Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 5:57 am Post subject: Dickers pages 119-135
I think that the Riot Grrrl was unique in its goals. Not only was it a response to sexism, but also focused on "female friendship, sexual desire, and sexual victimization" (Dicker 121). Overtime, as the Riot Grrrls focused on more and more topics regarding feminism, women and men were able to see that struggling with more than one issue and representing more than one group at a time was becoming more common in the Third Wave.
Quick note: I was confused on what a 'zine' was but I looked it up and found out it's just a shortened version of magazine so that cleared things up for me.
So, I remember sitting in my room and listening to the Spice Girls on tape and singing along to their songs. "scantily dressed in miniskirts, revealing tops, and high heels, band members relied on their sexuality to sell their music. On the other hand, they sang about female friendship and claimed that their 'girl power' was the decade's version of feminism" (Dicker 122). It might just be my memory, but I only remember the Spice Girls as being these over-sexualized women who used their bodies in appropriate ways. I can't, however, remember what any of their song lyrics meant.
I remember some of their names, though. I know I used to love Baby Spice because she was cute and I used to think Sporty Spice was a tom-boy and Ginger Spice was pretty crazy; the wild Spicer.
I definitely think that the Spice Girls contributed to "girlie feminism," though, because it laid out the 5 different types of young women that were idolized at the time. I remember asking people in 1st grade which Spice Girl they wanted to be and being able to guess a lot about them based on which of the five girls they idolized.
I found a quote I liked on page 126: "The third wave has less to do with a neat generational divide than with a cultural context: the third wave consists of those of us who have developed our sense of identity in a world shaped by technology, global capitalism, multiple models of sexuality, changing national demographics, and declining economic vitality" (Dicker 126). I interpreted this to mean that the Third Wave, instead of separating generations and groups, was/is about the joining together of world wide identities.
Questions:
1. "Third-world feminism is talking about the vital, life-giving necessity of understanding your roots and how they influence your entire life" (Dicker 127). Can people with different roots be influenced in the same way? What do your roots dictate about your life?
2. After this reading, what would you consider the 3rd wave of feminism to be? When did the wave take place? Has it ended? What was the primary goal? (there are a lot of examples in the text)
3. Can you come up with a cheer for 3rd wavers? What would it be focused on? (Answering this question might require a live performance on Monday) I should dig up those old pom poms
Like Heather, I was struck by the use of the Spice Girls as an example of girlie feminism in the text, partly because they were so big when we were little. To me, what makes girlie feminism interesting is its "embracement of contradiction"; simultaneously, girlie feminism promoted women's equality/value/power without completely rejecting traditionally feminine modes of presentation. The idea of "embracing contradiction" really hit home for me, because I feel like that's constantly what I'm forced to do in order not to beat myself up for doing anything/believing anything that could be construed as antifeminist. For example, Lizzie touched on this when we were discussing chivalry a few days ago. I think she said something along the lines of, "I understand how chivalry is based on an assumption of female weakness, but at the same time, I like to have doors opened for me/I'm not complaining at the treatment that being a women gets me." I think that being a feminist now is so much less restrictive than it used to be.
I also found the Radical Cheerleaders to be an interesting part of this chapter. I find their picture on pg. 132 to be a little annoying, but I think that there is value in the fact that they're turning a stereotypical female personna (that of the cheerleader) on its head. This is a good time to answer Heather's 3rd question, so here's my feminist cheer:
Accept yourself for who you are,
Feminists are not bizarre!
You know you're pretty,
Know you're smart,
Know the good that's in your heart.
It's gonna be a battle,
Gonna be a fight!
But the future's definitely bright!
Ok that was embarassing haha. Another thing that I found intriguing was the sidebar about Power Feminism on pgs. 130 and 131. The connections we made about society's scare tactics about women being raped were very similar to the victim ideology that has dragged feminism down in the past. The specific organizations formed to combat women's violence reminded me of Take Back the Night, (the basis of Alicia's capstone project, Take Back the Bathroom) a series of 1970's marches to help women be less afraid.
I'm sorry my question is exclusionary, but I'll try to give an option for guys if Christian, Ryan, or Hardy is next to post.
If you're a girl: do you feel overwhelmed/afraid by the possibility of street violence? Do you think over women feel affected by it? How does your religion/economic class/ race/ sexual orientation/ gender identity play into these emotions/fears? What can women do to stop feeling afraid?
Right now I don't have time to answer Heather's other two questions, but I'll try and repost later.
This reading was all over the place. Kind of hard to respond to- but I think thats reflective of the nature of "third wave" feminism- its all over the place.
Well, lets see. You know how we've been watching feminists split and split and split into two trillion different sub-groups since, like, abolitionism?
Well, it seems that third wave feminism is basically the proclamation that almost all labels are too restricting and an openness to all individualities is vital. I was a little surprised at the attitude towards second wavers, and how third wavers felt they needed to.. sort of.. escape the restricting second wave concept of feminism: "For many of us it seems that to be a feminist in the way that we have seen or understood feminism is to conform to an identity and way of living that doesn't allow for individuality, complexity, or less than perfect personal histories." (129)
Pages 128-131 seem to have trouble not contradicting themselves. Zines emphasize individuality- but "power feminism" ISN'T (according to dicker) acceptable because it takes away any universality or wholeness of feminism, BUT THEN it says that "it is not enough is think about "woman" as a broad category, to do so would be to repeat the second wave's exclusiv(ity)" (127) ET CETERA ET CETERA ET CETERA.
It goes back and forth awhile longer.
While I can perfectly picture this all inclusive, yet contradictory definition of third wave feminism to feel perfectly fitting for some all inclusive, open minded, slightly indecisive feminists, but I personally find it a little irritating. Maybe if it was just outlined for me a little and the contradictions acknowledged it would make more sense to me.
That said, its awesome feminism is trying to take on so much. Do you think they'll get any of it done?
QUESTION: What chunks of feminism have accomplished the most? the exclusive undiluted chunks or the all-inclusive and very morally grounded chunks?
sorry if that question is inaccessible.
The reading, for the most part, seemed to be focused on the comparison of the second and third waves of the feminism movement. I found it interesting to see how the two waves contradicted one another at times, and at other times echoed one another. The main idea was that "For third wavers, it is not enough to think about "woman" as a broad category; to do so would be to repeat the second wave's exclusive focus on white middle-class, heterosexual women" (Dicker 127). Much about second wave feminism was exclusive to only a certain type of woman, and defeated the idea of freeing all women. "One of the main things uniting the third wave, then, is its commitment to multiplicity, its belief that a wide range of concerns can be considered feminist (Dicker 126) Third wave feminism was broad, in the sense that included several different types of people, and the voices of those people. It was about embracing and celebrating much of what was never recognized during the second wave- sexuality, individuality and empowerment.
But to answer Olivia's question- What chunks of feminism have accomplished the most? The exclusive undiluted chunks or the all-inclusive and very morally grounded chunks?
To be honest, I think the "exclusive undiluted chunks" a.k.a. the second wave of feminism was able to accomplish and see the most happen. Having a group of people with exactly the same beliefs and ideas, fighting for one common cause proved to be a stronger/better method in one way. However, at the same time, having multiple people from all different backgrounds, come together as one ("all inclusive chunks a.k.a third wave feminism), proved to strengthen the movement in another way. This way, it was easier to have the message heard and acknowledged by all.
My question- "Also a result of its insistence on multiple, personal voices, critics- as well as academics- have found it difficult to pin down the central beliefs of the third wave" (Dicker 129). Do you think this is even possible? If so, then what are these central beliefs?
I do think that it's impossible, because the third wave is so spread out and inclusive. Third wave feminism includes so many groups of people that their is no central belief except for equality. Third wave feminism is so hard to define due to many reasons, one of them being how recent it is, and is still happening. It's weird to think that the spice girls are considered part of the movement, I remember listening to their music and signing along without having any idea that they were "reclaiming the term 'girl' and embracing femininity." That is kind of why third wave feminism beliefs are so hard to define, because it is a wide spread group of women, basically all women.
I enjoyed reading about third wave, mostly because its... well, us. It got me thinking about how like, well this class is a feminist movement, much like the second wave creating awareness of the oppression of women.
Do you think that the forms of communication have greatly effected the feminist activism? "...third wavers can preform their activism in arenas very different from those that were available to women in the second wave, (internet for example)"
I feel like it must have affected the movement simply by making things easier to accomplish. Technology must have made things easier (like spreading awareness and sharing opinions and ideas) but at the same time I can't really think of any specific examples that I've noticed). It's kind of hard to answer though because we live in a world (well, a country and community and class) where technology is almost taken for granted, so it's difficult to think of examples because they seem so mainstream to us. But just in terms of logistics- like being able to spread the word about events (either through the internet or cell phones) transportation, communication in general, etc must have improved over time.
On page 128 Dicker said that "only by listening to and learning form those who experience oppression differently can we understand the broad range of issues that need to be addressed... third wavers insist that identity is intersectional and must be considered along all of its axes," and it prompted me to have the dorkiest/ cheesiest thought EVER. When I imagined that visually, I remembered how in algebra 2 (or whatever math class) where the Z axis was introduced it made graphs 3d basically. I then realized that there would be an infinite number of axes going in all different directions to connect all of the sides and arguments about feminism. This would then make a sphere, like the Earth. awww. So yeah. that was my lame thought process.
In the insert titles "queering femininity" on page 124 it said that some people have "argued that the rejection of overt femininity espoused by some feminists had its roots in our culture's deeply held misogyny... a loud femininity has been assumed to be extra oppressed." This seemed really unfair to me. How can women do the right thing? Dressing and acting in a feminine way means seems to mean you are playing into men's sexual desires, yet if you are trying to be masculine then you are promoting the idea that men are something to strive to be like (enforcing the idea that they are better).
Do women have any idea of pleasing people? Who are they trying to please in the first place??
I really appreciate what both Steph and Olivia Buntaine had to say, I would say that they articulated exactly what concerned me about the reading and third wave feminism. Firstly I think it is important to point out the connectedness of the two ideas to which I refer, i.e. that women can be neither feminine nor masculine, and that feminism has split into so many fractal groups as to become unwieldy. I would argue that these notions are connected in that the pressures to be feminine and masculine come from different shards of the early feminist movements. Secondly I would like to raise the notion that due to the constant internal mitosis going on within feminism, feminist notions have become murky and ineffectual. I am not proposing that feminism has stagnated because it has grown to fight too many fights, instead I am arguing that what feminism stands for is so unclear at this time, due to discrepancies in the thoughts of different factions. And this is leading lo general disregard of feminism as an amorphous movement for foggy thinkers. The hypocricy of modern feminism is perfectly pointed out by Steph's point. If women are expected to be neither classically feminine nor classically masculine, what are they to do? It is difficult to be so iconoclastic as to completely discard the gender roles enforced by society for thousands of years.
Yes, we are done with the book! (well sorta) But honestly I thought this book provided so much information I had no idea about. I wish that it included the other reading about men as well but I guess this will have to do. I really enjoyed the part about how music became about of music. And this reminded me a lot of steph’s question. When involving art into the movement I felt as if women did it please people about the movement and also about the music itself in general (make sense). When I was little I had no idea about the spice girls being a big part in the women’s movement nor did I think about women creating music to empower other women. I just thought music was music. I also felt that the third wave of feminism was very similar to the second because this wave also included L.B.T.Q.I.A
Question: What do you think about the whole concept of personal gain for women in the women’s movement?
I really liked this reading because it was really broad and while it left me feeling like less things were actually achieved, it was interesting to read about lots of different groups with such varying goals all under one umbrella. I would disagree with Helen's assertion that the 2nd and 3rd waves were similar because of their acceptance of LGBT people; i saw that as a main difference between the two waves; the third wave seemed more inclusive of LGBT people as well as women of color and other minority women in general, whereas the 2nd wave had been freaking out about lavender menaces and the like.
I also found the connections to the Spice Girls to be very interesting because I am, was and will always be an avid Spice Girls fan, and while many people will argue that they don't count as part of the feminist movement, they were definitely empowered women [the most successful British band since The Beatles and the best selling girl group of all time], and despite whatever their original intentions, they were also the most effective vehicle for putting the phrase "Girl Power" in the minds of an entire generation of girls..
To answer Helen's question: What do you think about the whole concept of personal gain for women in the women’s movement?
I think personal gain played an interesting role in the women's movement, especially in the third wave because the third wave actually seemed less centered on personal gain and more on gain for women in every part of the world, including many whom the women didn't know personally at all, like the movement to end sweatshops and domestic violence. Additionally, the identity-concealing methods of the Guerrilla Girls and the like avoided the problems of the 2nd wave in which they would turn against any one of themselves who became a spokesperson for the movement.
My question: What is the definition of Feminism in this so-called third wave era? Under this third wave definition of feminism, do you believe the woman from Beyond the 11th would count as a feminist, in trying to better the conditions of women in Afghanistan?
So, there was a lot of critism towards the third wave of the feminist movement, mainly because it was seens as very self centered and revolving around personal gain. I would agree with that to a certain extent; I wouldn't go as far as saying that "third wavers" were self centered though. Liberation on a personal as well as a communal level WAS huge during the time of the third wave of feminism. Keeping that in mind, it wasn't as if everything that the womens movement stood for in the past was being thrown away. This is just a new form of what feminism (historically) is all about: equality and empowerment of women.
My question is: WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL?! Personal liberation doesn't translate into not considering the well being/liberation of others who are also oppressed. That's made very clear by the fact that many women involved in the third wave of feminism continued to help other women while being labeled as "too self-absorbed" and "not adequately political" (Dicker, 129). Some of these groups would include The Radical Cheerleaders, Riot Grrrl, and the fifty thousand protestors at the World Trade Organization's meeting of (November) 1999 who protested for humane treatment of workers in addition to fair trade practices.
I thought Olivia’s question was really interesting and I want to talk more about it. I was, “What chunks of feminism have accomplished the most? The exclusive undiluted chunks or the all-inclusive and very morally grounded chunks?” I think that the prior can be most successfully measured and recorded. This makes tracing its progress much easier and clearer. The wave that was all-inclusive could not be as easily traced back and there were not as many events that could be illustrated as successful steps forward or accomplishments.
I tend to think of the three waves of feminism the same way as you but I do have one difference. I think of the first wave of feminism as purely political. It soul purpose was to change the laws that restricted women and put them on unequal ground with men. Skipping to the third wave I think of like you said as all-inclusive and morally grounded. It was changing the publics view on more than just women but could not fight one “enemy” like not having the right to vote. Going back to the second wave, I think if it as a mix of both the third and the first pulling together the ideas that women need to gain power in politics but also attempting to change the publics views on women’s roles.
Long story short all of the waves feminism has gone through have accomplished a lot. I would have to say though that because the earlier waves not only changed policies that were in place but also changed the public’s outlook on women, they were more successful. It seemed like the only accomplishments of 3rd wave feminism was changing the publics already evolving ideas on women, but this goes back to my previous point that the third wave of feminism is much harder to trace.
I thought it was really interesting when the reading talked about what caused the different waves of feminism to form. It talked about how the waves will start when women have similar experiences and interests in a particular part of history. I don’t really understand then why historians would call the third wave of feminism to be an actual wave. Any thoughts?
I know this is late so it probably wont get answered but here is my question: On page 118 it talks about how women in the time of 3rd wave feminism were, “apolitical and uninterested in furthering the gains made by second wave feminists…” why do people think this?
What is Uploadee?
Uploadee is a great place for members to earn some extra cash by simply getting downloads on their files. By using Uploadee, you have the possibilty to earn more than on any other upload site. We promise to not just match any other site, but beat their payouts. That means more cash in your pocket for each download!
Why Use Uploadee?
We strive to separate ourselves from the competition by making sure you have the most enjoyable experience here at Uploadee. Below are some reasons as to why you should use Uploadee.
* Each download pays a minimum of $0.40+(USA, CA, UK, AUS) and $0.25+(INTL)
* You can get up to $8 per single download
* Minimum payout of only 5.00
* Net 15 payment
* Chatbox
* Dedicated team with 1.5 years of affiliate marketing experience
* Committed, experienced administrators
* Constantly looking to add new features
* Simple sign up
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
