status, access and entitlement among women are
increasing proportionally” (Braidotti, 2005: p. 3ff). Popular and consum
er culture through the lenses of which the success of girls and women is in
terpreted, brings new (renewed) forms of (post)feminist dependencies. As
succinctly put by Andy Zeisler, “there is a very fine line between celebrat
ing feminism and co-opting it” (Zeisler, 2017).
82
