For what I understood, Thursday, November 25, 2010 was the day of the skirt. Initiative to scale a high school resume and popularized by a movie I have not had the courage to see (sorry in advance m'insupporte Adjani), the principle is simple: we invite women to put on a skirt to protest against sexist behavior. Media immediate sympathy, supported by Ni putes, ni soumises association which had also received a prompt political and media dubbing, it was finally happening rather eclipsed the issue of violence against women to which this day was meant to educate everyone . Maybe it was a bad choice unless the floor is the form of the message it must be questioned.
By using what is ultimately a pretty happening politics - all the more successful it can do much ink to flow without being particularly on field monitoring (this post is proof ...) - the instigators of this "Skirt Day" have done more than simply draw media attention to the issue of Violence against women: they have helped build this in a particular direction. If we follow this mobilization, the problems encountered by women today was defined mainly in not being able to appear as women in public space without suffering violence varied.
Let's be clear: I will not deny that such violence exists ( testimony of a blog that I want ), I will not deny that women suffer, I will not even discuss the idea it is indeed of violence - because it is. I'll just say that this problem is poorly analyzed, because it is not taken root.
By focusing the debate on the wearing of a skirt, taken as a "militant act," we present things as if the central problem was that the unveiling of the female body. The central demand is for women, you can view their bodies. It is good to display it: we simply do not discuss matters of comfort, some have emphasized that there was still something ironic and organize a day of the skirt end of November. The problem is those who want to hide the bodies of women.
But if women show their bodies by wearing a skirt, they are provided free or paid? We want to hide or show it on the contrary, the female body is seen in both cases the same way: as sexualized. I say "sexualized" and not "sexual", that is to say, not identified with one sex, but subject to sexual desire. If some want to hide the body, precisely because they are thought of as sexual. If they are shown as such, then we do not solve the problem, we only increase it. Or wear a skirt can not claim to be a political act of "de-sexualization" enough.
Let me be clear: I am not saying that women should not wear skirts, even less than who do "deserve" in any way the pressures and unpleasant remarks which may be addressed. The problem is not just in clothing but in the look that you wear - it is interesting to note that one wears a garment while it supports a glance ... This is not to say that women should never be "sexy." They simply may not have to be all the time - for example not to their place of work - nor anyone - for example by a stranger on the street. Like the men in fact, which do not necessarily want to be seen constantly as objects of desire.
Some will say without doubt that the purpose of this day of the skirt is just to claim for women the right to wear a skirt without being subjected to stares and lewd behavior. But, to paraphrase another, "the context is stronger than the concept." This can not happening anytime. Before him, there was the "scandal-bangs", there was media coverage of several cases of sexist violence in the suburbs relayed with treatment not always immune from criticism by the media, there is all the action of Ni whores nor submissive who has been to confine the issue of feminism to the suburbs, there was the whole wave of criticism vis-à-vis Islam. All this weighs on the meaning to be given and accepted at this day. In this context, it can only help to say that the essential problem of feminism is that of the suburbs and Islam, and that of the sexual freedom of women. The skirt against the burqa, free sexuality as enforced abstinence and virginity before marriage: it is how we have constructed the problem in France.
And in that context, the day of the skirt is unlikely to be understood as a claim of de-sexualisation of the gaze focused on the woman. Instead, all that has preceded has been to try to abandon this issue the sexualization of women's bodies, to withdraw from the political agenda of feminism mass.
You might think it's because this question is more difficult, more complex and less able to mobilize. It is simply false. American feminists - who maintain, it seems, a much stronger link with social sciences than the French, which probably explains a lot of things - mobilize strongly on this issue of the sexualization of women's bodies and even girls. I had already raised this question about Halloween costumes. One can also watch this video, quite striking:
Here we see a problem constructed quite differently. The issue of daily suffering of women is not rejected at the margins of society, its suburbs and ghettos or only to its own minorities, it is instead placed in his heart and in a broader spectrum of its activities. This is not to limit the activity of small groups misidentified and possibly imagined, but the question of collective responsibility overall. And especially it is not so much a piece of clothing that we gaze focuses on women and models, all models, they are given and imposed on them.
This sexualization of women and girls is any less strong in France and the United States for less that it mobilizes activists and politicians? Whenever I come across the videos of the great music channels or on any MTV show, every time I flip through a magazine or female that I see the covers of men's magazines every time I hear some of my conversations students, I can not help thinking that the problem is here, among us. And rather than trying to explain everything in Islam, it might be that we look at the image of women in all contexts.
And is it difficult to devise effective happenings on this topic then? Is it less backbone than the skirt? One can also doubt it when we see the suggestive power of this simple video.
But the contrast with what is happening in France is probably the most striking. We have "specialized" the issue of feminism to the suburbs and religion, and we are more often economic criticism of television, music, advertising - the recent revival of Sardou song, by an amazing miracle, he managed to make it even more sexist the original has not raised much commotion that it could have (had?). Maybe because we consider it for granted or too obvious. But even sexist behavior that they condemn loudly in the suburbs may have something to do with it. Tele-reality models provide devastating does not seem to raise more than protest it.
's all the misfortune that day of the skirt a little more shut the issue of women's liberation in a particular context. Without question there is a real problem in the stigmatization of women who wear skirts in some contexts, one may question the choice of such a happening that does not address the root and comes to overshadow, unfortunately, much of what could be the fight of women.
By using what is ultimately a pretty happening politics - all the more successful it can do much ink to flow without being particularly on field monitoring (this post is proof ...) - the instigators of this "Skirt Day" have done more than simply draw media attention to the issue of Violence against women: they have helped build this in a particular direction. If we follow this mobilization, the problems encountered by women today was defined mainly in not being able to appear as women in public space without suffering violence varied.
Let's be clear: I will not deny that such violence exists ( testimony of a blog that I want ), I will not deny that women suffer, I will not even discuss the idea it is indeed of violence - because it is. I'll just say that this problem is poorly analyzed, because it is not taken root.
By focusing the debate on the wearing of a skirt, taken as a "militant act," we present things as if the central problem was that the unveiling of the female body. The central demand is for women, you can view their bodies. It is good to display it: we simply do not discuss matters of comfort, some have emphasized that there was still something ironic and organize a day of the skirt end of November. The problem is those who want to hide the bodies of women.
But if women show their bodies by wearing a skirt, they are provided free or paid? We want to hide or show it on the contrary, the female body is seen in both cases the same way: as sexualized. I say "sexualized" and not "sexual", that is to say, not identified with one sex, but subject to sexual desire. If some want to hide the body, precisely because they are thought of as sexual. If they are shown as such, then we do not solve the problem, we only increase it. Or wear a skirt can not claim to be a political act of "de-sexualization" enough.
Let me be clear: I am not saying that women should not wear skirts, even less than who do "deserve" in any way the pressures and unpleasant remarks which may be addressed. The problem is not just in clothing but in the look that you wear - it is interesting to note that one wears a garment while it supports a glance ... This is not to say that women should never be "sexy." They simply may not have to be all the time - for example not to their place of work - nor anyone - for example by a stranger on the street. Like the men in fact, which do not necessarily want to be seen constantly as objects of desire.
Some will say without doubt that the purpose of this day of the skirt is just to claim for women the right to wear a skirt without being subjected to stares and lewd behavior. But, to paraphrase another, "the context is stronger than the concept." This can not happening anytime. Before him, there was the "scandal-bangs", there was media coverage of several cases of sexist violence in the suburbs relayed with treatment not always immune from criticism by the media, there is all the action of Ni whores nor submissive who has been to confine the issue of feminism to the suburbs, there was the whole wave of criticism vis-à-vis Islam. All this weighs on the meaning to be given and accepted at this day. In this context, it can only help to say that the essential problem of feminism is that of the suburbs and Islam, and that of the sexual freedom of women. The skirt against the burqa, free sexuality as enforced abstinence and virginity before marriage: it is how we have constructed the problem in France.
And in that context, the day of the skirt is unlikely to be understood as a claim of de-sexualisation of the gaze focused on the woman. Instead, all that has preceded has been to try to abandon this issue the sexualization of women's bodies, to withdraw from the political agenda of feminism mass.
You might think it's because this question is more difficult, more complex and less able to mobilize. It is simply false. American feminists - who maintain, it seems, a much stronger link with social sciences than the French, which probably explains a lot of things - mobilize strongly on this issue of the sexualization of women's bodies and even girls. I had already raised this question about Halloween costumes. One can also watch this video, quite striking:
Here we see a problem constructed quite differently. The issue of daily suffering of women is not rejected at the margins of society, its suburbs and ghettos or only to its own minorities, it is instead placed in his heart and in a broader spectrum of its activities. This is not to limit the activity of small groups misidentified and possibly imagined, but the question of collective responsibility overall. And especially it is not so much a piece of clothing that we gaze focuses on women and models, all models, they are given and imposed on them.
This sexualization of women and girls is any less strong in France and the United States for less that it mobilizes activists and politicians? Whenever I come across the videos of the great music channels or on any MTV show, every time I flip through a magazine or female that I see the covers of men's magazines every time I hear some of my conversations students, I can not help thinking that the problem is here, among us. And rather than trying to explain everything in Islam, it might be that we look at the image of women in all contexts.
And is it difficult to devise effective happenings on this topic then? Is it less backbone than the skirt? One can also doubt it when we see the suggestive power of this simple video.
But the contrast with what is happening in France is probably the most striking. We have "specialized" the issue of feminism to the suburbs and religion, and we are more often economic criticism of television, music, advertising - the recent revival of Sardou song, by an amazing miracle, he managed to make it even more sexist the original has not raised much commotion that it could have (had?). Maybe because we consider it for granted or too obvious. But even sexist behavior that they condemn loudly in the suburbs may have something to do with it. Tele-reality models provide devastating does not seem to raise more than protest it.
's all the misfortune that day of the skirt a little more shut the issue of women's liberation in a particular context. Without question there is a real problem in the stigmatization of women who wear skirts in some contexts, one may question the choice of such a happening that does not address the root and comes to overshadow, unfortunately, much of what could be the fight of women.
0 comments:
Post a Comment