AbstractIntroductionDefinitions
Chapter 1:The wavesThe first waveSecond waveThird wave
Chapter 2: The HazeChapter 3: The [Inverted] GazeChapter 4: The mazeConclusionBibliography
Postfeminism;The haze, the gaze and
the maze.By Andrea Berryman
Abstract
In this paper I will explore postfeminism in order to theorize that the
prefix ‘post’ is the implication that postmodern theory combined with
feminism, claims to create discourse for women to negotiate spaces of
inequality when in fact i will present evidence that postmodern theory
cannot recognise the term ‘feminism’ because feminism is a socio
political power relations discourse ,and therefore a term that is not
recognised by a theory renders an empty discourse,in this case,
postfeminism. Spaces of conflict are a consequence of the slow
uptake of successful legal challenges by the second wave of feminism
such as the Equal Pay Act (1970) and the Sex Discrimination Acts
(1975 & 1983), and third wave feminism seeks to close this gap.
Postfeminism denies that inequality is due to men’s oppression of
women but rather claims it as a consequence of essentialising of the
sexes. I will show that this space is, in fact, created by the patriarchy
through acts of reasserting dominance over women (also coined as ‘the
backlash’ by Fauldi 1992). I will show these patriarchal acts are a
system of interchangeable steps that pressurise women back into
traditional gender roles. These steps I have called the haze
(postfeminism), the gaze (the inversion of the phallic gaze) and the
maze (the conditions of society influenced by the media and institutions
of state).
I will demonstrate that consequences of postmodern (patriarchal)
society are that women are isolated from support and campaigning
networks; suffer the selfreflexivity imperative and are reconstructed by
a media which implements `ironic’ sexism into consumer culture and the
depiction of what is to be a woman in contemporary times. The intense
individualisation of women from networks which were built by women in
founding the Women's Liberation Movement leads to women’s isolation.
These networks were and are success in applying pressure to social
and political institutions to instigate social change that benefited women
and men. Concurrently, postmodernity demands self reflexivity, the
notion that one must constantly reflect and change oneself in order to
negotiate the modern world. I will argue that women have difficulty with
this flux because, unlike men, women have never had the chance to just
‘be’, therefore, it has always been that women change and adapt in
order to gain economic and sociopolitical goals. Finally, I will also
show that the aim of full equality under the conditions of postfeminism
is only possible for a media dominated construction of what it means to
be a ‘woman’, namely, conforming to patriarchal beauty standards,
being (and appearing) sexually available to men, depoliticised, a
product for the consumer and a product that is a consumed.
Introduction
In this paper I will explore the discourse known as postfeminism in both
the contexts of feminist theory and whether this discourse is useful to
the ongoing Women’s Movement in achieving the goal of emancipation
and empowerment.
In Chapter One (The Waves) I will give a brief overview of the 1st, 2nd
and 3rd waves of feminist activism, to show distinct paths of
progression from wave to wave. It is important to put into context the
gains made by coalitions under the movement and to contest the
assumption made by postmodern theory that the women’s movement
is of a homogeneous nature. In this context I will also to identify that the
steps of the Haze, Gaze and Maze were always a part of the conflict
between the genders and indeed a part of conflict within the Movement
itself. I will to show that these steps came into dominance once equality
rights, such as the Equal Pay Act and Sex Discrimination Act, were
legally gained and feminism became part of mainstream academic
discussion.
Also in this chapter I will to show the differences between third wave
feminism and postfeminist rhetoric. Third Wave feminism organises
and campaigns on equality issues (such as the gender pay gap, which
still hasn’t closed even though legislation prohibits the practice) using
networks to consciousnessraise and mobilise. Post feminism, on the
other hand, is the assumption that full equality has been reached and it
is necessary to compete as an individual rather than a group, therefore
removing the need for collective action/campaigning on equality issues.
Within Chapter Two, the Haze I will look at the origins of the term
postfeminism and examine the notion of a feminism when applying the
lens of postmodern theory. Using radical feminist critique i will show
that postmodernism does not differentiate between genders and
therefore gender is an homogeneous term but then criticises feminist
common ground as essentialist.
I will also show that within postmodern theory binary language is to be
avoided and therefore there is no discourse regarding oppression/
dominance and thereby no room to discuss power relations. Using
postfeminist perspectives I will look at how they try to utilise this
fragmented theory in order to empower the individual rather than the
collective empowerment of women.
It will be deduced that postmodernism cannot be seen as political in
the feminist sense because it does not acknowledge patriarchy
because the term is of a metanarrative nature and also
postmodernism cannot account for commonality among women. For
the purposes of this paper, the Haze will refer these small and seemly
insignificant particles of patriarchal action and influence which actually
serve to obscure the clear sky (full emancipation of women and equality
between the genders).
Within Chapter Three, I argue that as part of this ‘Haze’ effect demands
an inversion of the phallic or masculine Gaze which therefore proposes
and condones women viewing other women under a set of patriarchal
conditions that define what can be deemed a feminine a body or
essence. The Gaze involves the defeminisation of women who do not
fit into these conditions e.g, refuse to perform for men, either sexually
or by conforming to societal norms of beauty, refuse to bear children or
live with same sex partners (through tropes such as feminist
manhaters, lesbians or “fuglies”).
I will explore notions of being seen using Berger’s (1972) work which
argues that “The way we see things is affected by what we know or
believe” (pg8) and will show that this inversion of the gaze is affected by
education and acculturation of individuals through a patriarchal managed
media, social and political systems.
As example of this, I will explore the phenomena of women as sexual
consumers (for example women buying pornography and visiting strip
clubs) and as sexual commodities (presenting themselves as a
‘pleasing to the eye’ for the male gaze) using the postfeminist polemic
presented by Kate Roiphe (1993) to reflect on explanations of how
feminism has increased divisions and barriers regarding the site of the
body and sexual relations. In contrast I will look at the premise behind
Ariel Levy’s (2005) investigation which explores the idea that the gaze
of phallic (or power) applies only to women as opposed to men
because images of the nude male is not a commodity.
These texts support my overall argument that patriarchy reasserts its
dominant position as instigator and observer over women’s bodies and
sexuality as a site of control. The reassertion of the gaze is an act which
absolves men and renders women as nothing more than a pliable
object.
In the context of this paper the Maze (Chapter Four) consists of societal
and political conditions which act as barriers to women within the path of
life and the path to emancipation.The maze in this context is, “An
intricate, usually confusing network of interconnecting pathways, a
labyrinth” Farlex (2009). The context of the labyrinth is discussed by
Somer Brodrib (1992) as a white western male construct, created to
dismiss, confuse and alienate women from men and women’s relations
with each other.
In mythology a labyrinth is a maze in which there is only one entry point
and the quest is to reach the centre in order to find ones way back to the
entrance point. Since the maze is a patriarchal construct, as Brodrib
suggests, I argue that feminism could allow women to negotiate a path
to the centre by breaking down legal and societal barriers, to effectively
veer off the path that has been set for them by patriarchy.
Within the conclusion we will take stock of the chapters and find that the
constructs of the Haze and the inverted Gaze are tools in which the
patriarchy use to set women back on their ‘designated’ course, through
the maze constructed by the patriarchy. However these tools are not
visible as means of oppression because these oppressions are
marketed as choice for women.
For example women are free to be working mothers , in order to be a
consumer you must earn money, however in order to do this you may
neglect your children, but if you stay at home to look after your children,
you are conforming to a traditional role and cannot participate in
consumer society and therefore you are invisible.In this instance the
waves were successful in gaining the right for women to work but also
the right to be seen as an independent economic unit, then we find the
haze manipulates dilemma of to work/not to work, modern/traditional
role of motherhood in society.
The gaze invokes your performance as a mother/ worker and the maze
is societal and political ‘norms’ to be negotiated in order to be seen as a
‘successful’ and empowered member of society.
Definitions
At this point i shall outline the definitions for terms contained within this
paper using. I begin with the waves.
The waves: The 1st, 2nd and 3rd waves of feminism which sought and
seeks to empower women and achieve full equality between the
genders.The first two waves achieved legal status for women to and
the third seeks to ensure legal obligation and full equality is achieved.
Postfeminism: A dichotomous discourse which seeks to both
empower women negotiate the contemporary world and yet
disenfranchise women from feminist solidarity in order to do it.Also
referred to in this paper as the haze.
The movement : The women’s movement . I use this term
interchangeably with the term ‘umbrella of feminism’ as the Movement
has conflicting groups within for example,antiporn and pro porn
feminists they may have conflicting views but both support the
empowerment of women.
Patriarchy : A framework of social relations in which men dominate
women.In the realms of this paper is seen as a meta narrative by post
modern theory and therefore is dismissed because post modern theory
does not recognise gender relations nor power structures.
Societies (NUWSS) presided over by Millicent Fawcett, sought peaceful
means to engender reform. However , other groups disagreed that this
could bring about reform and in 1903 the Women’s Social and Political
Union (WSPU) was formed by Emmeline Pankhurst, advocating militant
direct action such as window smashing, arson, clashing with police and
disrupting political meetings. This militant action was called to halt
during the First World War, in which women went out into the workplace
in lieu of the men who were fighting.
This forced the government to acknowledge women as independent
economic units, however it was still two years after the war that wives
and women over thirty gained the vote and a further 10 years (1928)
when full equal franchise was won that women over the age of twenty
one gained the vote (in line with men).
It is within the above period, according to Brabon & Genz (2009)
postfeminism is first mentioned “In 1919 a group of female literary
radicals [...] declared that moral, social, economic, and political
standards ‘should not have anything to do with sex‘ [and] promised to
be ‘prowoman without being antiman’ and called their stance
postfeminism” (p10).
Chris Bolt surmises that “The Women’s Movement in the 1920’s is
commonly presented as being gripped by a conflict between the old,
equal rights feminism and a new feminism which acknowledged and
Chapter 1:The wavesIn this Chapter I will look at the first, second and third waves of feminist
activism. I do this to trace the historical context of the Waves, how they
extend on from each other and show that modernist style of
campaigning for equal rights/emancipation has been successful and
the factor of a gender gap is the workings of the patriarchy in a bid to
reassert itself in light of feminist gains. I intend to show that
contemporary criticisms of women’s campaigning for equal and social
rights and the socalled apathetic attitudes from women (“I am not a
feminist but...” for example) have always been a feature of the Women’s
Movement.
The first wave
The first wave of feminism was a response to centuries of patriarchal
attitudes towards women, in which women were the property of their
fathers or husbands with no legal rights to their children, to purchase
property, to hold a bank account or to engage with the political system
through the right to vote. According to Chris Bolt (1993) definite roots
of the patriarchal framework can be viewed as far back as the early
enlightenment/ modern period. “From the 1600`s patriarchal attitudes
shaped all society attitudes, literature itemised and instructed how
women behaved in the public and private sphere” (1993, pg13).
Women’s ‘natural’ attributes were itemised as “modesty, quietness,
passivity, piety, generosity, chastity, domesticity, timidity, vanity and
ignorance’ ( 1993, pg13). One response and analyse of these
conditions and instructions was A Vindication of the Rights of Woman
by Mary Wollstonecraft (1792), this document, according to Bolt:
“... offered a compelling indictment of the enemies of women ...equality
and showed graphically ...that the subordination of women harmed both sexes
and the children who were women’s special charge... Female emancipation
could be seen as procuring the emancipation of the whole of society”(p29)
A hundred years after Wollstonecraft wrote Vindication, the women’s
suffrage movement began in the UK. Conducting the suffrage
campaign through “tried and tested methods of meetings, petitions
and political lobbying” (Bolt, 1993, p32), the National Union of
Women’s Suffrage sought to meet women’s distinctive needs and
interests’ (1993, p271).
In the first Wave we see conflict between courses of political action
and once the ‘core’ objective has been achieved we start to see now
familiar arguments involving what kind of feminism is needed now?
Second wave
The second wave of feminism was about the duality of women’s
presence in the private and the public sphere. In a burgeoning feminist
literature such as Betty Freidman’s (1963) The Feminine Mystique we
see a reflexive analysis on the conflict between having equal franchise
but still living under conditions of male oppression. The Mystique, as
Friedan found ‘after conducting a survey amongst fellow graduates, was
‘discontent’ (Siegel ,2007,pg 71) This discontent was the inner voices
of women being drowned out by patriarchal definitions of the role of
women . According to Humm (1993) ‘Second wave feminism was a
focus upon was a focus upon the body ,sexual and reproductive politics’
(pg 55). In order to facilitate this ‘new’ body politics ‘ ...a new language
[which contained] terms such as ‘conscious raising’, `sisterhood is
powerful’, ‘sexism’ and ‘the personal is political` were invented” (p55).
Along with this new language, theories about male domination over the
female body became a large area of discussion in order to establish
that everything we ‘know’ about of what it is to be a women is effectively
controlled by what men think a women should represent. For example,
Andrea Dworkin argues “male domination of the female body is the
basic material of reality of women's lives ...” (p83).
Also within this Wave we see the beginnings of the feminist
anticapitalist strand such as the work of Shelia Rowbottom who argues
that “all conceptions of female nature are formed in cultures dominated
by men and like all abstract ideas of human nature are invariably used to
deter the oppressed from organising effectively against the most
unnatural of systems, Capitalism”. (p92).
Within this Wave we see that the correlation of new language and theory
gave the final push towards legislation that directly addressed women’s
specificity (their difference rather than their sameness) such as
contraception rights (1966); The Abortion Act (1967); the Sex
Discrimination Act (1975) and the Equal Pay Acts (1970 & 1983).
Third wave
The Third Wave according to Gillis et al (2007, xxiii) is “a definable shift
away from the politics of the individual, and the implicit problems
contained within the neoliberalist individualist ideology”. The shift away
from the politics of the individual was demanded by the fact that most
third wavers have been born and raised in a period which sees women
with full equal (legal) rights. Yet the Third Wave is still directly linked to
Second Wave, according to Siegel (2007) “ third wavers saw the war for
women’s social, political and economic equality far from won” (p132).
As we will discuss in chapters 2, 3&4, the war is far from won due to
unequal conditions of pay and treatment within the workplace, not
enough female representation in government and business, casual
sexism which is internalized within the process i call the inverted gaze.
Third wavers effectively campaign around issues that are the basis of
the legal acts successfully gained by previous Waves, but also social
issues specific to their context such as the effects of neoliberal
ideology and the use of women's body as advertising tools within
consumer society (see Chapters Three and Four).The discourse of
Identity politics within the Wave serve to acknowledge privilege which
had been invisible in previous Waves, that of the white, middle class,
heterosexual and western dominance of feminism , thus Third Wave
feminism allows an exploration of issues such as racism,
heteronormativity and women in the third world. The Third Wave
effectively negotiates the global as well as focusing on national issues.
This Wave has also combined new technologies such as the Internet
and communications technology, combined with traditional campaigning
tools such as pamphlets, zines, meetings and lobbying.
To conclude, I have traced that all three waves have dealt with the
patriarchy through change and transformation. First we see the struggle
for the vote and the different actions the NUWSS and the WSPU took in
order to gain equal franchise, the NUWSS in a peaceful legitimate
campaign and the NUWSS in militant gaining more attention because
they acted out of traditional role of woman. In the second wave we see
feminism explored as an inner voice that has been drowned out by
conforming to a traditional role, new language from feminists to write
feminist discourse about the male dominance and control over a
women’s body. In the third wave we see discourse has moved on to
confront issues such as privilege , racism and still the campaign against
sexism and the commodification of women’s bodies.
In the next two chapters I will show how the postfeminism differs from
the Women’s Movement to demonstrate how postfeminism is highly
individualized ideology concentrating on the premise that women have
full equality under the law in western society. It’s premise is that women
can achieve in a competitive employment market and any experience of
sexism other oppression demands only that women think reflexively to
get round the problem rather see it as systemic problem which
demands addressing from the roots. For post feminists the only
oppression they face is the legacy of oppression discourse (see
chapter 3) which they believe marks all women as victims instead of
strong, confident individuals.
Chapter 2: The HazeThe definition of ‘haze’ in meteorological terms is “a suspension in the
air of extremely small, dry particles invisible to the naked eye and
sufficiently numerous to give the air an opalescent appearance”.( Met
office,2007). The haze within the context of this paper is that these
invisible particles are in fact seemingly fragmented policies of the
patriarchy to trap, deter and ultimately confuse women. The haze is
much like a soft focus photograph: it is cosy and nostalgic but doesn't
show a true, sharp depiction of the image.
In essence, this Haze creates conditions of uncertainty and
disorientation through the maze , the maze being the institutions of
state. The haze suggests through the media that, de facto, equality has
been achieved. However, as Angela McRobbie (2009 p.2) states “the
young woman is offered a notional form of equality, concretised in
education and employment and through participation in consumer
culture and in civil society...” The haze is a tool of deception.
In this section I will look at the origins of the term Postfeminism
according to Susan Fauldi (1992) and Phoca and Wright (1999) and will
show that the term has it’s roots in both social constructionism and
poststructuralist theory. Using the work of Michele Barrett (2000) ,
Denise Thompson & Charlene Spretnak (1996) and Ben Bradbon &
Stephanie Genz (2009). I will use socialist, radical feminist and
postmodernist views on postfeminism to explore the arguments
around the use of postmodern theory when combined with feminism.
Postfeminism is a fragmented term and typically (at times) ironic within
its discourse and therefore cannot work as a discrete space/theory
because of entanglements relating to modern/postmodern societal
debates.
The discussion around these arguments will make clear the what the
actual phrase postfeminism means within post modern theoretical
discourse. These findings will help in identifying aspects of what may be
called as postfeminist actions/standpoints when exploring the notions
of the ‘gaze’ and the ‘maze’ in the chapters 3&4.
In Backlash Fauldi (1992 p14) argues that postfeminism was “a term
invented by the media in the 1980`s with a generation of younger
women as the participants who supposedly reviled the women's
movement”. The Backlash itself, she posits, is an assertion of power by
patriarchy (in respect of slow up take of legislation regarding equal
wages, equal opportunities and the eradication of sexism within the
workplace), “ ...the antifeminist backlash had been set off not by
women’s achievement of full equality but by the increased possibility
that they might win it” (1992 p14). This attack on women is perpetuated
in sites of “socalled feminine crises...the infertility epidemic, the man
shortage” (pg 89). According to Faludi these ‘feminine crises’ are
constructions not rooted in the “actual conditions of women's lives but in
a closed system that starts and ends in the media”(1992 p9). Post
feminism, in this case, “is the backlash” (Nolan, 1992 p15), the
reactionary current against feminism by the patriarchy.
Media created crises have always been used in order to destabilize
beliefs and ‘restore’ the societal norm (as the media sees fit); because
equality laws are present there is (according to society laws and norms)
no discourse to `complain’ publicly about sexism or women’s
oppression. The media creates the myth that legal gains won by the
Second Wave feminist movement are to blame for women's individual
crises.In contemporary times woman have choice,however, the media
depicts that feminism hold criteria for ‘membership’.The media depicts
stereotypes and therefore presents feminism/ feminist action as
another conformity cage which ignores the right to be feminine and an
active free agent within society. Stereotypes dictated by the media
include, the angry feminist (Kira Cochrane, 2009 ), the bra burner,the
egotistical man hater (Mailonline, 2006). In these examples we see
the purpose of postfeminism as a tool to beat back the societal gains
of women in the public and private spheres.In a further example i
present a newspaper article about a leisure centre forced to close down
a women's only swimming session (MaleOnline, 2006) because of the
complaint that the session was sexist, the petitioner was a man. The
absence of a ‘man only’ session was the reason given by the council , a
prime example of of perceived unfair treatment for men , yet it has taken
nearly a century for women to be permitted into men only spaces
ranging from public bars to private men’s clubs. Why should we have
women only spaces when men do not ,its ‘political correctness gone
mad’! Political correctness however was originally a discourse” to
removing offence from our vocabulary and to recognise a broad range
and to recognise a broader range of experiences” (Siegel, 2000,
p24).Within the contemporary world the term has been distorted by the
patriarchy to diminish the notions of difference and oppressions.
Examining feminism within a postmodern context we find that, unlike
Fauldi, Phoca & Wright (1999 p.3) first cast off the assumed meaning
of postfeminism, “Postfeminism does not mean feminism is over. It
signifies a shift in feminist theory”. According to the authors this shift
was first marked by a group of French Feminists in 1968 who “marched
through the city with placards reading ‘down with feminism`”(p4). In this
case postfeminism is a discourse created by postmodern theory as a
response to the shift from modernity to postmodernity. In other words,
a discourse created by feminists reacting to the the perceived
homogeneous image of the second wave.
Modernity is a construction of the patriarchy and therefore this group of
French feminists identified that feminists are rooted in the modernity
because power relations, therefore to rescue feminism from modernity
the shift must include the obliteration of essentalist views of women. In
this context the authors argue that difference/différance `must be
celebrated’, and if difference/différance is not celebrated then the
modernist social construct of femininity remains the stumbling block in
the quest for social emancipation.
In postmodern language discourse there is a distinction between
between ‘difference’ and différance, as Micheal Drolet (2004) explains,
according to ‘Jacques Derrida in order to deconstruct an object,
difference is a preface and différance is the concept of the object’
(2004, pg120). In the context of this paper, ‘woman are equal’ is the
preface to deconstructing ‘woman’ where one must look at the
différance between men and women in order to find evidence of
equality.
Postfeminism for Phoca & Wright is therefore is a tool that, “...maps
out the contemporary experience of seismic crises in the foundation of
western modernity” (p85). The main problem with using post
modernism to ‘map’ out modernity is that postmodern theory sets out to
deconstruct the contemporary world. In feminist theory social structures
are of a modernist nature, the links between the political and the
personal are ‘concrete’ whereas in postmodern theory the world and
the individual is in ‘flux’.
Within these two perspectives we find (as I will argue in the next
chapters) that this is largely a debate between equality and difference:
“ ...the equality model, argued that there were no significant differences between
men and women other than those created in a sexist society...the task of
feminism was to bring about a social and economic order in which that
underlying equality was realised.The second model [ argued, by contrast, that
women on account of their role in reproductiodiffrence]n were different from
men and that social arrangements should ensure that they were different rather
than unequal” (Barrett, 1991, p49).
According to Charlene Spretnak (in Bell & Klein, 1996 p.322) “post
modern feminism seeks to protect women from ‘metanarratives’ which
it maintains is oppressive to the individual”. These meta narratives are
essentialist statements made about women since the enlightenment
(see the first wave). Spretnak states that, “...any commonality among
women is to commit the ...post modern sin of ‘essential ism’, the failure
to perceive that every single aspect of human existence is supposedly
socially produced and determined in particular, localized circumstances
about which no generalisations can be made” (1996, pg322).
The conflict here between commonality amongst women and the
homogeneous perception of the women’s movement (more about
which I will discuss in Chapter Four, The Maze). However, the
discourse of identity politics play a useful role for feminists to find
common ground with other women (black feminists, queer feminists,
feminists of colour etc) and still function under the ‘umbrella’ of
feminism.
In Bradbon & Genz (2009) ,Seyla Benhabib tries to reconcile
postmodernism and feminism by suggesting feminists should tackle
‘weak’ post modernisms rather than strong postmodernisms:
“...the complex interaction of postmodernism and feminism around the notion of
identity cannot be captured by bombastic proclamations of the ‘Death of the
Subject’...a way out of the Subject centered dilemma [is to advocate] a ‘weak’
version of this theory that situates the subject in relation to social, cultural and
discursive surroundings...Any attempt to link feminism with a ‘strong’
postmodernism can only engender incoherence and undermine all efforts at
effectively theorising and leading feminism to a passive stance...postmodern/
feminist meeting results in a predominately modern feminism infused with a
postmodern strain to create a more diverse politics for the contemporary age”.
(2009, pgs116118).
Within Benhabib’s theory we come back to Phoca & Wright’s (1999
p.16) assertion that postfeminism discourse is a shift away from
modernist discourse and that “....feminism and postfeminism will not
stand as distinct ideologies but will be seen to characterize the evolution
of a multifaceted discourse...which continues to seek the
empowerment of all women”. However, within this discourse is the
diluting of the Subject and the refusal to tackle the root of inequality,
namely the patriarchy.
As I have discussed in Chapter One (The Waves), patriarchy can be
traced back to the Enlightenment and according to Denise Thompson
(in Bell & Klein 1996 p.325) “Post modernism sees itself as challenging
the enlightenment, modernity and western philosophy in general”, within
postmodernism thought, meta narratives are to be avoided within the
discourse because of the “linear, teleological, hierarchical, holistic, or
binary ways of thinking” (1996, pg 327). Patriarchy (as a framework of
oppression) is a meta narrative, there is therefore, no room to discuss
themes of oppression/dominance discourse, the “...inability to names
forms of domination, and in context to identify male domination as the
adversary challenged by feminism” (1997, pg 325).
According to Somer Brodrib (1992) it is vital to understand that post
modern “... writing had nominated as central masculine texts” (1992, ix).
This does not mean that feminist theorists should not examine
postmodern theory, we still need to find indicators of patriarchal
presence within discourses and challenge assumptions and statements,
just as women challenge inequalities faced in public and private life.
As I have shown there is a tenuous link between postmodernism and
Feminism. Feminism is a sociopolitical discourse, built on the
foundations of a response to dominant patriarchal oppression. Post
modernism is a theory that seeks to avoid meta narratives and thereby
does not discuss power relations, it distorts difference by fragmenting
issues down to a purely individual level and thereby creating flux which
disables commonality and thus rendering women’s lives a haze. In the
next two chapters (The Gaze and The Maze) I will show that
postfeminism is a Haze which distorts efforts to create an equal
society.
Chapter 3: The [Inverted] GazeThis chapter will focus on the contemporary reassertion of the
patriarchal/male gaze upon the female body and how it operates in the
UK context of formal legal equality. This patriarchal/male gaze reasserts
itself as a centre of power within consumer culture that women can
appropriate by viewing and condemning other women bodies and
actions. The inverted gaze is a construct to disorientate women by an
illusion of divesting power i will use evidence suppiled by an
investigation into raunch culture by Ariel Levy (2005), a postfeminist
view of the gaze by Ellie Levinson (2009), a brief look at imagery in
mainstream media by Anglea Mccrobbie (2009) but first a explanation
about the construction of gaze by Somer Brodribb(1992).
Within Somer Brodribb’s work, attention is immediately drawn to the fact
that postmodern theory and discourse about women (or the Other) is
dominated by male authors (as we saw in The Gaze). Theory is written
with men as the Master moulding women as they see fit:
“Derrida creates Veronica ‘true image’ in medieval Latin woman as
representation of the transparency of meaning.Then he deconstructs her while
denouncing feminists for defining her: Veronica must be his and must be
appearance only...Once satisfied to control her body and her movements , once
pleased to create images of her and then order her body to conform, the Master
of Discourse now aspires to the most Divine of tasks: to create her in his image,
which is ultimately to annihilate her” (1992,pgxvii)
Once woman has been created and moulded then He must destroy her
because the only thing he cannot control fully is her mind, we see here
symptoms of The Mystique (Siegel, 2007, pg 71) or discontent of being
controlled. The Master knows the Other is capable of logical thought
because He made her in his own image. So in this insistence the gaze
isn't merely about sexual desire it is about control of His subject.
According to Brodbribb “To desire a woman is in some sense to
recognise her, and this threatens a loss of control...” (1992, pgxx) and
to lose control is to lose power.
Psychoanalyst Susie Orbach (2009) and social theorist Zygmunt
Bauman (2000) both describe the body as a work in progress. Bauman
talks about the presentation of the body as a presentation of health
because it is “the proper and desirable state of the human body and
mind...to be healthy is to be employable” (2000, pg77). To be healthy
is therefore to be useful and successful, the production of the
presentation of usefulness is a major concern. “The individual is now
deemed accountable for his or her own body ‘looking after oneself’ is a
moral value. The body is akin to a worthy project”( Orbach, 2009,pg4).
Therefore this ‘moral value’ becomes a ‘norm’ within society because
the body can be (or imperatively should be) moulded by the consumer
through plastic surgery and other aesthetic procedures in order to
produce a useful body. So, who or what orchestrated this body project?
According to Orbach ‘late capitalism has changed the view of the body
as a tool of production to a tool that is produced by the individual’ (2009,
pg 5). Bauman states that it is “Life organized around
consumption...and must do without norms: it is guided by seduction”
(2000, pg76). Thereby, to do without norms is to be the judge, for
according to Brodbribb’s work, the Master sculpts the subject in his
desired construction.This body project is orchestrated by the Master, a
white western image:
“His images, of himself and us, are before our eyes: the noxious narcissist has
placed a body of knowledge across our desire to know.I reach for my body ,but
this ‘male stream’ corpus has imposed itself between my experience and my
reflection.The access to formal knowledge is mediated by the
master”(Brodbribb, 1992, xviii).
As Brobribb explains, the gaze is about the control of the subject and
not the seduction of the subject by the Master. The site of power is the
gaze and feminist responses have been to assert that women should
be viewed as a ‘whole’ person and not just by appearance, that is
pleasing according to social ‘norms’. The Master reacts against this
assertion by appearing to fully disclose knowledge and thereby opening
up the site of power via images of the ideal image presented by female
celebrities, the postfeminist lcon in most literature is that of Madonna
(Wheleen, 2000, p38).
Madonna image is that of strong, ever changing,(in fashion and music)
to keep up or dictate the rhetoric of what is ‘hot’. ‘Hot’ in this context
interchanges with the term ‘sexy’. “Sexiness is no longer about being
about being arousing...it’s about being worthwhile” (Levy,2005,pg31).
The knowledge imparted by the Master is that to be worthwhile you must
constantly change and adapt. The distortion is that if requirements are
everchanging how can women possibly use a flux as point of
reference? This creates conditions of confusion and doubt leads to
women requiring constant rules for the ‘correction’ of the body and so
look to the appearance and performance of other women using a
masculine gaze.
This confusion and doubt manifests itself in different ways, self
proclaimed feminist author Ellie Levenson (see notes)describes such a
situation:
“ Do you ever walk past a building site and feel disappointed when your not
whistled at?...I do feel disappointed when I am in a situation where traditionally
men are supposed to fancy any woman who walks past, and i don’t hear a peep.
The thing is, though we shouldn’t have to be whistled at or acknowledged by men
to feel validated, sometimes that is exactly what we need, a confidence boost
that lets us know that we are attractive.(2009, pg131)
It is interesting that Levenson states that she has a positive body image,
is married and has a successful career and yet still feels the need to be
validated as attractive by men.Levenson describes herself as a feminist
but infact she indulging in postfeminist discussion ,within this lack of
affirmation by men she internalises the dilemma instead of dismissing
or not even noticing the ‘event’ in the first place.The knowledge
disclosed by Levenson is that women “who are so beautiful that they
don’t need to try hard at anything ...men flock to them... women want to
be their friend and become part of the glamorous set” (2009,
pg107).Beauty is made glamorous by social reaction to the surface of a
beautiful women . Levenson’s reflections upon beautiful women and
her own attractiveness is explained by John Berger (1972) in Ways of
Seeing :
“ And so she comes to consider the surveyor and the surveyed within her as two
constituent yet always distinctive elements of her identity as a woman... The surveyor in
herself is male: the surveyed female.Thus she turns herself into an object and most
particularly an object of vision: a sight” (1997, pgs 4647).
The inversion of the gaze encourages an intensification of the seeing
and being seen, these reflections and the source of power is still that of
being an object that can be moulded to the requirements of men.
In Female Chauvinist Pigs (2005), Ariel Levy looks at the phenomena
of women indulging in raunch culture, the reflections of the women
featured are, again, an ironically confused state. The women state they
choose present themselves in two different lights, “Sherry and I, by day
we would wear these guy outfits, and then at night we’d get dressed up,
and people would be like, Oh my God!. Its like a card and let them look
at you and it takes it to a whole other level” (p97).
These women feel empowered by the fact that they hide and reveal
their attractiveness at will, apply hard and fast rules about revealing their
attractiveness. According to Levy, most of the female chauvinist pigs
take their clues about what is attractive from women depicted in male
orientated pornography, “I pick up Playboy because I want to see who
is on the cover, (said Shania), the other day Shannon Docherty was on
one and I just wanted to see what her breasts were like” (2005, p100).
Implying that these pornographically presented breasts are a normative
standard of attractiveness, therefore the power still lies within the
masculine gaze to set conditions for attractiveness. The crux lies within
this investigation of the relationship between sexual allure and power, as
one contributor states “Who wouldn't want to be a sex symbol?...if I had
a twenty three inch waist and a great body, I would be there in Playboy
...all those guys ,awwing at you. That must be real power” (2005,pg
103).
So, status as a sex symbol is powerful because you can render the
observer dumb with your allure, however, the female chauvinist pig
according to Levy abhors the very women they see as powerful
because the project of the presentation of the body, the project of
power in this case, is performed by “people who have nothing to think
about but the way they look” (2005, pg 101). This aberration leads us
back to Berger’s work about the identity as woman and also Brodbribb’s
statement about what is missing between experience of oneself and
ones reflection, the ‘corpus’ is a structural divide.
This divide is explained by Iris Marion Young as a tool of keeping
women divide through the processing of Othering:
“Other to herself, and the Other to the others, contingently fungible with them...In
the newspaper I read about a woman who was raped , and I empathize with her
because I recognise that in my serialized experience, I am rapeable, the
potential object of male appropriation. This awareness depersonalizes me,
constructs me as Other to her and Other myself in a serial interchangeability,
rather than defining my sense of identity”. (1949, pg 30).
The effects of Othering can also be found in the mainstream media,
Angela Mcrobbie describes fashion photography as a medium of the
inverted gaze, it is widespread throughout Western culture and you
don’t have to be a Female chauvinist pig or a postfeminist to access
the images. These images depict female models as “...preoccupied,
neurotic...The images create an atmosphere of desire through the very
opacity of the needs of the women portrayed” (2009, pg 105) Hence
the search for knowledge, but if she is beautiful, the object of the
photograph then how are women viewing the image supposed to
identify with this definition of feminine beauty? “The logic of the fashion
image is that it speaks primarily to women viewers, it is thus mediated
through codes of femininity and it must address the nebulous or illegal
desires of women which are not specifically, in this genre at least,
focused on masculine approval”(2009, pg 105). What we
subconsciously take in from the image is not the beauty of the object,
per se, but the clues to what circumstances the object finds itself in,
again women are the surveyed and surveyor.
The inverted gaze is another tool for the Master to confuse and maintain
the fragmented state of ‘woman’ and thus a tool of power which seems
accessible to women but as I have shown is not. In the next chapter
The Maze i will show how the gaze contributes to the haze, in order to
obstruct, and confuse women when negotiating the maze.
Chapter 4: The mazeThe Maze is a patriarchal construct, many years in the making
throughout what I will call modernity, the enlightenment and the male
authors of it constructed norms for women to fit within the production
process in the infancy of capitalism, creating public and private spheres
and based on this premise constructed a cage of oppression for
women. Bars of the cage were prised open by women gaining legal
reform to vote, have control of their own bodies and the legal right not to
be oppressed by men, women were freed from the cage and now step
into the maze. The maze is society at large controlled by modern
institutions of state and, in the context,of my paper these institutions of
state depend on inequality between men,women, transmen and
transwomen.
Even though all genders are recognised under the law with the same
legal rights, the patriarchy finds ways to distort the ease of passage
through the maze using the tools of the gaze and the haze as
discussed. In this chapter I will show instances of cultural phenomena,
Capitalism as an oppressive tool especially for women and the role of
the media as the instrument of the patriarchy.
Feminist gains regarding the right to be recognised as economic units
and the right to equal opportunity in the workplace is a site of conflict.
Within the maze the barriers to economic success for women are well
documented, as too is the feminization of labour sectors. In a report by
the TUC (2009) we find that ‘40% of women work parttime and the
parttime gender pay gap compared with men in low paid employment
stood at 36.6%; 19.5% of women do secretarial or administration work
compared with 5% of men; and women are more likely than men to be
employed in personal services’ (TUC 2009). It is no mystery why
feminzation of labour occurs, it is a direct link to societal norms of
traditional gender roles: the apparent traditional concerns of women
within the household ‘found a niche’ in the job market.
The Haze ensures that woman are diverted away from questioning why
these assumptions are made in employment ,or why gender gaps of
pay and opportunity still exist despite equality laws. The emphasis is
placed on gender performance and status, for the emphasis on a living
wage for women and the feminization of labour is addressed by
postmodernism as the need to move away from status being assigned
on an economic scale. Ellie Levenson (2009) surmises, “ ...women are
likely to remain the main holders of these [low paid, personal service]
jobs. Perhaps what we need to start to do is start valuing these jobs
more not just in monetary terms but in terms of status and
importance”.(2009, pg78). A fine sentiment to be sure, yet “...
postmodern society engages its members primarily in their capacity as
consumers rather than producers” (Bauman, 2000, pg 76). The
entanglement of status and importance is bound up by economic worth
in the contemporary world and presents what Patricia Mann (in Bradbon
& Genz, 2009) calls “ ...multi agency positions...a confusingly varied set
of motivations, obligations and the desire for recognition...that we
occupy in contemporary society...” (2009, pg 169). These ‘multiagency
positions’ are a direct consequence of the distortion produced by the
patriarchy, we see continual fragments when discussing women as
economic agents.
In The illusions of Post feminism (Cappock et al 1995), the authors
outline multi agency positions within a chapter entitled ‘The Myth of
Equal Opportunities in the Workplace’ (1997, pg 75) women in different
professionals were interviewed about what they saw were inequalities
within the workplace, overwhelming it was the stereotyping of gender
roles, an unrecognised (by law) form of sexism, that blighted the
women’s professional lives. When dealing with professions that duties
of domestic work it was remarked by male colleagues that “...women
are better equipped to carry out certain domestic roles...” (1997,pg 80).
“Young women, remain discriminated against because they are seen as
unpredictable and a poor training investment” (1997, pg81) because the
assumption is that women will leave jobs to have children.” Most of the
women felt that they were expected to accept moody behaviour from
male colleagues, but if women showed their feelings they were labelled
hysterical” (1997, pg90). Therefore, “Female staff were expected to to
behave in a feminine and subordinate way” (1997, p90).
Patriarchal systems of oppression woven into the fabric of institutions
create conditions for sexism. Equal opportunities supposedly quashed
gender assumptions within the workplace, so why is it that officially
figures(TUC, 2009) and news media(Gentleman, 2009 & Cakeshott,
2009) revealed that during the recession(2008 onwards) more women
were made redundant than men? Gender assumptions about the
breadwinner as male and the economic dependent as female still
persist.
Under terms of postmodern theory gender is a homogeneous term
given that everyone is an individual and “Individualisation consists of
transforming human ‘identity’ from a given into a ‘task’ and charging the
actors with the responsibility for performing that task and for the
consequences (and also the side effects) of their performance.”
(Bauman, 2000, p3132.)
Being charged with responsibility effectively absolves responsibility in
cases of aggressive domination namely the act of rape. Ellie Levenson
(2009) writes “Rape is always wrong” (pg 64), however the individual
must assess the degree and circumstances of rape as Levenson
describes internalised debate about what is and what is not rape:
“Sex with someone I later decide I do not like may be embarrassing but it is not
rape. Changing my mind after penetration is not rape. Giving drunken consent to
someone I would never have slept with if I were sober...is not rape. Is it rape if
you’ve sucked him off willingly and then he’s tried to have full sex with you and
say no and he continues anyway? Yes. But is it as bad as being violently
attacked by a stranger down a dark alley and not knowing whether you will live or
die? No”. (pg 65)
The contentious thing is that Levenson chose to discuss rape in the
‘Sex’ section of her book suggesting that rape is about the sexual act
rather than an act of one individual exacting violent oppression over
another. The act of internalising crises leads to the silencing of the
individual, yet another facet of oppression. This silencing according to
Katie Roiphe (1993) is “...the passkey to the empowering universe of
the disempowered” (pg35) meaning that women who internalise crises
and do not feel able to speak out about rape or ‘get over it’ subject
themselves to ‘victim’ feminism.
The women described in Roiphe’ book do speak out about their
experiences with men and women at a ‘take back the night’ event (a
conscious raising event to highlight sexual violence) however Roiphe
see’s a pattern of essentialism within the stories told “The strange thing
is that all these different girls ...get up to give intensely personal
accounts, all of the stories begin to start the same” (pg 33).
Condemning these women as victims Roiphe misses the point that
“Those fearful of confining women to perpetual womenhood seem to
have forgotten the relief of hearing one’s oppression named as
oppression” (Thompson in Bell&Klein, 1996). Roiphe also misses the
point that sexual violence (in all its contexts) is an everyday phenomena
perpetuated by sexist oppression, the Othering process (the inverted
gaze)’ allows’ her to dissociate herself from women testifying to the
power taken away from them, she is too caught up with asserting
herself as a individual power who has the clarity to see through what she
sees as old, victim feminism.
According to Thompson (in Bell & Klein 1996) “...post modernist
feminism might be reluctant to talk about domination... [because
of]...intellectual boredom with, stale old talk about male dominance and
female subordination “ (1996, pg 325), there is ‘intellectual boredom’
simply because an oppression discourse does not ‘fit into’ postmodern
discourse, oppression isn't flexible, you can only identify different kinds
of oppression not dilute it.
The Haze and the inverted gaze is amplified when factoring in the role of
Media. As we saw Susan Fauldi sees the media as the tool that invented
the term postfeminism and through, films, music and the printed media
creates crises for women. Embedded in everyday life the media
dictates the body project (in the gaze), identity politics in a
subconscious manner, and amplifies trends. One such example to be
found in Fauldi’s work is that of how the media in America constructed
the crisis of marriage and the ‘Spinster boom’ and blamed it all on the
feminism movement:
“[New York Times ,1974 ] ‘women are more self assured, confident,secure’...The
women's movement , apparently is catching on...within just eight years the,
singlehood has emerged ...[as a] newly respectable style of American life...A
dozen years later, these publications were sending out the opposite signals.
Newsweek were now busy scolding single women for refusing to settle for
‘lesser’ males... On the front page of The New York Times the unwed woman
stalked the empty streets like Typhoid Mary; ‘though bright and accomplished’,
’she dreads nightfall, when darkness hugs the city and lights go on in warm
kitchens...Mary was an executive in a garment firm.Like most ailing single
women that the media of this time chose to pillory, she was one of the success
stories from the women’s movement now awakening to the error of her
independent ways “( Fauldi, 1993 pg119121).
Feminism isn’t a trend but a social movement, it ‘caught on’ because of
successful lobbying and campaigning over a period of a century and
counting.
Drawing on feminist gains of equal opportunity the media machine
distorted the equality agenda falling back to the well worn ground of
traditional gender roles. We see this effectively portrayed within the
media today, the new feminist ‘icon’ is far different from the the spice
girls brand in the 90’s it is all about the über mummy. The spice girls
were young feisty and free to make and spend money, the current
media taste is for the über mummy, middle class women, who can cook,
entertain, work parttime, raise children and satisfy patriarchal beauty
‘norms’. According to Sarah Vine (times online, 2009) the two top
women female icons are Michelle Obama and Nigella Lawson, these
women are both from privileged backgrounds and undertake major
prepping before facing the media. Michelle is more famous for being
the wife of the American president and mother of his children than she
is of her own career and Nigella Lawson is feted as a ‘sexy’ über
mummy. “Feminism, leaderless as it has always been, never satisfied
the public’s thirst for figureheads and spokespeople, and therefore the
media make figureheads for themselves...”(Whelehan, 2000, pg78).
Figureheads are needed in order to ‘fix’ identities and ideas to provide
both role models and scapegoats and more so in the postmodern era
“What emerges from from the fading social norms is naked frightened,
aggressive ego in search of love and help.In the search for itself and an
affectionate societiality, it easily gets lost in the jungle of the self...”
[Beck in Bauman, 2000 P37).
The maze, when negotiated by women is conducted under conditions of
the haze and maze, tools of the patriarchy. Post modern theory does not
provide a place for a collective movement because in the postmodern
age the emphasis is on the individual. Distortion and disconnection is
masked by the media, the media portrays itself as common ground, a
voice of the people when in fact I have shown it manipulates in order to
maintain the status quo of gender inequality.
ConclusionAs I have shown throughout, postmodern theory cannot intersect with
feminism, so called new feminism’s attempt to interact with the world of
now and thereby ‘postfeminism’ is merely a buzzword. The evidence
supplied about the haze and the gaze are proof of the elaborate
distortion by the patriarchy and the maze concludes how these tools are
employed within wide stream society. So whats next for feminism?
Feminism, embraces change and new ideas unlike the patriarchy and
therefore, that is where the power lies. The advent of identity politics
has strengthened the movement filling the gaps of individual
oppressions and formed a more commonality between women
because if it hadn't there wouldn't be a third wave movement. The third
wave must continue with its quest for full equality, but like the previous
waves, the instances in which push feminism aside such as war,
recession and mainstream political ideology. The new ‘war’ is that of
climate change, ecofeminism along with anticapitalist feminism
challenges, campaigns and lobbies governments, companies alongside
other groups such as Greenpeace.
The advent of the Internet as a networking tool is invaluable as a way of
communicating women's stories, actions and ideas without the vetting of
the patriarchy, links of solidarity across the world are made.
Feminism does not suffer because women do not identify as feminists,
women have always fought for equality and to directly challenge
oppression, working class women for example, have always worked to
supplement family income, shared experiences and challenge
oppression by men. ‘Feminist’ sadly now is a label prescribed by the
patriarchy, but that does not stop women supporting the feminist
movement.
Women must still look at the theoretical discourses created by men that
‘explain’ the world around us and men should look at feminist discourse
with equal measure, for it is the only way for a true balance of equality to
occur.
My final note is that women should have the space to ‘Be’ rather than
‘Do’. The patriarchy has conditioned women to be in this constant state
of fixing, and the only way to be an individual, as postmodern theory
suggests we are, is to have time to reflect. With individual reflectiveness
combined with feminist story telling we can finally differentiate what is
dictated by the patriachy and what is original feminist thought and give
women the chance to ‘Be’ rather than ‘Do’.
Bibliography
Bauman, Z (2000) Liquid Modernity. Polity Press. Blackwell publishing
Ltd. Cambridge.
Barett, M (2000) ‘PostFeminsim’ Chapter 3 in Browning,G. Halcli, A.
Websters, F . Understanding Contemporary Society:theories of
Present. Sage.
Bell, D. Klein, R (1996) Radically Speaking: Feminism
Reclaimed.Zed books in association with Spinifex Press . London.
Berger, J (1972) Ways Of Seeing.British Broadcasting Corporation.
London
Orbach, S (2009) Bodies. Profile Books Limited. London.
Brodbribb, S (1992) [N] othing Matters. Spinifex Press Ltd. North
Melbourne.
Coppock, V. Haydon, D. Richter, I (1995) The Myths Of
PostFeminism. Taylor&Francis Limited. Bristol.
Fauldi, S (1993) Backlash: The Undeclared War Against Women.
Vintage. London.
Gillis, S. Howie, G. Munford, R (2007) Third Wave Feminism: A critical
exploration. Palgrave Macmillian. Basingstoke.
Humm, M (1992) Modern feminism's. Columbia University Press. New
York.
Levenson, E (2009) The Noughties Girl’s Guide To Feminism.
Oneworld Publications.Oxford
Levy, A (2005) Female Chauvinist Pigs;Women and the rise of
raunch culture. Free Press. New
York.
Mcrobbie, A (2009) The Aftermath Of Feminism.Sage publications Ltd.
London.
Roiphe, K (1993) The morning after.Sex, fear, and feminism. Little and
Brown&company.Canada.
Siegel, D (2007) Sisterhood interrupted;From radical women to grrls
gone wild. Palgrave macmillian. Basingstoke.
Young, M,I (1949) Intersecting voices: Dilemmas Of Gender, Political
Philosophy and Policy.Princeton university Press.New Jersey.
Cakeshott, I (25/01/2009) “ Women losing jobs as fast as
men”.(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5581549.ece
. accessed [24/06/2010]).
Cochrane, K (2007) “Katherine Rake :Feminism’s calm
champion”(http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jul/17/feminism
fawcettsocietykatherinerake) accessed 21/06/2009.
Gentleman, I (05/06/2009) “ Employers targeting pregnant women for
redundancy”.
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/jun/05/pregnantwomentargete
dredundancy[accessed 25/06/2010]
Mailonline (2006) “ Are men mad to marry a career
woman?”.(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article402648/Aremenma
dmarrycareerwoman.html [accessed 21/06/2009]).
Mailonline (2006) ” Council in hot water over womenonly swimming
session”.
(http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article374862/Councilhotwaterwome
nswimmingsessions.html.[ Accessed 21/06/2010])
Met office. (2007) Factsheet
no.1.Clouds.(http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/corporate/library/factsheets/fa
ctsheet01.pd[accessed 30/03/2010]).
“Maze”
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/maze.[accessed 08/05/2010])
TUC (January 2009), “Women and recession”.
(www.tuc.org.uk/extras/womenandrecession.pdf.[accessed
25/06/2010])
Vine, S (05/08/2009) “Michelle Obama and Nigella Lawson:
Feminist icons.9
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/article6739280.ece.
[accessed 25/06/2010])
Top Related