My initial reaction as I began today’s reading for class was: Wow, this guys is really out there. David Gauntlett, the author of Media, Gender and Identity begins his discussion of men and women today by saying, “The sexes today are generally thought to be ‘equal’, to the extent that the cover of Time magazine wondered if feminism was ‘dead’ in June 1998. There is even a noisy minority who argue that feminism has ‘gone too far’ and that it is now men who have the worst deal in society.” How could someone have such a disillusioned view of the sexes today? Women are still fighting for every inch of equal ground we rightfully deserve! What about the concept of the glass elevator in the workplace? And what about our image in the media today--OH, that’s right. It’s written by a man. However, as I begrudgingly continued to read, Gauntlett redeemed himself. He explains that all the examples of the stereotypical gender roles being discarded are simply “a change in attitudes. The reality of actual behaviour is somewhat different.”
I was confronted by his argument that femininity is no longer an existing core value for women, “instead, being ‘feminine’ is just one of the performances that women can choose to employ in every day life--perhaps for pleasure, or to achieve a particular goal.” I realized that I am one of these women. In developing my own personal identity, realized I have abandoned this concept of “femininity” altogether, not wanting to be associated with it’s connotations of a weak, passive, and brainless woman.
I see proof of this in what I am interpolated by in the media. The first time I watched the music video (the link is attached--skip to 1:00 to view), Toca Toca by La Mala Rodriguez, I loved it. I thought it was a strong yet sexy portrayal of a woman. I love dance and artistic, edgy portrayals of women. But, after reading the two chapters of the book, I see the music video in a whole new light. The women are dancing with such forcefulness, it’s almost like they are physically fighting. They have hardened expressions on their faces, and confront each other with intensity.
So I am left to ponder this: Is it wrong to identify with a more masculine portrayal of a woman? What is femininity? Am I incomplete as a woman if I do not incorporate femininity into my identity? My gut tells me that there is nothing incomplete or lacking in my life. I am not less of a woman because I cannot identify with the frilly, air-headed connotations that the word “femininity” implies. I express and identify with femininity in other ways than this traditional, old-school view.
You wrote: "Is it wrong to identify with a more masculine portrayal of a woman?"
ReplyDeleteThis will probably come up in class some time, but I really think there's something entirely dysfunctional in the way we use the words "masculine" and "feminine." Wait, to clarify: this isn't a criticism of your question--really, it's an affirmation of it.
Somewhere in the evolution of our language, the words "masculine" and "feminine" came to signify a constellation of often un-related, arbitrary personality traits, attitudes, behaviors, and even physical characteristics. Questioning the rigity of traditional conceptions of gender accompanies the realization that, say, aggressiveness is not the exclusive domain of men. Women can be (and have been) aggressive as well.
Regardless of our increasingly fluid expectations of what a woman must be and what a man must be, we've retained the words "masculine" and "feminine" to refer to those same, old, calcified sets of traits, which is the only way that it can make sense to ask a question like "Is it wrong to identify with a more masculine portrayal of a woman?"
If you were really asking me that question (which I recognize you weren't), I'd refuse to answer it because the question itself is hopelessly overdetermined by limitations in the discourse of gender. Part of my ideal gender future is that words like masculine and feminine will be abandoned in favor of de-sexed, de-gendered, un-linked descriptors of human qualities.
In other words, I'd love to see a linguistic future where you couldn't ask the question the way you did. Instead, you'd ask something like "Is it wrong to identify with a woman who is portrayed as hard, physical, muscular, athletic, forceful, artistic, rebellious, intimidating, intense, imposing, and even somewhat aggressive?" And I'd say, "Of course it's not wrong! What, do you think men OWN those qualities?" :-)
Hahaha! Noooo, I do not think men own those qualities : )
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting that you picked out that question, because while I was writing this blog entry I kept thinking, "This is so dysfunctional!" I'm challenging what it means to be a woman, but meanwhile, using the term 'feminine' as a derogatory description of women! But I couldn't figure out how to get around it, so I figured, hey, this is where I'm at right now, and just posted the damn thing. And now, I'm glad I did. I feel like you connected the missing link I was searching for: just describing males and females by specific adjectives, and not using words that carry gender biased, sexists connotations (like feminine, masculine, etc.).
This goes back to the main goal of this class: letting down our guards enough to the point where we can be completely honest with ourselves on where we stand with stereotypes, biases, and assumptions about our culture. Then we can help each other (or you can help, haha) us connect the "missing link" and move deeper into analyzing all of this. : ) Thanks, Kevin!
Hey Erica,
ReplyDeleteYou're finding your voice. You are woman!
I agree. When you can find your center, speak from that place, and lose your fear of speaking, you become authentic.
Keep writing! I'm eager to read (and edit) your first book. You know. College co-ed spends a semester abroad in Spain, where a new romantic relationship suddenly throws every part of her life into danger.
Okay, maybe not, but at least that's a place to start. :-)