Course Description

At the core of the course is the question how feminism has become a demonized and ridiculed “F-word” in an age when issues of gender and sexuality are at the center of constant, often explosive political debates. These debates often connect media representation and political representation but tend to do so in simplistic ways that bypass or distort decades of sophisticated feminist theory and practice. We will trace back such representations through the decades around case studies that encompass film, video, television and new media practices. The case studies come from the United States and beyond, taking into full account the global interconnectedness of media production and consumption as well as the transnational travel of feminist ideas. The main goal of the course is to evaluate how useful feminist thinking is to understanding the relays between media and political representation; and to develop a lasting critical apparatus to analyzing the politics of gender and sexuality in the media.


Saturday, November 30, 2013

Despite learning so much this semester, I still can't define Feminism (read: no one can)

"If we were to concede the claims that [critiquing] articles make about feminism, then a feminist is someone who cannot be ambitious at the same time that she must be and all the while as she alienates women of color and women in low-income brackets." Gloria Yu

 A friend of mine from NYU wrote this article about how it is so difficult to write about or discuss levels of feminism because the term itself is inherently undefinable and not static.  I completely agree.  I think that part of the reason celebrities deny that they are feminists or evade the question is because they either don't really know the meaning of the word or know how muddled the general consensus of the term is and do not want to fall under any negative connotation.  

 The part of the article I don't necessarily agree with, or truly understand, is the theory Yu discusses that feminism is only for white women.  Perhaps, as a white woman myself, I have not noticed the term as being particularly ethnically divided as it stands in use today.  That is not to say that I have been oblivious to the constructs of the term: that most waves of the movement evolved in first-world urban communities and were largely led by well-off caucasian women.  However, I don't think the term inherently is any more black or white (double meaning intended).  As I understand it, feminism aims to further the progress of women regardless of race or socioeconomic background, even if those leading the movement at each of its stages were not making strides conducive to the betterment of ALL women. 

 In general, I do not think the term aims to intentionally exclude anyone.  Yu goes on to say that "There is no convergence over whether feminism is in itself is ostracizing precisely because nobody knows what the word means."  So, are we all off the hook then? Or is this a call to action for society to finally make an understandable definition that includes all women of all types?  

 Link to the article:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gloria-yu/giving-feminism-meaning_b_3857033.html
Posted by at

1 comment:

  1. UnknownDecember 5, 2013 at 11:37 AM

    This post really struck me as interesting because I totally agree. After numerous debates and discussion in this class and outside, articles read, and my own personal experience I’m still not sure what exactly a feminist is and why I identify as one. I know I believe in equality and I know I think that women can have it all (meaning a career and a family) and that it’s ok to choose one or the other if that suits you best, but I don’t feel I know how to properly answer the question when people ask my why I identify as a feminist. So can be blame public figures for not knowing how to answer this question? Espeically when they know they are being recorded, word for word, and judged for what they say?

    I do agree that I don’t think the term aims to exclude anyone. Wouldn’t that defeat the purpose and just create more problems? When I think of feminist I think of woman…of all races and classes. The article that Lei attached states, “Most articles using the word "feminism" assume its referent to be universally understood. However, feminism -- its goals, its methods, and its proponents -- changes meaning depending on which time period you ask about: the first wave feminism of the 1920s lacks the racial inclusivity of the second wave of the '60s, and both precedents fell short of accounting for the international scope of women's voices. In effect, the word is devoid of any static definition.” I think it’s really important to note that the word changes meaning throughout time, and continues to. So isn’t it time to define it?

    One big question is how can we raise awareness and cohesion about this word? I believe that discussing it in an academic setting is great, but it’s only a start. Not everyone will have the ability to take a class like ours and explore these issues. And what about males who don’t generally sign up or take isn’t in this issue? It involves men as much as it involes women. I believe we need to find a way to 1. Define this term and 2. Spread it past the academic world to be an everyday work that people understand and aren’t afraid to use or align as. How? Well that is to be determined but I think conversations like this blog are a good place to start.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)