Friday, April 7, 2017
Week Eleven: Response 11.2
Zeisler points out that marketplace
feminism now uses “feminism” as a brand or a stamp of approval rather than a
living, pluralist ethic at the foundation of a larger system. What are a few of her examples of
films, TV shows or fashion items that get labeled “feminist” or “not
feminist”? Why is this limiting?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Zeisler points out that marketplace feminism now uses “feminism” as a brand labeled as “feminist” or “not feminist”. These examples include films such as Mad Max Fury Road, TV shows like Orange is the New Black and fashion items stamped “This is what a feminist looks like”. The film Mad Max Fury Road and TV show Orange is the new Black are both seen as “feminist” and therefore “good” to consume. These examples are labeled as “feminist” because both passed the Bechdel Test. This test requires that three criteria must be met in order to pass and be labeled as “feminist”. The criteria; first must have two female characters that, secondly talk to each other and lastly talk about something other than a man.
ReplyDeleteThis is limiting because there aren’t very many films and shows that pass the Bechdel Test. With this test, feminism is not being used as a fixed metric that tells feminists if something is “good’ or “bad” to consume. I think it’s very limiting for those who only want to watch feminist films and TV shows as a majority of them I’m sure wouldn’t pass the Bechdel test. Although some seen Mad Max Fury Road as a “feminist” several others argued it wasn’t. Stating “a real feminist movie wouldn’t feature a harem that resembles a Calvin Klein perfume ad.” (pg. 31)
As for the fashion items stamped as feminist fashion is not seen as feminist but an oxymoron. These items are given subjective value and ultimately reducing a social movement. Wearing fashion items stamped as feminism is “not feminist” and therefore is not “good”. This is problematic because like Zeisler mentioned, feminism is messy, pluralistic and unfinished and can’t be reduced to a single brand.
I think for those who wear fashion items like “This is what a feminist looks like” either don’t truly understand the importance of the movement and want to look cool. Or they actually think that by wearing the shirt that they are helping the stigma that feminist look a particular way and that anyone can be a feminist. Although I think that it’s inappropriate to think one is supporting a cause by wearing a t-shirt but not having a clue about the progress and projects that are in motion for the cause that they think they’re supporting. “There’s a difference between admiring the great style of feminists who came before … [and] commodifying the women as though their clothing is the most salient thing we can learn about from them.” (pg. 69)
Alexis S.
Zeisler explains that to brand “feminism” it does not involve any policy it is simply just saying “This is feminist, because we say it is” (62). Some examples in fashion is the “This is What a feminist Looks Like” t-shirt (67). There were also online places that sold Riot Grrrl inspired clothing. Companies would only start to become interested in all of the feminism fashion once it became “mainstream enough to be acceptable and vintage enough to be cool” (70). Zeisler also said that Elle collaborated with other partners to “rebrand” feminism so that it would seem cooler and can relate to the younger women (72). It makes their brands become more popular and seens and normal to dress like a “feminism.”
ReplyDeleteA film that was said to be “feminist” was Mad Max: Fury Road and it was declared as “the feminist picture of the year” (30). Zeisler stated that all of the debates about the movie, were not actually on the movie but the feminism (31). Because the movie never really intended to be “feminist” or “not feminist,” displays that feminism is not a “set of values, ethics, and politics.” It is just something to examine a product and see if it is worthy or not (32).
This is limiting because anyone could show up and say that a certain product is feminist when it not actually stated as being “feminist” or “not feminist.” For the fashion items, once branded with feminism, it is saying that only feminist can wear them. Because feminism is becoming so mainstream, so many people are labeling them as “feminist” when they could be just for the fashion items. Also, it is really limiting to people who are feminist, saying that they only dress like this or they only watch these movies or TV shows.
Kaitlyn A.
In chapter 3 of “We Were Feminists Once,” Zeisler points out that marketplace feminism brands feminism as an “identity that everyone can and should consume” (74). She discusses certain products that sell “feminism” such as T-Shirts that say things like, “This is What a Feminist Looks Like” (65), “Feminist Killjoy,” “Crush the Patriarchy,” or, “FEMINIST” (64). The brand Chanel even went so far as to have a “feminist” runway show.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 4, Zeisler discusses television shows that are labeled feminist” or “not feminist” depending on how they are marketed. She includes examples from Mad Men and its episode titled, “Moving Past Gender Roles to Negotiate a Raise,” which although seemingly feminist, was actually about what women should do differently than men when they negotiate raises. She also mentions the show Sex and the City, which is considered a “feminist” television show. While this series does have many feminist aspects such as the focus on female friendships and its honest discussions about sex, abortion, and STIs, the show is still problematic as none of the main characters are women of color, and it does not portray bisexuality in a positive light as the main characters see it as “just a phase” (99). A more recent example of a show that is considered “feminist” is “Orange Is the New Black.” People praise it for its diverse cast and discussions of topics that are often considered taboo (103). Zeisler mentions how people feel guilty if they consider themselves feminist or buy into feminism, but enjoy watching television shows or movies that are not considered “feminist.”
The problem with selling feminism as a brand is that it highlights only the most appealing features of a multifaceted set of movements (74). It doesn’t touch on the more complex feminist issues, and instead assures that we will get back to them later after everyone is on board. The problem with this is that for the people who are experiencing daily oppression, we cant just “get back to them later.” Feminism is a complex social movement that cannot be boiled down to one selling point. Instead of labeling products as “feminist” or “not feminist,” we should ask ourselves why something is feminist, and what it is still lacking.
-Hyla R.