Page 88 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 5-6: Teaching Feminism, ed. Valerija Vendramin
P. 88
šolsko polje, letnik xxxi, številka 5–6
Studies of gender culture in South-East Europe have shown that the
media discourse “mirroring all of the social controversies of transition, as
an ideological state apparatus – participates in the reproduction of very
retrograde patriarchal ideological matrices” (Moranjak-Bamburać, 2006,
p. 31). Obviously, media are an active manufacturer of intolerance, dis-
crimination and prejudice because one of the important results in mul-
ti-ethnic societies is the differentiation of an “ethnically ideal woman”
and the “woman as portrayed by the media”; while the former is connect-
ed to the ethnic, patriarchal ideology, the other is a “guarantee” of mascu-
linity (Moranjak-Bamburać, 2006).
Researchers dealing with the status of feminism and feminists reveal
that from the middle 1990s we can recognise a negative cognitive frame-
work of feminism (Riley, 2001; Buschman & Lenart, 1996; Callaghan
et al., 1991). The study of Sarah Riley (2001) established the decoupling
of feminist values from feminism, in addition to a new sexist discourse
which she demonstrated with the example of everyday communication.
This decoupling of feminist values from feminism has the purpose of min-
imising social change connected to gender inequality by using liberal rhet-
oric in five ways: positioning feminists as extremists; minimising the sig-
nificance of the historical oppression of women; minimising the privilege
of men in history and the present; marginalising the voices calling for
change; and decoupling feminism from feminists in order to portray fem-
inist values as gender-neutral.
Feminist demonisation in the media has been confirmed by sever-
al studies, among which it is important to point out Rhode (1995) and
Lind and Salo (2002) (see Jaworska & Krishnamurthy, 2012). Rhode dis-
covered that the media uses four strategies while reporting on feminists:
“demonisation, trivialisation, polarisation, and the focus on the individ-
ual rather than social transformation” (cf. Jaworska & Krishnamurthy,
2012, p. 404). Demonisation is a strategy focusing on feminists linked to
radicalism, unsexed characteristics, and a deviant lifestyle. Emphasis on
the physical appearance of feminists serves to trivialise the feminists’ ef-
forts. Feminists are also antagonistic, polemical and do not fall into the
concept of normal women, which is strategy of polarisation. Among oth-
er things, this approach, states Rhode, prevents feminist efforts for col-
lective action. Lind and Salo (2002) have come to similar conclusions;
feminists are demonised, feminism is primarily a topic within the media
framework of arts and politics while women are generally written about
in the private sphere. Authors have concluded that feminism is not seen
as essential when it comes to solving women’s everyday lives (Jaworska &
Krishnamurthy, 2012). In their comprehensive and significant quantitative
86
Studies of gender culture in South-East Europe have shown that the
media discourse “mirroring all of the social controversies of transition, as
an ideological state apparatus – participates in the reproduction of very
retrograde patriarchal ideological matrices” (Moranjak-Bamburać, 2006,
p. 31). Obviously, media are an active manufacturer of intolerance, dis-
crimination and prejudice because one of the important results in mul-
ti-ethnic societies is the differentiation of an “ethnically ideal woman”
and the “woman as portrayed by the media”; while the former is connect-
ed to the ethnic, patriarchal ideology, the other is a “guarantee” of mascu-
linity (Moranjak-Bamburać, 2006).
Researchers dealing with the status of feminism and feminists reveal
that from the middle 1990s we can recognise a negative cognitive frame-
work of feminism (Riley, 2001; Buschman & Lenart, 1996; Callaghan
et al., 1991). The study of Sarah Riley (2001) established the decoupling
of feminist values from feminism, in addition to a new sexist discourse
which she demonstrated with the example of everyday communication.
This decoupling of feminist values from feminism has the purpose of min-
imising social change connected to gender inequality by using liberal rhet-
oric in five ways: positioning feminists as extremists; minimising the sig-
nificance of the historical oppression of women; minimising the privilege
of men in history and the present; marginalising the voices calling for
change; and decoupling feminism from feminists in order to portray fem-
inist values as gender-neutral.
Feminist demonisation in the media has been confirmed by sever-
al studies, among which it is important to point out Rhode (1995) and
Lind and Salo (2002) (see Jaworska & Krishnamurthy, 2012). Rhode dis-
covered that the media uses four strategies while reporting on feminists:
“demonisation, trivialisation, polarisation, and the focus on the individ-
ual rather than social transformation” (cf. Jaworska & Krishnamurthy,
2012, p. 404). Demonisation is a strategy focusing on feminists linked to
radicalism, unsexed characteristics, and a deviant lifestyle. Emphasis on
the physical appearance of feminists serves to trivialise the feminists’ ef-
forts. Feminists are also antagonistic, polemical and do not fall into the
concept of normal women, which is strategy of polarisation. Among oth-
er things, this approach, states Rhode, prevents feminist efforts for col-
lective action. Lind and Salo (2002) have come to similar conclusions;
feminists are demonised, feminism is primarily a topic within the media
framework of arts and politics while women are generally written about
in the private sphere. Authors have concluded that feminism is not seen
as essential when it comes to solving women’s everyday lives (Jaworska &
Krishnamurthy, 2012). In their comprehensive and significant quantitative
86
