Feminism in Media

STACY ST. HILAIRE

credit: Emily Bauman

Modern women live in the post second wave feminist world, where they can vote, work, get abortions, access birth control, and generally enjoy relative autonomy over their bodies and lives. However, while we have come a long way, we have a long way to go. For all the positives earlier waves of feminism can claim, the feminism that was pushed to the forefront was that of middle class white women, and therefore very exclusionary. This speaks to the fragmented nature of feminism itself as there are different types of feminism. While a feminist is simply someone who supports political, social, and economic equality between the sexes, the mainstream movement has often erased or overshadowed women of color and trans women. Another problem with the ongoing feminist movement is that the kind of feminism that attracts mainstream attention always echoes popular values at the time, and always overpowers other kinds of feminist expression. While there are many voices of equality, I find that there is a very specific kind of feminism that is displayed in mainstream media, and it is extremely problematic.

Feminism in modern media is usually dragged as a liberal, man hating, lesbian agenda, that is in stark juxtaposition to traditional family values. This characterization of feminism leads many to shy away from the label, even though it's definition echoes American values of freedom and equality. However, on the other side, modern mainstream feminist icons champion a form of feminism that uses their success, voices, and sexual expression as a means of challenging the patriarchy. For instance, in Beyoncé’s song, Flawless, she actually has Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie in the background defining and explaining feminism. This new form of protest is rooted in the idea that anything a man can do a woman should be able to do. So if a man can be vulgar or sexual, then women should be able to be that way too. And, so, a lot of the women whose voices are being heard are women who own their sexuality, and are seen as pretty, and successful. However, what happens as a result of these women being the ones with the feminist megaphone is if you happen to be the kind of woman who is more conservative in terms of how you express yourself, you get accused of being a prude or setting women back 50 years. 

Yet, this version of feminism that celebrates the Beyoncés, Nicki Minajs, and the Kim Kardashians of the world, also simultaneously panders to our consistent objectification of women. In the past, commodifying the female body to sell products was objectifying and demeaning. It reinforced the idea that a woman’s value lies in her looks and body. Now, we see women owning their bodies and saying the female body is more than just an object and that women can be sweet and pure, but also vulgar and sexual. But to what extent is displaying your body, even when you control that display, a protest, and to what extent does it simply reaffirm the objectification of women? Now, being more risqué is actually normal, and being less risqué is prudish. How you look and express yourself as a woman is still how people evaluate you, only now it's almost like you are less of a woman if you are not “taking ownership” of your body the way the mainstream says you should.  Underneath this noise is an undercurrent of my body my choice, where people do in fact celebrate and uphold all forms of female expression. But, I fear that this new standard is creating a dangerous environment for young women who feel the pressure to look sexier and more revealing, even if they are not women who feel empowered by revealing clothing, thus simultaneously creating an environment where men expect women to look this way. It also fundamentally misrepresents feminism as a tit for tat exchange where women want to do the sorts of behavioral things men do, when we want equality across the board, which means in this sense to be whoever or whatever we want to be. It's great that I can wear a crop top, but what I would like is representation and policies that are not harmful to my body and life and to get paid as much as a man, especially since there are more single parents (and children from single mother families would need food just the same - not 20 percent less than comparable families).

Ultimately, while there is definitely some airtime being given to more inclusive types of feminism, most media attention is devoted to anti feminist rhetoric or rhetoric that prizes female sexual expression as protest. While that form of body ownership and life ownership is not problematic in and of itself, it may have adverse cultural consequences for the everyday woman. Also, if these women are viewed as the voices of modern feminism, then instead of evaluating the merits of the idea of feminism, people will (and do) attack the women themselves, as if they embody the idea and defaming them defames the idea. This is what happens when one group of people’s voice gets overrepresented in favor of a more balanced discourse. The problem is not the women; it’s media coverage itself. Media coverage of feminism in modernity needs to be more balanced, and focus on true equality, not equal behavior.