Sunday 31 October, 3.45pm until 5.15pm, Student Union
If once it was feminists who campaigned against the objectification of women, now it’s a Conservative prime minister, backed up by Mumsnet. David Cameron has made headlines condemning the ‘commercialisation and sexualisation’ of young girls. There is widespread outrage over retailers selling t-shirts bearing Playboy bunnies, toy pole-dancing kits, and lingerie deemed unsuitable for prepubescence. Figures like Lily Allen and Amy Winehouse are criticised for making ‘sluttishness’ fashionable. Does this backlash represent a new wave of feminism, or rather old-fashioned moralism about female sexuality? It was the third wave ‘lipstick’ feminism of recent years that urged us to move beyond worrying about sexist images and appearance. Out went the bra-burners and dungarees; in came new female icons like the characters from Sex and the City. But given that recent surveys of teenage girls have found more than half would consider being ‘glamour’ models, and a third see Katie Price as a role model, have things gone too far? Do we really want our daughters, sisters - ourselves - to aspire to such diminished caricatures of ‘independent’ women? One of the New Feminism’s original architects, Natasha Walter, certainly thinks there’s a problem. In her latest book Living Dolls, The Return of Sexism she admits, ‘I was wrong’ to suggest feminists should focus on political equality and not worry about the ‘raunch culture’ of celebrities, pole dancing and an increasingly blatant sexualisation of women and girls. ‘The language of empowerment has been harnessed to confuse sexual liberation with sexual objectification,’ she writes.
Many young women do complain bitterly that they are valued for their appearance rather than achievements, intelligence and talent. But can feminists challenge unwelcome objectification without then policing the drunken fun of ladettes, imposing models of correct female behaviour, and tut tutting if girls choose to wear clothes deemed inappropriate? Is it helpful if feminists back up conservative criticisms of everything from frilly pink pants for children to ‘size zero’ models? Young Muslim women who embrace the hijab often claim they want to avoid the harassment of the ‘male gaze’. But it’s not just religious conservatives who worry about pressures on young women to dress provocatively. Does an unease about ‘sexualisation’ constitute a challenge to sexism, or simply distaste for modern life and openness about sexuality?
Finally, does it not matter if women tend to care about their appearance more than men? Or are there still unanswered questions about the true meaning of sexual liberation and equality? Is the battle for formal political, legal and equality between the sexes really over, so all that’s left to fight over is bikinis and burqas?
Listen to session audio:
|Dr Maria Grasso|
lecturer in politics and quantitative methods, Department of Politics, University of Sheffield; author: Generations, Political Participation and Social Change in Western Europe
research professor in history, University of Sussex; author, Glamour: women, history, feminism
emeritus professor, School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, Canterbury; Centennial Professor at the LSE Gender Institute
feminist actvist; news editor, UK Feminista website
freelance writer and editor; assistant editor, Culture Wars; editor, Battles in Print 2010
The brainchild of a 1940s lingerie salesman, the tiny swimsuit has not lived up to its promiseLaurie Penny, Guardian, 19 July 2010
Wearing a burka can be 'empowering ' and 'dignified' for Mulsim women, one of the Government’s most senior female ministers has said.Rosa Prince, Daily Telegraph, 19 July 2010
Few are prepared to defend the movement that gave women rights. That's why Piers Paul Read can attack it without being challengedHannah Betts, Guardian, 18 July 2010
They parade in miniature ballgowns, wear false eyelashes and can be as young as five… We venture into the world of mini beauty pageants to meet the young princesses and their pushy parentsElizabeth Day, Observer, 11 July 2010
For my generation, Sex and the City’s vision of female empowerment rings increasingly hollow.Laurie Penny, New Statesman, 28 May 2010
Today's teenagers are struggling to cope with the expectations imposed by media images and peer pressure, the reality of low-paid work and a sexist cultureAmelia Hill, Observer, 21 February 2010
Far from undermining capitalism through a reclamation of authentic subjectivity, cultural radicalism in fact helped fuel the emergence of contemporary consumer capitalism.Mark Carrigan, Culture Wars, 19 February 2010
How do we understand "Glamour"? Has it empowered women or turned them into objects? Once associated with modernity and the cutting edge, is it entirely bound up with nostalgia and tradition? This unique and fascinating book tells the story of glamour. It explores the changing meanings of the word, its relationship to femininity and fashion, and its place in twentieth century social history.
Carol Dyhouse, Zed Books, 11 February 2010
Empowerment, liberation, choice. Once the watchwords of feminism, these terms have now been co-opted by a society that sells women an airbrushed, highly sexualised and increasingly narrow vision of femininity.
Natasha Walter, Virago Press, 4 February 2010
Men lose too, if women are demeanedClaudia Pritchard, Independent, 1 February 2010
Can youth engagement save democracy?
"Intellectually stimulating - an answer to those who despair of the next generation."
Professor Stanley Feldman, retired doctor and academic