{"id":327,"date":"2003-07-17T23:07:26","date_gmt":"2003-07-18T03:07:26","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/2003\/07\/17\/girlism-makes-about-as-much-sense-as-"},"modified":"2007-02-16T02:00:14","modified_gmt":"2007-02-16T06:00:14","slug":"girlism-makes-about-as-much-sense-as-funism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/2003\/07\/17\/girlism-makes-about-as-much-sense-as-funism\/","title":{"rendered":"“Girlism” makes about as much sense as “funism”"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a> For more background, see Burning Bird<\/a> and Halley’s Comment<\/a>. Halley doesn’t have a comment box, Shelley (Burning Bird) Powers’s box is overflowing. My thoughts here: Do we really need another “ism,” robed in the language of marketing, and peddling a conventional adherence to conformity, flogged our way? A queen of lethal “girlism,” the Patsy Stone character on the British comedy Absolutely Fabulous<\/em><\/a> illustrates just how manipulative you have to be to buy into this ideology. Admittedly, her version has no pretensions to the sweet or romantic, but might reveal more of its true nature. Yet even she calls thongs “dental floss wedged up your chocolate starfish.” In so many words, fuck fashion fascism, including “girlism.” Remember that song by Cyndi Lauper, Girls just want to have fun<\/a>? That had a subversive moment, at least it did when seen together with the video: Cyndi, in a get-up that a “real” man would have found ugly (but which since has been manufactured to be bought off the rack, such is the way of co-optation), has liberatory fun, including getting her big-guy hairy dad to loosen up. It was a great “moment”: girl has fun throwing off shackles of oppression & authority (job & dad). And it was immediately frozen, merchandised, and sold. That Lauper was singing about working<\/em> girls looking for release, and that her Fun Girl had a revolutionary core, was lost as soon as it was marketed. Today, the flamboyant anti-fashion that Lauper’s music video wage-slave character wore is peddled to 8-year-olds who shouldn’t have to wear a bloody uniform<\/em> to HAVE FUN because they shouldn’t yet be working<\/em>, either. But that’s the reality of conformism, and “girlism” smells suspiciously like another marketing ploy to conform conform conform to the powers that be. Hey, any girl<\/em> could imagine being Cyndi Lauper in a goofball outfit for the nanosecond that her video lasted, and find it freeing. But imagining being a Charlie’s Angel or a Legally Blonde or whatever it is the Culture Industry is spewing out these days? That sounds like work galore. It’s regimental, it’s oppressive, it’s authoritarian: the diets, the workouts, the hair, the skin, ugh! So much for having fun. Feminism<\/em> enabled women to make demands for personal & collective liberation in an organized way. Its limit might well be that fun<\/em> is a kind of antipode to any “ism.” Fun is anarchy, it’s revolutionary, and it’s not on the rack of some store: it’s not an “ism.” “Girlism” is just another form of drudgery where, maybe, you get the guy. At least with feminism, maybe you get the well-deserved raise, too.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

For more background, see Burning Bird and Halley’s Comment. Halley doesn’t have a comment box, Shelley (Burning Bird) Powers’s box is overflowing. My thoughts here: Do we really need another “ism,” robed in the language of marketing, and peddling a conventional adherence to conformity, flogged our way? A queen of lethal “girlism,” the Patsy Stone […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":311,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_hide_featured_image":false,"_jetpack_featured_image_duplicate_dismissed":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[600],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-327","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-yulelogstories"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/311"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=327"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/yulelog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}