Tits Out For The Votes - The New Bra Burning
By Demosthenes
A few days ago, these photos hit Facebook on the public page of a UCSA election campaign (fair warning - female nudity incoming):
The inevitable result was controversy. On one side, the girls have been defended for exercising control over their own bodies; on the other, they have been brutally attacked for sexualising themselves, making other women feel uncomfortable and using their agency to endorse male candidates.
This publication stands firm behind these women. They have made an empowering choice to use their sexuality to achieve their political goals – a choice that is no more problematic than donning paraphernalia or delivering a speech. It is the prerogative of all women to exercise agency over their bodies, including their sexuality, and that should never be circumscribed for the “good” of a collective.
First, let’s break these photos down and add some context. A number of women women are undressed and holding billboard that support a number of candidates in the upcoming UCSA election. Those candidates are all men. These women have uploaded at least one of the photos themselves, and expressed that their intention in doing so is to “back the boys.”
Our take on this is pretty simple – these are women making a choice to endorse political candidates. To make that point most effectively, they’ve decided to take their clothes off, knowing that that will appeal to male voters and is likely to push them to vote for the candidates these women support. Compared to the traditional notion that female sexuality is something to be controlled by men in the context of a monogamous relationship, this is a statement by these women that sexual agency is theirs. To use that for to political, social or personal end is perfectly capable of empowering them.
To the critique, then. Opponents of the campaign have addressed two concerns: that these women are inherently bowing to the patriarchy by exercising their sexuality to appease men, or that their actions are harmful to a collective of women to which they owe a duty.
Both arguments are hugely problematic. The first claims that whenever a woman does something that men enjoy or support, she is buying into power structures that control her. Not only does that belie the idea that women have agency and freedom to act as they choose (notwithstanding social influences that might try to fight that), but would prohibit any heterosexual woman from ever exercising her sexuality. If we refuse to acknowledge that women can make their own choices free of patriarchal influence, then all women are disempowered by the mere idea of patriarchy, regardless of whether it is controlling them or not. Rather than dispelling the power of patriarchal norms, that rationale reinforces them.
What's more, it's fundamentally alienating to criticise the choice these women have made to support male candidates. It's their prerogative to determine which candidates to support on the basis of their personalities or policies; weighting gender as part of that that is an exercise for them, not for external actors. Even then, if they did believe gender, or gender policy, to be an important part of their voting calculus, it's a perfectly legitimate decision to find that a man best supports your views on gender and on feminism when compared to female candidates. In the same way that I prefer Russel Norman's take on feminism to Paula Bennett's, it's fair for these women to prefer their candidates over female ones.
The second argument is even more harmful. Though feminism once embraced the notion that women owed duties to a “sisterhood,” that somehow encompassed the wide range of views that women take on gender issues, that view has now largely died off. It’s understandable that women with conservative ideologies, or those who don’t associate with sexual liberation, might not agree with the path these women have chosen. However, that does not create a duty on them to curtail their agency to accord with what is supposedly good for “feminism.” The only duty owed here is to themselves; in the same way that we would never ask men to act in a way that is best for men, these women must be treated as individuals.
It’s clear that not everyone agrees that taking your clothes off is an effective way to garner political support. For some, that would make them feel objectified and degraded. But for these women, it is a source of power – that’s something that everyone should celebrate.