Feminism vs Female Empowerment vs Feminist Exemplification
In the past years this thread of labeling anything thatâs female positive as feminist has really skyrocketed and it bothers me greatly. Great female representation and female empowerment does not make a thing feminist. Something that illustrates, explains or describes a feminist value or point of view does not make that thing feminist.
What defines something as sexist or empowering or feminist is the context and the message or objective that it wants to convey.
There are men in the industry who are progressive and works towards equality by hiring more women, and actively trying to give us better female representation. There are women who direct women in films about women and who try to maintain a crew or team of mostly women. In both cases, none of this makes their project or them feminists.
The majority of the entertainment industry responds and caters to The Male Gaze â it does so even if there are no men operatively involved in the project, because 99.9% of people in the industry do not make art, they are here to make money.
And although it is based on what we commonly call artistic careers, that does not mean that there is a really artistic background or objective in the things being made â itâs purely commercial in a vast majority. The ultimate goal of the entertainment industry is to sell. Therefore, much of this âartâ is not progressive, thought-provoking or subversive in any way, specially if the person in charge believes that this could cost them money. The main objective is to market to the consumers and they do so at the expense of everything - this includes quality, values, points of view, consciousness and self-awareness. And this is when two very interesting things happen: Faux Feminism & Female Exploitation.
Female Exploitation is when the person in charge believes that what sells is quiet, beautiful and sensual women â this is the main thing, and the characterâs story is secondary (so much that most end up being just eye candy or as a manic pixie dream girl). In this case they think of subversive and thought-provoking as something that can harm their income. So the actresses talent and creativity doesnât really matter, as long as theyâre pretty and sell.
Faux Feminism is when the person in charge believes that the money is in the feminist pov and they make films that could pass as feminist and with strong female characters that follow closely and/or represent the political climate and feminist discourse of today â but that does not make the product feminist, mainly because in most cases they do this in the most superficial way for a monetary gain. Keep in mind, in this cases they donât explicitally use the word feminism in attachment to whatever their selling, but itâs very obvious.
And sometimes is neither of these, but instead Casual Feminism - when something could represent, stand for feminism but that wasnât the intention at all. Feminists saw it and were like HECK YEAH.
Is feminist a project in which mostly or only women participate? Is feminist a project where the main roles are 99% female? Is feminist a project that addresses sexism? Is feminist a project thatâs inclusive? Is feminist a project with independent and empowered women? Is feminist a project that criticizes the way in which society treats women? The answer to all this is NO.
What defines whether something is feminist or not, is first and foremost if whether its exhibitors/creators are feminists or if it was written to represent/stand for feminism explicitly and consciously. If I wear a shirt that says I am feminist, that does not make me feminist. Being a fan of Beyonce, Taylor Swift, Emma Watson or any other feminist does not make me a feminist. Reading one feminist book does not make me feminist (itâs the start, if so I decide). Iâm just wearing something, following a person, consuming a product. And many artistic products are attributed the term feminist when they are not in the slightest. If you assume that it is feminist because it exemplifies feminism or is potentially empowering for women, that does not make it feminist. Talking about self-love, girl power, sorority and sexism does not make you a feminist - it makes you self-aware of your rights, strengths and weaknesses and that is excellent and encouraged, but it does not make you feminist.
Why? Because Feminism is a philosophical, social, political, economic and artistic current. What makes a feminist person a feminist, above all, is that they identify themselves as such, with all the awareness of what feminism is because they have studied it or are constantly studying it or have the intention of studying it.
We can long and dream for a feminist awakening in the entertainment industry, but precisely because of that we should not label just anything as sfeminist, because labeling something or someone as feminist when it is not is a disrespect to the person or product and misleading; and it is harmful to the people and products that are feminist and that are mostly ignored, criticized, received in a negative way and usually overshadowed by pseudo-feminist products with better marketing, plus it only helps to preserve the misinformation and misunderstanding of what feminism is and superficializes it. Not to mention it can perpetuate some misconceptions.
Something or someone not being feminist does not mean it is sexist and there IS feminism in the entertainment industry, but very little and it usually suffers from detractors from the industry itself; so what we find mostly is female empowerment, in an initial and often diluted facet.
So no, we canât call it feminist but we can call it empowering since many women feel that spark of strength, they feel identified and reflected accurately, maybe they even feel understood - and that is something very valuable. We can also use them as an exemplification of feminism, there are many artistic projects that are not feminist but serve to explain, illustrate or describe a feminist point of view because they showed it excellently.
Letâs see some examples of what Iâm talking about:
Mean Girls is a great example of a feminist movie. It represents and portrays feminist points of view and feminist values consciously and with the intention and awareness of doing it directly from a feminist stand. It has the feminist label very big and very visibly. It was written by a feminist (Tina Fey), inspired on the novel of another feminist (Rosalind Wiseman). The director is not a feminist, as far as we know, but that doesnât take away from its value as a feminist piece of work in any manner.
Legally Blonde is another great example of a feminist film. The writers, Karen McCullah and Kirsten Smith are both feminists, Kirsten notably being a Riot Grrrl. It is based on a novel written by a feminist (Amanda Brown). And just as Mean Girls, it represents and portrays feminist points of view and feminist values consciously and with the intention and awareness of doing it directly from a feminist stand. It has the feminist label very big and very visibly. Also, it is very female empowering.
Now letâs talk Harley Quinn, because is a very interesting one.
First, letâs talk about her in the comics. She wasnât created by feminists. She isnât coded as feminist. She is not written as a feminist character. She is not female empowering for most of her story. Nor she or her story are an exemplification of feminism. The character is not meant to represent or embody feminism in any way. So is she a feminist character? No.
Now, in the movie Birds of Prey. Again, she wasnât created by feminists. Was the script written by a woman? Yes, but not a feminist woman. Is the movie directed by a woman? Yes, but again, not a feminist woman â the director even said in an interview that she didnât want to âsound too much like a diehard bra-burning feministâ. The film had an all women crew. Again, Harley isnât coded as feminist - she is not written as a feminist. The character is not meant to represent or embody feminism in any way. BUT is it female empowering? HELL YES. And the movie as a whole is a great exemplification of feminism, this is another quote from the director: âa harlequinâs role is to serve, theyâre nothing without a master and so the movie is about Harley Quinn becoming her own master. And not just Harley, but the Birds of Prey as well. All these women go through something and theyâre all trying to break free from their own chainsâ. So is the movie feminist? No, and so are not itâs characters. But we can and should embrace and celebrate Harley Quinn from a feminist point of view.
Is Hermione Granger a feminist character? No. But she is female empowering and an exemplification of feminism. The actress who plays her, Emma Watson, is a feminist but that doesnât magically makes all the characters she portrays feminists or well written female characters.
On the other hand, Lisa Simpson IS a feminist. Is the voice-actress a feminist? I donât know. Are the creators feminists? I dont know either - but it doesnât matter because Lisa is a feminist and she is explicitly portrayed and written as such, she voices feminism and is meant to embody and represent a feminist (even if itâs an 8 year old one) â and she does so very well if I might add.
So stop calling everything âfeministâ and stop telling people that if they believe in equality they are inherently feminists even if they dont want to use that label themselves, stop this specially towards people (Iâve seen this in comment sectons). In my experience, there are three types of women who refuse the feminist label:
1) The Closeted Feminist: a woman thatâs not afraid to speak up about their opinions but doesnât describe themselves or their povs with the word feminism even though their arguments and discourse has a feminist stand that is based on feminist theory to the point where itâs obvious this person has immersed themselves in feminist books, podcasts, films, documentaries, etc â this could be because labeling oneself as a feminist is dangerous. Either in their house, or in the society theyâre a part of â and with this I mean that it could actually lead to abuse or active persecution. Not everyone has the same freedom, background and opportunity you do.
 2) The Double Agent: they say they donât need feminism and they donât believe in it but they still stand for equality and justice. Usually this person doesnât really understand what feminism is because they have never cared to learn about it and yet they go round commenting on feminist blogs about âhow feminists are wrongâ â this person believes the patriarchyâs version of what feminism is. This person is aware of the injustice and inbalance but thinks feminism is sexism towards men, hatred of men and that is used for women as a women-victimizing campaign to get pity points and advantages. This are the people that said Taylor Swift played the victim for 13 years.
 3) The Free Woman: she doesnât believe in feminism, she probably voices hate towards feminism and feminists and thinks very low of them because âshe doesnât need feminismâ because she loves the men in her life and has ânever suffered sexismâ first hand so it doesnât exist. The Free Woman and the Patriarchal Feminist have in common that they feel feminism victimizes women and is sexism towards men. The difference is one thinks inequality is a myth and the other one knows itâs still a thing.
If yaâll read all of this KUDOS TO YOU and THANK YOU. Iâve been thinking about this for almost a year and it took me a long time and effort to write this and put my thoughts into words cause Iâm really bad at expressing myself and lack communication skills. Iâd like to write too about the difference between Feminist Icon â Feminist Woman â Iconic Women, just because Iâm tired of that mess too.
snowghoul
turnnoffyourmind
romaincrisis
