I quite liked this article by Gill and think it's a topic that really needs to be discussed. This idea of postfeminism has the potential to erode a lot of the progress of the feminist efforts of the past and I think that Gill touches on this a couple of times. This is especially true when she talks about how over-sexualized women are and how they are made to think that this makes them more powerful. I think it's interesting to consider that men clearly don't partake in this sort of behavior such as wearing shirts that read "fit chick, unbelievable knockers" or its male equivalent.
Another thing I thought about when reading this was her discussion of "chick lit". I have often felt that this separation of chick lit has made it seem as though books that are written for women are somehow less valuable. I also feel that this label is often applied to books that aren't written for women simply because the main character is a woman. I saw this a lot with The Hunger Games wherein a young girl is chosen to fight to the death against a number of other young people. After reading it, I thought it was excellent but had a tough time convincing my male friends to read it because they felt that its intended audience was clearly tween girls. This could not be further from the truth as is obvious to anyone who has read the book, and yet this misconception still thrives. The chick lit label is dangerous in the sense that it suggests that some books are less universally valuable than others.
DQ: Is postfeminism degrading the efforts of feminists who fought for women's rights and power in the past? How can we maintain the power that comes with postfeminist thinking without losing all that we've fought to earn?