Page 9 - Šolsko polje, XXXI, 2020, 5-6: Teaching Feminism, ed. Valerija Vendramin
P. 9
v. vendramin ■ teaching and trending feminism in the 21st century
and should no doubt be reclaimed as a transformative politics (Rivers,
2017).5 I could not agree more.
It might be too simplistic to suggest the interest in feminism can
be attributed to the media-friendly image of “feminism” only. Yet, it is
certainly true that the renewed popularity of feminism(s) has both influ-
enced and been influenced by the commercialisation of the movement, as
pointed out by Nicola Rivers (2017, p. 57). Feminism sells, or at least those
strands of feminism uncomplicatedly promoting the neoliberal princi-
ples of agency, choice, and empowerment (ibid.). There is quite a noticea-
ble shift towards the personal battles and independence of women; collec-
tive endeavours are swept aside and the principle of individualising social
problems and obstacles (along the lines of “If you cannot, it is entirely your
fault”) is put at the forefront (e.g. Vendramin, 2018, p. 77). The images of
these independent and successful women are often taken for more than
what they are. Structural limitations are made invisible and success is pre-
sented as individual attainment (one hardly has to mention that the pos-
sibility of success is clearly an option for already privileged middle-class
women; for the disenfranchised, less so). The collective nature of oppres-
sion is nowhere to be seen, hence there is no need for organised action to
remedy social injustice (Genz, 2006, p. 343).6 This narrative has re-intro-
duced the syndrome of “the exceptional woman”, which was a recognised
topos before the women’s movement introduced more egalitarian princi-
ples of inter-connection, solidarity and teamwork (Braidotti, 2005, p. 4).
It might thus be overlooked that this “feminism” rather appears a lot
like celebrating or show-casing traditional forms of femininity. As Angela
McRobbie points out, under the celebrations of women’s freedom, there is
an insurgent tidal wave of patriarchalism, embedded within various forms
of feminine popular culture (McRobbie, 2008, p. 539). Put slightly dif-
ferently, feminist themes have been popularised and “mainstreamed”, but
not only that, “they have also become increasingly compatible with neo-
liberal and neoconservative political and economic agendas” (Rottenberg,
2018, p. 11). Catharine Rottenberg uses the term “neoliberal feminism”
and claims it is “a key contemporary discourse that is overshadowing oth-
er forms of feminism” (ibid., p. 21). This makes the vocabulary of social jus-
tice quite difficult to pursue (ibid.), “as this new and increasingly popular
5 On the other hand it is true, as Janell Hobson puts it, one should not be confined to accept
complicated academic prose as the only legitimate discourse, critical issues should (also)
be articulated for a wider audience and messages existing in music, films, and art have the
potential “to complement, not replace, the feminist manifestoes, academic monographs,
policy briefs, and grassroots missions /…/” (Hobson, 2017, p. 1000).
6 Stéphanie Genz speaks explicitly with post-feminism in mind.
7
and should no doubt be reclaimed as a transformative politics (Rivers,
2017).5 I could not agree more.
It might be too simplistic to suggest the interest in feminism can
be attributed to the media-friendly image of “feminism” only. Yet, it is
certainly true that the renewed popularity of feminism(s) has both influ-
enced and been influenced by the commercialisation of the movement, as
pointed out by Nicola Rivers (2017, p. 57). Feminism sells, or at least those
strands of feminism uncomplicatedly promoting the neoliberal princi-
ples of agency, choice, and empowerment (ibid.). There is quite a noticea-
ble shift towards the personal battles and independence of women; collec-
tive endeavours are swept aside and the principle of individualising social
problems and obstacles (along the lines of “If you cannot, it is entirely your
fault”) is put at the forefront (e.g. Vendramin, 2018, p. 77). The images of
these independent and successful women are often taken for more than
what they are. Structural limitations are made invisible and success is pre-
sented as individual attainment (one hardly has to mention that the pos-
sibility of success is clearly an option for already privileged middle-class
women; for the disenfranchised, less so). The collective nature of oppres-
sion is nowhere to be seen, hence there is no need for organised action to
remedy social injustice (Genz, 2006, p. 343).6 This narrative has re-intro-
duced the syndrome of “the exceptional woman”, which was a recognised
topos before the women’s movement introduced more egalitarian princi-
ples of inter-connection, solidarity and teamwork (Braidotti, 2005, p. 4).
It might thus be overlooked that this “feminism” rather appears a lot
like celebrating or show-casing traditional forms of femininity. As Angela
McRobbie points out, under the celebrations of women’s freedom, there is
an insurgent tidal wave of patriarchalism, embedded within various forms
of feminine popular culture (McRobbie, 2008, p. 539). Put slightly dif-
ferently, feminist themes have been popularised and “mainstreamed”, but
not only that, “they have also become increasingly compatible with neo-
liberal and neoconservative political and economic agendas” (Rottenberg,
2018, p. 11). Catharine Rottenberg uses the term “neoliberal feminism”
and claims it is “a key contemporary discourse that is overshadowing oth-
er forms of feminism” (ibid., p. 21). This makes the vocabulary of social jus-
tice quite difficult to pursue (ibid.), “as this new and increasingly popular
5 On the other hand it is true, as Janell Hobson puts it, one should not be confined to accept
complicated academic prose as the only legitimate discourse, critical issues should (also)
be articulated for a wider audience and messages existing in music, films, and art have the
potential “to complement, not replace, the feminist manifestoes, academic monographs,
policy briefs, and grassroots missions /…/” (Hobson, 2017, p. 1000).
6 Stéphanie Genz speaks explicitly with post-feminism in mind.
7
