The "Strong Woman" Isn't Particularly Empowering

Finally the mainstream media has conceded that it is too male centric, with little positive female representation. As a solution, we have seen the rise of the Strong Woman trope - supposedly the ultimate solution to the problem of invisible female role models. The Strong Woman is Arya Stark, Lara Croft, Cersei Lannister and Wonder Woman. She doesn't care for traditional female gender roles like sewing and softly giggling at the sidelines, she is tough, belligerent, sexually empowered, and hot.

The Strong Woman is basically a man with double Ds and flawless makeup, not to mention inevitably white, cis-het and perfectly able bodied.

This portrayal of women is just as restrictive and disempowering as the Damsel in Distress trope; it does not portray women as complex humans with layers of diverse gender expression and interests. Instead, it further glorifies the strength and power we associate exclusively with masculinity by allowing women to be presented as... Well, masculine. Her characterisation almost always includes a warlike attitude and affinity for violence, which are historically hallowed as indicators of a strong masculine presence. Even though we now have women taking on the physical roles of sword wielding and city destroying, it still encourages young girls to adopt a negative view of "girliness" - the girl who acts like a boy is more worthy of respect because masculinity is an inherently more desirable trait than femininity.

The sexual aspect is also quite convoluted. There is a consistent attitude towards media portrayals of female sexual emancipation, where its representation must include high levels of flirtation and promiscuity, with a certain disregard for a long sexual history. Once again, we see only a superficial adoption of historically "masculine" traits by women who undoubtedly still exist for the male gaze. Harley Quinn's teeny shorts and Margaery Tyrell's incredible cleavage were created specifically to draw in and please a male audience, which undermines the already flimsy level of sexual liberation these characters actually had.

What constitutes a good female character is authentic complexity. Women cannot be categorised into pink frilly damsels and black leather badasses - when they are, young girls internalise this characterisation and come to devalue their own complex selves. We need to see a realistic mix of sensitivity, physical and emotional strength, self awareness and the ability to act as holistic individuals; and having as much sex as the character pleases without the writer's ulterior motive of objectifying her spandex-covered body. Men are beloved protagonists as soldiers and fighters, dorks and geeks, sensitive sweethearts and promiscuous teens, and it's time women were able to demand the same.

How to Deal With Problematic Pop Media

Entering a fandom sometimes feels like a cult initiation: swearing upon your favourite character (long may they live) to worship the franchise and defend it against all enemies. There’s definitely a great sense of fun and community within fandoms, but they are not without their problems.

Basically every conceivable form of oppression is present within popular media; offensive jokes and stereotypes are funny to a mainstream audience, especially as this audience are historically (and continually) wealthy, white, etc. As soon as anyone tries to point out the problematicness with Mrs Hudson’s conviction that Sherlock and Watson are gay, you have to deal with no less than death threats from the zealous Sherlockians.

So what’s the big deal? Case study time!

American sit-com F.R.I.E.N.D.S. is easily one of the most popular TV shows of all time, with almost unanimous international love and adoration. Every one of the six protagonists is a fave, and each episode is hilariously quotable. FRIENDS is also consistently problematic. The most prominent example is Joey Tribbiani, the stock-standard sex-manic womaniser trope. 20% of his humorous moments are him being “dumb” and making silly mistakes, the other 80% are pretty much all to do with objectifying women. Every time a lesbian is mentioned, Joey is blatantly seen to fantasise about sexually exploiting her, often verbalising his intentions to the soundtrack of canned laughter. Joey also spends a good few minutes per twenty-min episode defending his masculinity, or insulting Ross and Chandler by attacking their manliness. Basically, if you played a drinking game with a shot per sexist line, you would pass out before the episode was over. Joey being sexist barely scratches the surface of oppressive problems in FRIENDS; lack of representation for PoC, racism, making fun of intersex people, lack of acknowledgement of bisexual as a valid sexuality, the list goes on.

But as soon as you try and criticise something as immortally golden as FRIENDS, its millions of supporters scream against you before you can even really get anywhere. The thing is, accusing something of racism/sexism/-ism is often taken as an unnecessarily harsh attack, which will immediately shut down the legitimacy in an otherwise funny and enjoyable TV series. Unfortunately, so many people don’t take calling-out for what it usually is: a constructive criticism that allows for enjoyment of media in conjunction with an acknowledgement of the issues it contains, in the hope of creating a healthier attitude towards said show.

Of course, accepting criticism against something you care about isn’t exactly a trip to Disneyland, but it’s so counterproductive and more than a shade ignorant if you defend harmful and problematic media just because you don’t want to feel guilty for loving it.

And you know what? You shouldn’t have to feel bad or guilty at all! In a social justice context, those feelings are pretty stagnant and unproductive as people ignore feminist messages to try and avoid that sense of guilt for doing things that have been labelled as “problematic”. Instead, the best option is to take the education head-on and become empowered to fix your actions, and correct those around you. Definitely go ahead and marathon FRIENDS, laughing at everything Joey says (I know I do!), and definitely adore Pitch Perfect, or the Big Bang Theory, or Gossip Girl. If we refused to watch any media that is not feminist, we would literally have to live under a rock. Even feminist shows like Orange is the New Black or Mad Max Fury Road have their problems. But what we should be doing is acknowledging and understanding how and where our favourite shows fall short of the intersectional feminist mark (AKA the be-a-decent-human-being-mark). We need to put aside our blind passion for informed appreciation, and allow constructive educational conversations to take place rather than shutting them down as soon as we fear our beloved show is being called out as less-than-perfect.

Your fave is problematic. So is mine.

It’s ok, so long as you accept it J

Comment below!

Hannah

A Common Phrase

"The thing I don't like is that some feminists put down men, and that's not equality"

It's a pretty common phrase and at face value seems to be perfectly reasonable. However the social causes and effects that lead to this statement are quite problematic and I would like to take them down. 

Firstly let’s consider why it's such a common phrase. So many people feel it necessary to differentiate between "equality" and "feminism" because feminism is tainted with the image of discrimination against men, and angry women screeching. But this is not even close to an accurate representation of feminists and feminism. Today, feminism looks like breaking taboo topics, anti workplace discrimination laws, freedom to wear clothes of our choice, better education for women, affirmative action in previously male dominated careers, women's sexual emancipation through the pill and female directed porn etc. etc. What it definitely does not look like is actual discrimination against men, or a "matriarchist" agenda. If there are any women with these aims, and naturally there is a small handful in this extremely diverse world, they rarely identify with feminism because most feminism and feminists do not support their views. 

So then we must ask ourselves, why does such an insignificant group of people incorrectly represent a global movement? The short answer is because that's how popular media both historically and currently portrays feminism. Even in its most generic form, the media is dominated worldwide by men in terms of content creators, representatives and consumers. And men are much more inclined to present feminism in a negative light because at its core, gender equality threatens men's privilege, which is an understandably difficult thing to accept. Although this may sound villainising to those men, the truth is most men are not intentionally sexist. Very few people who actively contribute to sexism or any other form of oppression are inherently evil. Rather, they are a product of a toxic society that mis-educates its people into a system of privilege and oppression, ignorance and misrepresentation. 

Small example of male dominated media in the UK

Ok, so the male dominated media grossly misrepresents feminists, and there are actually statistically insignificant amounts of "misandrists" or "matriarchists", but why is saying the aforementioned statement so bad?

Firstly it spreads this incorrect portrayal of feminism, further perpetuating the negative stereotype of feminists. This means that instead of advocating for women's rights and better education, women waste a lot of valuable time and energy defending the basic principles of the movement. 

And secondly it’s extremely disempowering as a feminist to hear that statement. Having someone say to your face that the movement you represent is "sexist" or discriminatory is extremely disheartening. It invalidates your work not only in the eyes of people who have never been educated otherwise, but potentially in your own mind too. It's not necessary to use an incorrect stereotype as an excuse not to give full support to a movement which empowers so many women, and aims to completely defeat all forms of oppression. 

It is worth noting that one of the potential reasons men see feminism as "discriminatory" is because it threatens their privilege. It’s sometimes difficult to differentiate between having your privilege (which was unfairly and arbitrarily assigned at birth, and disadvantages other people) reduced, and having your rights taken away. But I can promise that women's empowerment and emancipation does not take away the rights of anyone, but it definitely does tackle unfair privileges, especially of men. Yes, it's uncomfortable. No, it's not a bad thing. Yes, it’s difficult to swallow, and yes, you need to put in the effort to come to terms with it. 

A conversation about feminism should not include a regurgitated account of "some feminists", because it’s blatantly untrue and ends up leading what could be a healthy, empowering discussion down a tired and roundabout path.

Comment below :)
Hannah