Having the Cake and Eating It Too: Complicitous Critique in Sex and the City

Anglea McRobbie and Diane Negra make some key observations in emphasizing the ambiguous and problematic notion of the concept of ‘post-feminism’, particularly as embodied in Sex and the City as a quintessential representation of postfeminism in television. These authors are rightly concerned that postfeminism presumes many of feminist waves’ central issues have been resolved and that on some level, societal equality between men and women has been established. This is a valid apprehension, but Sex and the City manages to explore this rather than ignore it in many of the show’s episodes and plotlines. It thus seems somewhat anticipatory to cast the show off as a negative, consumption-focused representation that neglects to tackle the continuing struggle for equality that women face on a daily basis. For instance, the episode where Miranda and Steve’s relationship comes to an abrupt end because he is intimidated by her superior income deals with a very real reversal that has become ever more relevant in developed societies where equality is received positively on paper but negatively in practice by the dominant patriarchy.

McRobbie’s hesitation about the notion of a complicitous critique is evident, but her doubts that such a theoretical concept could be valid narrow down media possibilities for subtle criticism and analysis. By failing to see the potential in complicitous critique, McRobbie seems to suggest that a ‘true’ or valid critique of societal structures and gender normativity could only come about through a decidedly non-mainstream format, which limits the potential for mainstream, popular media to speak to wider audiences with critiques embedded in their seemingly standardized material. If anything, as Linda Hutcheon argues, complicitous critiques are all the more effective because they are able to speak from this position of ‘power’ and thwart the very concepts and systems they represent by including an impulse to question and dissect that which they present as being normative. Sex and the City operates very effectively in this manner and is able to encapsulate the ambiguity of ‘choice’ and ‘privilege’ that comes with the advances that feminism has established for women, however limited or imagined these may be. This is evident in various aspects of the show; Samantha’s open and abundant sexuality is celebrated even though she falls ill with cancer partially as a result of her decision not to have children (which can be perceived as punishment); the fabulous four both embrace their single lives and are constantly on the lookout for ‘Mr. Right’; femininity can be both an element for self-satisfaction and a tool to achieve male appraisal.

Moreover, the show plays with humor constantly, somewhat undermining its consumerist and problematic representations and allowing for oppositional readings. In this manner the show can comfortably fit within traditional and patriarchal norms while still claiming to advance postfeminism and female liberation. Even so, the humorous exchanges between the protagonists allow a space for opinions to be delivered and problems examined, so that the show’s core theme of female friendship is given precedence. Though admittedly the show’s representation is narrow and problematic in numerous ways (the protagonists are all thin, conventional, white, privileged consumers) it’s worth recognizing the landmark that Sex and the City posed for female representations in television and hope that its future legacy will tackle issues of postfeminism’s potential value with more perceptiveness and sensibility to difference.