I really appreciated
the clear definitions of liberal, radical, and social feminist schools of
thought. Possibly media is simply
mediating the definitions that are given to women. In effect society is the agent of
classification of the genders. It allowed me to gain a different perspective
on the role of the soap opera genre.
After taking an undergraduate course at Penn State in the history of
television (it actually counted as an elective!), I learned that both males and
females watched soap operas as an escape from their own lives. If this was a regurgitation from liberal
feminists, they would say that the beautiful, fit, and successful career woman that
is also a dutiful mother of two – the super woman—would be representative of the
liberal feminist ideal. Maybe the single
female district attorney that makes men cower is the radical feminists’ ideal. Lastly, the obscenely rich matriarch, who is
powerful not because of her gender, but because of her economic status may represent
the social feminists’ ideal. So
dependent on the lens that I look through, that is how media mediates my world.
For me, technology
mixing with feminism creates cyber-feminism
lens. Women are participating with the
internet as much or more as men, and cyberspace is changing women’s roles in
all spheres of life, both locally and globally.
Cyber-feminism is evolving and has the potential to promote new territories
for women, not just for the “grrls.”
Still patriarchy, racism, homophobia and classism exist and dominate even
new media platforms.
“Still patriarchy, racism, homophobia and classism exist and dominate even new media platforms”. But with the access and power of the internet, it doesn't have to be this way, does it? You could conceivably create a cyber environment where all these problems are negated. Obviously you have to start small but the Internet is the perfect place for a project like this. In fact, it's probably the only place that this sort of idea would work. You could have a website dedicated to theories of boyhood and girlhood, or just gender studies or what have you.
ReplyDeleteSince what we are really talking about is reeducating the public as to what's appropriate and what's not, the site could simply have examples of both so the public can learn the difference. You could have weekly or monthly podcasts with gender study professionals from various universities. You can have a section indicated to the various literature on the subject. Perhaps even the universities with solid gender studies programs could each have a section on the site to keep everyone updated on all the new hubbub bubbling on campus. You could have a message board where people share their thoughts and experiences. You could even begin the whole thing by outlining the project and beginning a Kickstarter campaign where you ask for the money to cover your start up costs for the first year or two.
Of course, as Lizbet Van Zoonen points out, media strategies can be “problematic”. “The belief that women together – all innately good people – would be able to work without competition, hierarchy or specialization, and would write or film from the same source of essential femininity, proved an allusion.(Feminist Perspectives on the Media, pg 28). " So, I think my idea is sound but you would most definitely run into the problems described by Van Zoonen above. Unfortunately, I don't have viable solutions to these problems.
I believe that cyber-feminism is a culmination of the many waves, degrees, and labels that feminism has given itself. Cyber-feminists employ an ideology that technology should be an open and accessible computer mediated form of communication, but this needs to be monitored. Sexuality and technology studies are concerned with space and identity, but it also touches upon access, practice and theory (also known as praxis). Cyberspace can be seen as a place to hide one’s racial, ethnic, marginalized and or sexual identity, but research suggests that this is most definitely not the case. More research needs to be done that will promote equalization within technology of marginalized individuals.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYolanda,
ReplyDeleteI *completely* agree with your last statement. In fact, I think the internet and other new media have given things like misogyny and racism a platform they did not enjoy prior. The amount of sexism online angers me to no end, probably because it seems infinite. The same with racism. (Actually, in some ways I think the racism is worse. On news sites that do not moderate their comment sections, or cannot moderate them fast enough, when a story appears involving a minority -- let’s just say, reading those comments is absolutely horrifying.)
Hayley
Yes, I completely agrees with you as well. You are so right about the internet allowing bigger platforms to spread misogyny and racism - it is horrifying that the platforms are global! And, I didn't even think about the news sites comments -- good point. Even the political mudslinging (and posters personally attack each other) just makes me cringe. The saddest thing is that posters seem to engage to make themselves sound highly literate and intellectual, but the statements (given the context and real meaning of the message)appear sadistic, and self depreciating! It angers me too, and sometimes I feel like the internet provides the perfect platform for those gutless and heartless to lash out from the safety of their bedrooms.
DeleteI think it's interesting to think about the potential for good in online spaces in historic terms. When the internet was first finding popularity in the mid-1990s, feminist scholars and computers and composition folks considered the possibility of an online utopia. Theoretically, online spaces would render everyone equal - there would be no difference in gender, race, ability, etc. The physical body would be irrelevant - in theory anyway.
ReplyDeleteWhat we found, unfortunately, is more akin to what Hayley mentions with online spaces simply offering a safe place for all kinds of niche groups - both good and bad - to gather and share their ideas. Unfortunately, many of those ideas are not good and are not about equality.
So, where are we now really? Are online spaces places of freedom and self-discovery or are they places of control? Are they both?
I think they are both, but as was mentioned the platforms allow anyone to spew anything. Back before internet (whenever that was), people would preach or make a public speeches about issues such as god, racism, sexuality. They would drag a "soapbox" into a high foot traffic area, such as a city sidewalk, a college campus, and start telling whoever would listen, their innermost thoughts. Those soapboxes have become less daunting, and easier to carry (we have laptops and IPADS).
DeleteOne reason I'm not a social media fan is that it seems to be another type of clique. As cliques, online spaces don't allow self-discovery; they encourage following the crowd, whichever crowd you want to belong to. Online spaces do grant more opportunities of belonging. I don't know, is the quest for belonging self-discovery?
DeleteThere are online sites that provide ways of learning about "other" as well as self.
So yes, of course, they are both places of control and places of freedom.