For me, feminism never needed to be explained to me. I grew
up surrounded by strong female role models - who taught me to fight for what I
wanted and to never allow someone to tell me I was incapable or unable.
Now that I am in my twenties, these words carry so much more
importance - living in a post millennial society - it seems that we are
increasingly scrutinised and criticised when failing to meet some kind
of expectation.
Last month, Kim Kardashian and Emily Ratajkowski launched a series of furious
debate about the interplay of sexuality and feminism - with many suggesting
that Mrs West sexual provocation was in some way demeaning and disgraceful.
When I think back to last year, when Amy Schumer posed nude for the Pirelli
calendar I remember the sentiments being very different. When Amy decided to
lay all her shit bare it was brave and empowering, damn near verging on
inspirational. So why the furor with Kim is it because she uses her body as a commodity,
or because were tired with seeing her nudity displayed across the media? Either
way it shouldn’t matter, we can not have difference for women in how they
choose to express themselves, because it counter acts the “supposed” feminist
effort.
Follwoing the initial post by Kim, Chloe
Grace Moretz was one of the first to comment on Kardashian's Tweet, writing “I
truly hope you realise setting goals are for young women, teaching them we have
so much more to offer than just our bodies."
Now, I am not trying to be a defending advocate for
Kim Kardashain here - as she can clearly defend herlsef - but I think Chloe's sentiments perpetuate the sterile view
that women can not identify as both sexual and smart without comprising one or
the other - My question here is, why does being sexual or acting self-indulgent
automatically presume that women are stupid or insular people who don’t give a
shit about the bigger picture - Surely we should be hoping that Chloe
"realises the importance" of allowing women to know that they can
indulge choose to identify as both intelligent and sexual.
Cue, Bette Midlers response - If
Kim wants us to see a part of her we've never seen, she's gonna have to
swallow the camera, - which lambasted Kim's past and did
nothing to but provide a tasteless joke referencing Kim’s 2007 sex tape. For
me, Midler's response was a disparaging example of one woman tearing another
down on a day when we should be celebrating women.
In effort to cavort attention on
the explosive social row, Piers Morgan also tweeted his reaction to the
picture and said: "Just a thought @KimKardashian - but you could always
try wearing a little dignity?" Piers, whilst I "appreciate" your
urge to chime in and offer your opinion - it means all but shit and only
offering to strengthen the idea that a woman’s body is something that needs to
be claimed from a ubiquitous culture which has degraded and imposed shame on
female nudity.
Although I can understand the
apprehensive view that Kim or Emily's posts
haven’t dramatically furthered the battle for equality. What emerges from it all is that there is a circus of
hypocrisy that still consumes feminist ideology -, Yes, empowerment and
liberation are important entitlements, but there are conditions attached and
anyone who breaks the rules are penalised - I can’t help but feel that these
"conditions" are displaced in our millennial era, in todays world
Feminism is not about judging other women or
telling them how to use their bodies.
Whether you love or hate Kim, the repercussions of her nude
selfie have at least inspired a conversation about female sexuality, which
may perhaps challenge cultural perceptions and attitudes to
nudity.
END
No comments
Post a Comment