Douglas, Susan. "Girls Gone Anti-Feminist" & Levine, "Buffy and the 'New Girl Order'" (optional)


Please post your comments to Douglas and (optional reading) Levine below. Use the following questions to guide your reading.
1. What, for Douglas, is "Enlightened sexism"?
2. What are some examples of this phenomenon of "enlightened sexism"?
3. What do you think are the consequences of it?

4. How does Levine characterize postfeminism?
5. How does Buffy the Vampire Slayer participate in the discourses of postfeminism and in the shaping and reshaping of feminism and femininity at present? How does her discussion of Third Wave Feminism fit into this? And Anti-feminism?
6. What, for Levine, can Buffy tell us about the meanings of feminism and femininity at present? What does Levine think about this? What do you think about this?
7. Do you see these discourses operating in other shows?


In the Douglas article, I find her analysis of enlightened sexism and what "girl power" is to be very accurate and interesting. Even though women think they are at the top so to speak, the top 5 careers still remain to be the same year after year, including nurses, secretaries, and elementary teachers. The truth is that even as much as this "girl power" occurs, women's movement in society will always still include an emphasis of women as sex objects from appearance and biological destiny. Do you think the media is giving women false hope of equality, such as Elle in Legally Blonde, a successful law student? What will it take for females to be respected as more than just "sex objects"?

In this article, Douglas talks about shows like "My Super Sweet 16" and "Laguna Beach" as examples of shows in which the viewer is supposed to see the characters and situations as "over-the-top" and not take them seriously. Does the fact that there are so many examples of shows like this negatively impact the way viewers (especially men) see women? Even if the shows are meant to be over-the-top, if someone sees enough of them, could they start to see them as a reflection of reality?

Is the term Enlightened Sexism an excuse for advertisement exploitation for women? Douglas mentions that because of feminism, we are able to take advantage of female representation thus creating englightened sexism. Is this a contradiction to the statement that feminism was a way to help women achieve full equality?

I think that Douglas sees "Enlightened sexism" as a way for the media to represent women as sex symbols. Even though women may have made progress I think the issues are still there. Creating new terms like “Girl Power” I feel is the media’s ways of covering up the truth. What do you guys think?

She brings up the concept of 'enlightened sexism' which "sells the line that it is precisely through women's calculated deployment of their faces, bodies, attire, and sexuality that they gain and enjoy true power - power that is fun, that men will not resent, and indeed will embrace." Now this is something we se every day but the thing that i focused more on here was the "power that is fun, that MEN will not resent." Is our society that built around the concept of man being in power that women may be afraid/ looked down upon if they are in a high position of power but don't succumb to this playful "fun" power? I have a hard time believing that Marissa Mayer CEO of Yahoo, Hilary Clinton, or Morgan Whitman CEO of HP got to their positions by showing off their bodies or being playful in the workplace, yet this enlightened sexism makes it appear as though its the only way to succeed, is it? Is is the medias fault, or are own that we allow this exploitation to continue to fuel our markets and television programs?

Douglas sees enlightened sexism as the resurrection of sexist stereotypes of girls and women made permissible because the work of feminism is done. The consequences of which suggest that through media messages, women are told to be pleasing to men, and compete with each other. Can enlightened sexism be considered a facet (or a mutation) of post-feminism?

I thought this article reminded me of the post-feminism articles. Post feminism implies that the feminist movement is done. This article shows that it truly isn't... if the top jobs for women are basically secretary jobs, then women definitely aren't equal yet. This article makes some great points about the basic illusion of equality and enlightened sexism. I don't really have a question to pose... I'm sure we're going to be talking a lot about this article in class. Maybe this could spring some talking topics: why are these lower level jobs still completely dominated by women?

After reading "Girls Gone Anti-Feminist", I just want to know if when women choose to act 'hyperfeminine' or 'hypergirly', they see themselves are helping their sex to gain equality or if they even think twice about how they put the work of women before them in the back burner?

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by zimme313 published on March 25, 2013 9:50 AM.

Week 8 Post was the previous entry in this blog.

Blog Post Week 9 is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.