FEminism & Feminist Theory
Since I am going to include a feminist analysis for every book, here is some information on feminism and feminist literary theory in case you aren’t familiar and want to learn more. Major disclaimer, I am by no means an expert. I am constantly learning more about feminism and all of its factions, ideas, theories, and reexamining them to see how I feel about them. I just fell in love with the ideas in my literature classes and it’s become my ‘thing’ and I want to share it with everyone.
Feminism: definiton & History
Defining feminism is a hard thing to do. Feminism encompasses a lot: theory, movement, ideologies that often contradict each other. This makes it hard to give it one definition. Googling the definition of feminism gives you something along the lines of advocating for women’s rights based on equality of the sexes. The issue with a definition like this is that sex isn’t so simple anymore, and with sex and gender being different, how can we use the term “sexes” in the definition?
Feminism, at its core, is about equality. Regardless of sex, gender, or identity. So if something is saying women desire to be treated better and men need to go fall off a cliff because f- men… it’s not feminist. Some people argue, “well, if they want equal rights, why is it named after females? Doesn’t seem fair to me!” But, like, beyond the idea that something can have its name based in one word but encompass more (cough cough the term mankind), the movement was originally created to give women the same rights as men (think more along the lines of laws, such as being able to vote, own land, run for office). As time has passed and rights were won, the movement moved forward into equal treatment in all things (think perception, judgement for sexual history, to be able to be a working mom without ridicule or to be a stay at home without feeling poorly, men getting fair treatment in custody cases).
Feminism seems to have a conflict of purpose within itself on multiple issues. Such issues include whether feminists should push for complete equality between men and women, or if the differences between them should be celebrated and embraced. Another key issue is how gender theory fits in with feminism (I’ll get into these ideas a little later on, but how does what make someone a man or woman play a role?). A third major internal conflict is the argument between essentialism or social constructionism. Essentialism is the concept that gender reflects a natural difference between men and women that can be seen in everything. Social constructionism is the belief that women are created by a history and culture of patriarchy.
At this point you might be thinking, okay, so what? Not everyone can agree on the same things, that’s like 90% of life. You’re not wrong; it’s not possible to expect the entirety of the female population to agree on everything. I bring it up for two reasons. The first, there are two main “camps” to feminism: liberal feminism and radical feminism. Liberal feminism believes more of the essentialist ideals and think the way to move forward is to reclaim negative feminine stereotypes. Like besties calling each other the b word cause it’s okay if women do it, or wearing high heels because women do what men do while wearing stilettos, and make up is now war paint. They want to embrace feminine things and give them a new definition almost. Radical feminism basically wants to destroy all concept of men and women and start over because they agree more with social constructionism and so if a created gender is causing problems let’s just destroy it. They don’t believe you can reclaim something that was created out of oppression and truly make change.
The second reason I bring up all these issues and differences is because how you feel about certain issues will change your interpretation of theories, and literature. One of biggest things I learned when I spent literally 3 back-to-back semesters at college doing nothing but learning about feminist theory, is that your thoughts, can, will, and arguably maybe should change as you continue to learn things. And it’s up to you to define what feminism means to you (as long as it stays within the whole equality for all idea).
Take time to think about your thoughts on what it means to be empowered, as you learn things reevaluate what you think. Honestly, in one semester I went back and forth between liberal and radical I was basically ready to come up with some strange third camp I nicknamed liberadical. Changing your mind is okay, I promise.
Feminism, at its core, is about equality. Regardless of sex, gender, or identity. So if something is saying women desire to be treated better and men need to go fall off a cliff because f- men… it’s not feminist. Some people argue, “well, if they want equal rights, why is it named after females? Doesn’t seem fair to me!” But, like, beyond the idea that something can have its name based in one word but encompass more (cough cough the term mankind), the movement was originally created to give women the same rights as men (think more along the lines of laws, such as being able to vote, own land, run for office). As time has passed and rights were won, the movement moved forward into equal treatment in all things (think perception, judgement for sexual history, to be able to be a working mom without ridicule or to be a stay at home without feeling poorly, men getting fair treatment in custody cases).
Feminism seems to have a conflict of purpose within itself on multiple issues. Such issues include whether feminists should push for complete equality between men and women, or if the differences between them should be celebrated and embraced. Another key issue is how gender theory fits in with feminism (I’ll get into these ideas a little later on, but how does what make someone a man or woman play a role?). A third major internal conflict is the argument between essentialism or social constructionism. Essentialism is the concept that gender reflects a natural difference between men and women that can be seen in everything. Social constructionism is the belief that women are created by a history and culture of patriarchy.
At this point you might be thinking, okay, so what? Not everyone can agree on the same things, that’s like 90% of life. You’re not wrong; it’s not possible to expect the entirety of the female population to agree on everything. I bring it up for two reasons. The first, there are two main “camps” to feminism: liberal feminism and radical feminism. Liberal feminism believes more of the essentialist ideals and think the way to move forward is to reclaim negative feminine stereotypes. Like besties calling each other the b word cause it’s okay if women do it, or wearing high heels because women do what men do while wearing stilettos, and make up is now war paint. They want to embrace feminine things and give them a new definition almost. Radical feminism basically wants to destroy all concept of men and women and start over because they agree more with social constructionism and so if a created gender is causing problems let’s just destroy it. They don’t believe you can reclaim something that was created out of oppression and truly make change.
The second reason I bring up all these issues and differences is because how you feel about certain issues will change your interpretation of theories, and literature. One of biggest things I learned when I spent literally 3 back-to-back semesters at college doing nothing but learning about feminist theory, is that your thoughts, can, will, and arguably maybe should change as you continue to learn things. And it’s up to you to define what feminism means to you (as long as it stays within the whole equality for all idea).
Take time to think about your thoughts on what it means to be empowered, as you learn things reevaluate what you think. Honestly, in one semester I went back and forth between liberal and radical I was basically ready to come up with some strange third camp I nicknamed liberadical. Changing your mind is okay, I promise.
FEminist Theory
Moving forward from definitions, let’s get to the theory. I’m going to talk about four major ideas in literary theory that I personally find myself coming back to a lot: writing the body, gender as a social construct, angel versus demons, and the male gaze.
Writing the body
l’écriture féminine is based on the writings of a French feminist from the 1970’s called Helene Cixous. She wrote an essay, “The Laugh of Medusa” stating that one of the best ways for women to liberate themselves from patriarchal stereotypes is to write about the female body in new and creative ways. This can mean talking about the female body or writing in a new style (think not using any grammar, for example).
One literary example I can point to is Milk and Honey by Rupi Kaur. Any feelings about her work as poetry aside, if you look at what she’s doing with the lack of grammar because she believes no letters (or people) are more important than others, using drawings of the female body to make readers uncomfortable, talking about issues such as rape, menstruation, and sex so brazenly is what Hélen Cixous was talking about.
One literary example I can point to is Milk and Honey by Rupi Kaur. Any feelings about her work as poetry aside, if you look at what she’s doing with the lack of grammar because she believes no letters (or people) are more important than others, using drawings of the female body to make readers uncomfortable, talking about issues such as rape, menstruation, and sex so brazenly is what Hélen Cixous was talking about.
Gender as a Social Construct
This theory in relation to feminism is somewhat controversy. Earlier I mentioned how gender theory is one of the topics feminism is divided on. The reason is because gender theory came from feminist theory, but some believe it has grown so far from its roots that it is now its own entity that no longer fit together. I personally think they can be used together because all prejudices are compounded on top of each other (ie feminism and racist), so using them to support one another makes sense to me.
Judith Butler talks in depth at the idea of gender being a social construct in her essay “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution”. The official name for the theory is gender performative theory, and the idea is that gender is what you make it. If the general population wants female to mean make-up and playing house and everything pink and flowery, and everyone in the general population follows this, that is what makes it female. If we decide female is blue and dirt and high heels, than that would be female. In history, we can point to times where these things have changed. Blue use to considered too passive for boys, pink was more assertive. Because these things can change, they aren’t natural and predetermined and therefore, Butler argues they are social construct. One way to change this is to constantly challenge gender norms by doing what you want.
Judith Butler talks in depth at the idea of gender being a social construct in her essay “Performative Acts and Gender Constitution”. The official name for the theory is gender performative theory, and the idea is that gender is what you make it. If the general population wants female to mean make-up and playing house and everything pink and flowery, and everyone in the general population follows this, that is what makes it female. If we decide female is blue and dirt and high heels, than that would be female. In history, we can point to times where these things have changed. Blue use to considered too passive for boys, pink was more assertive. Because these things can change, they aren’t natural and predetermined and therefore, Butler argues they are social construct. One way to change this is to constantly challenge gender norms by doing what you want.
Angel versus Demon
So, in full disclosure fashion, this is the theory I am least confident in. But here is what I think about when I use this to think about the level of feminism in a book. The authors believe that before women can create feminist literature, true feminist literature, they must first recognize and then destroy the “masks” and “roles” that the patriarchy have put women into. Mostly, angel or demon roles.
If you really want to think about it, most roles can be broken down into these ideas even if they don’t originally look that way. For example, a women who works in a nursing home. She is kind, and sweet, and caring (obviously, she helps sick elderly people), and is there for the residents as they pass away. This theory says this basically takes women back to the passive angel role because they are just there to help. On the flip side, a woman CEO is aggressive, vain, doesn’t care about anyone but herself, would slit your throat if you got in her way. She’s obviously a monster. And typically you have the two together, and the angel at the end is triumpent in not becoming like the monster CEO lady. (The Devil Wears Prada anyone?)
So first we must identify all of these things (writing about them in a way that acknowledges it is a good place to start) and then challenge it by writing characters that don’t fall into either the angel or demon category. Then we can start writing feminist literature.
If you really want to think about it, most roles can be broken down into these ideas even if they don’t originally look that way. For example, a women who works in a nursing home. She is kind, and sweet, and caring (obviously, she helps sick elderly people), and is there for the residents as they pass away. This theory says this basically takes women back to the passive angel role because they are just there to help. On the flip side, a woman CEO is aggressive, vain, doesn’t care about anyone but herself, would slit your throat if you got in her way. She’s obviously a monster. And typically you have the two together, and the angel at the end is triumpent in not becoming like the monster CEO lady. (The Devil Wears Prada anyone?)
So first we must identify all of these things (writing about them in a way that acknowledges it is a good place to start) and then challenge it by writing characters that don’t fall into either the angel or demon category. Then we can start writing feminist literature.
The Male Gaze
This was the theory that blew my mind when first learning about all of this. Literal life changer guys. The idea is that everyone is so conditioned to view the world as a man does, even women look at themselves and other women as a man would. So, do you really feel empowered wearing the skin tight red dress with heels? Or have you been conditioned to think you like it cause you’ve been conditioned to think the attention of men is something to want? Do you really like BDSM or is that just the attractive thing to say and your ex really got turned on by it so like now you think it’s your thing but really very vanilla, romance novel love making is what makes your world go round?
This really clicked into place for me when my professor explained how she will never wear heels again. She use to love them because she felt confident in them. Then, one day she realized she actually hated wearing them. They aren’t comfortable, they don’t offer support, they aren’t natural to walk in, and don’t provide any benefit besides making her a couple inches taller and booty more perky and honestly, who does that really help? She isn’t directly benefitting from her booty looking more perky, it doesn’t help her do her job, or have meaningful relationships. So, she ditched them entirely.
This really clicked into place for me when my professor explained how she will never wear heels again. She use to love them because she felt confident in them. Then, one day she realized she actually hated wearing them. They aren’t comfortable, they don’t offer support, they aren’t natural to walk in, and don’t provide any benefit besides making her a couple inches taller and booty more perky and honestly, who does that really help? She isn’t directly benefitting from her booty looking more perky, it doesn’t help her do her job, or have meaningful relationships. So, she ditched them entirely.
Conclusion
To end this super long page of information (that will eventually include images, I promise), this isn’t everything. How race, class, age and sex all come together is a page all its own. Unfortunately I can’t fit all the details from the theories I named into a page without having it take, like, hours to read. Ideas I don’t even know about yet. So my analysis of books from a feminist perspective aren’t the end all be all. You could disagree, and if you do please tell me why because I love talking about this stuff!
I will end on this note: some theorists believe we are unable to ever write a true piece of feminist literature because we cannot break free while using a language created by the patriarchy. We have been too conditioned, too socialized, to make a complete break. At least right now. I am personally hopeful for the future.
I will end on this note: some theorists believe we are unable to ever write a true piece of feminist literature because we cannot break free while using a language created by the patriarchy. We have been too conditioned, too socialized, to make a complete break. At least right now. I am personally hopeful for the future.