User:LyricRhodes20/Lipstick feminism

Lipstick feminism is a variety of third-wave feminism that seeks to embrace traditional concepts of femininity, including the sexual power of women, alongside feminist ideas.

Unlike the early feminist campaigns that focused on the basic fundamental rights of women, starting with the Women's Suffrage Movement, lipstick feminism seeks to prove that women could still be a feminist without ignoring or negating their femininity and sexuality. During the second wave of feminism, feminists focused solely on the legal and social equality of women. Feminists of this era refused to 'embrace' their sexuality. Some second wave feminists abhorred the idea of men. As a result, they would often take on physical male characteristics and a persona that was far from what the average woman looked like. This created the stereotype of feminism. This also created the stereotypical imagery of what a feminist should look like.

Despite the stereotypes surrounding feminism and the dominate social narratives surrounding feminism during their time, women like Zora Neale Hurston and Emma Goldman argued that by using philosophical ideas of aesthetics and ideas of femininity, it is possible to empower and analyze the ways that gender works in everyday life. Lipstick feminism embraces the ideals of womanhood and the sensualities of a woman. Scholars of lipstick feminism believe that women have a right to act in accordance with passion and sexuality.

Lipstick feminism seeks to reclaim certain derogatory words and turn them into powerful tools to promote their cause. For example, lipstick feminists has redefined the word 'slut', as seen in the SlutWalk movement. This redefining developed, in part, as a response to the ideological backlash against radical varieties of second-wave feminism. Redefining terms were also influenced from the negative stereotypes generated during the second wave of feminism, such as "ugly feminist" or the "anti-sex feminist". In one sense, the successes of second-wave feminism made it possible to reclaim aspects of femininity that were seen as disempowering, like make-up or stilettos.

History
Lipstick feminism is a subset of the third wave of feminism, following the second wave feminism. The second wave of feminism emerged in the US around 1960. This wave challenged America's beauty industry and it's standards by protesting in a boycott of items considered to be feminine. These items included bras, girdles, curlers, false eye lashes, and magazines catered to women. Boycotting these items as well as embracing unorthodox appearances of women, such as unshaved legs and wearing no makeup, became a liberation mark for the second wave feminists. From early literature to date, the appearance of femininity has always had a negative relationship with feminism. During the eighteenth century, writings of Wollstonecraft criticized women who focused on their beauty, calling them "feather birds" with nothing to do besides plume themselves. Some time after Simone de Beauvoir implored women to go beyond their bodies by rejecting emotional responses and the superficiality of beauty. De Beauvoir urged that this was the way to equality for women. Fashion, glamour and beauty has always been viewed as superficial and problematic. Second wave feminism viewed these as bondage, being oppressive and exploitative.

Third wave feminism was birth out of the demands of the second wave of feminism. Women wanted to continue to fight for equality and to continue their activist work, while not fitting into the box of what society felt a feminist should look like. While second wave feminism focused more on political activism while pushing the beauty ideals away, lipstick feminism embraced both beauty standards and political activisms.

Language
Linguistically, lipstick feminism proposed to semantically reclaim, for feminist usage, double-standard insult words, such as "slut", in order to eliminate the social stigma applied to a woman whose sexual behavior was "patriarchally" interpreted to denote "immoral woman" and libertine. Terms such as "chick" and "girl" was once viewed as patronizing and depowering for women. Lipstick Feminism, a variant of third wave feminism, embraces these terms by redefining their meaning. Women saw this reviving of words as an act of solidarity in the movement of empowerment.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

References/ Notes not being posted live
Ferriss, S., & Young, M. (2006). Chicks, girls and choice: redefining feminism. Junctures: The Journal for Thematic Dialogue, (6), 87+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A164327971/LitRC?u=lln_auno&sid=bookmark-LitRC&xid=3418cfb0

Baker, S. E. (2017). A glamorous feminism by design? Cultural Studies, 31(1), 47–69. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1080/09502386.2016.1167928

Meyers, D. T. (2021). Reflections on Non‐Imperialist, Feminist Values. Metaphilosophy, 52(1), 111–126. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1111/meta.12464

MacLeavy, J., Fannin, M., & Larner, W. (2021). Feminism and futurity: Geographies of resistance, resilience and reworking. Progress in Human Geography, 45(6), 1558–1579. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1177/03091325211003327

McLaughlin, K., & Aikman, S. N. (2020). That is What a Feminist Looks Like: Identification and Exploration of the Factors Underlying the Concept of Feminism and Predicting the Endorsement of Traditional Gender Roles. Gender Issues, 37(2), 91–124. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1007/s12147-019-09240-4

Evans, E. (2016). What Makes a (Third) Wave? International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18(3), 409–428. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1080/14616742.2015.1027627

Critical Analysis of sources from paper
Information about article:

Chicks, girls and choice: redefining feminism by Suzanne Ferriss and Mallory Young

Junctures: The Journal for Thematic Dialogue (Issue 6), published by Otago Polytechnic, June 2006

Ferriss, S., & Young, M. (2006). Chicks, girls and choice: redefining feminism. Junctures: The Journal for Thematic Dialogue, (6), 87+. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A164327971/LitRC?u=lln_auno&sid=bookmark-LitRC&xid=3418cfb0

Topic & purpose: The topic and purpose of this article is to inform readers of the changes of feminism over time.

Summary:

In the era of the second wave feminism, terms such as chick and girl held a negative connotation in the height of the women’s liberation movement. Women of the second wave feminism felt the term chick portrayed women as a baby chick, delicate and fluffy. Second wave feminists felt the term girl patronized grown women. During the second wave, sex was viewed as oppressing and domination. Third wave feminism is said to be a result of abandoning the views of the second wave feminism to embrace the issues that were once off limit. Instead of viewing terms like chick and girl in a negative light, these terms were redefined to be empowering. Instead of viewing sex as oppression, third wave feminists see sex and sensuality to be liberating for women. It is argued that while first wave feminism did a great job opening up opportunities for women, it lacked other areas of life for women such as how to conduct heterosexual relationships, self-identity and power struggles.

Third wave feminist’s approach to activism looked different than that of second wave. Where most activism was directly political in second wave, third wave focuses a lot of their engagement with pop culture, infiltrating tv, magazines and music. Third wave feminist argue that women should be liberated to wear whatever they want and not feel the pressure to fit the box of what it looks like to be a feminist or anything else. It began and continued in an effort to give women a choice in life. A choice about abortion, clothing and anything else they wanted the liberty to choose in.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

The article breaks the waves of feminism into three different sections. The feminism in 1970 is identified as “First Wave Feminism”. The following era, “Second Wave Feminism”, and finally “Third Wave Feminism”. The article is also divided into sections by headers making the article really easy to follow. I personally am not a fan of the author’s style of writing because their style makes it hard to follow at time. It is not written grammatically incorrect, but the way they chose to frame sentences are the not the best in my opinion. While I do not prefer the article’s style of writing, I do believe the article is written for people who are not scholars on the topic of feminism. I do not think Amateurs who are completely unfamiliar with feminism would do well with this article as it does not do a good enough job explaining what feminism, in itself, is. Reading this article, you would need some background information on the topic of feminism for a more complete understanding. The article does a good job presenting information on feminism in an unbiased and professional manner. The authors presented many sources to support their reasoning, making for a strong and solid article.

________________________________________________________________________________ Information about article:

A glamorous feminism by design? by Sarah Elise Baker

Cultural Studies Volume 31 Issue 1, published by Taylor & Francis, January 2017

Baker, S. E. (2017). A glamorous feminism by design? Cultural Studies, 31(1), 47–69. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1080/09502386.2016.1167928

Topic & purpose: The topic and purpose of the article is to explore glamour as being an empowering tool for feminism as well as capitalism.

Summary:

From early literature to now, femininity has always had a negative relationship with feminism. During the eighteenth century, Wollensteincraft women criticized women through writings who focused on their beauty, calling them feather birds who have nothing more to do with themselves besides plume themselves. Some time after De Beauvoir implored women to go beyond their bodies and reject the beauty ad emotional responses. De Beauvoir stated that was the way to equality. Fashion and beauty has always been viewed as superficial and problematic. Second wave feminism views fashion and beauty as bondage, being oppressive and exploitative. Stephen Gundle identifies the history of glamour, being that glamour is in cahoots with consumer culture and feminine identity. As we were given the iconic glamorous housewife of 1950 and other depictions of glamour through various forms of art, glamour gave birth to a fantasy of a nation. It offered a dream transformation of self. Glamour can be used to the benefit of feminism because many of the glamorized things and practices centralizes on what it means to be feminine. Glamour can be embraced or rejected at this notion.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

Baker’s organization of the article is broken into many different sections that are very detailed and informative. These sections are labeled with headings to help the flow of the article and for understanding. She is very precise and thorough with each section of work, which leads me to believe she is writing to an audience of amateurs. The article begins by defining glamour and her view of feminism. The article moves from her understanding of feminism to what it actually is and how it is connected to feminism. As an amateur reading her work, I appreciate the depth that she goes to create a foundation for her readers to build understanding on. I was not left wondering about topics I was not familiar with. Baker covered all grounds. I do not agree with every opinion stated in the article because of my own beliefs, but the author was successful in relaying her point to me that glamour can be used to affect capitalism and the future of feminism.

__________________________________________________________________________ Information about article:

Reflections on Non-Imperialist, Feminist Values by Diana Tietjens Meyers

Metaphilosophy Volume 52 Issue 1, published by Wiley Blackwell

Meyers, D. T. (2021). Reflections on Non‐Imperialist, Feminist Values. Metaphilosophy, 52(1), 111–126. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1111/meta.12464

Referenced: Khader, Serene J. 2019. Decolonizing Universalism: A Transnational Feminist Ethic. New York : Oxford University Press

Topic: The topic and purpose of this article is to address the values that feminism can do without.

Summary:

The values addressed in the article comes from the body of work by Serene Khader known as Decolonizing Universalism. Diana Meyers article is what she calls an attempting at critiquing Serene Khader’s work. Meyer writes this article to inform and shed light on values that Serene Khader believes feminism can do without in decolonizing universalism, while also offering her insight and opinion of the subject matter. According to Khader, feminism can do without independence individualism, personhood individualism, enlightenment freedom and gender role eliminativism. Khader and Meyer argue that feminism should be nonideal and non-imperialist with normal teeth. Khader defines independence individualism as people having better lives when they are not held in cahoots with others. Personhood individualism is defined as people having interests that are not considerate of the interests of others. Enlightenment freedom is defined as “externally dictated practices being inherently objectionable” in cahoots with the view that “acceptance of traditional dictates constitutes an impediment to self-realization. (Khader 77,81) Gender role eliminativism is when no supportive gender role could work for gender justice.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

Meyer’s article is very organized and structured in a way that is easy to read and follow. Meyer lays a great ground work for setting up her article to critique Khader’s work efficiently. The article begins by being extremely informative on what the subject matter at hand is. The article then proceeds to elaborate more in depth on each value, ensuring maximum understanding. From this structure, it is easy for me to conclude that Meyer’s audience range from amateurs to people well versed on feminism. As an amateur, that is not very informed on feminism and its details, I did not find myself lost and confused while reading the article. Meyer was very effective in getting her point across of critiquing the work of Khader. She was also very effective in presenting Khader’s work in a softer light rather than in a harsh manner. I agreed with most of the points Khader made, while disagreeing with other points. Even though I disagreed with some of the points, both authors still did a great job in presenting their argument for that point.

____________________________________________________________________________

Information about article:

Feminism and futurity: Geographies of resistance, resilience and reworking by Julie MacLeavy, Maria Fannin, and Wendy Larner

Published by Arnold

MacLeavy, J., Fannin, M., & Larner, W. (2021). Feminism and futurity: Geographies of resistance, resilience and reworking. Progress in Human Geography, 45(6), 1558–1579. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1177/03091325211003327

Topic: The topic and purpose of this article is to spark conversation and good debate on expanding the understanding of feminism and the future.

Summary:

The article begins by creating a framework for the author’s argument. The authors make their agenda clear by stating the objectives of their approach. They do not desire only to be concerned with feminism and the fight for rights, but to address the expansion of geographical analyses of feminism. This article builds on the work of Judith Butler’s intervention to shed light on the work feminist and queer scholars have contributed in their creativity in their everyday lives. The authors then move their work to discussing feminism in Anglophone geography and how it developed over time. The third section of the article touches on the resistance, resilience and the reworking of feminism in different geographies. Within this third section, resistance, resilience and reworking is broken into their own sections for further in depth conversation.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

While this article is written to spark debatable conversation around the topic of feminism, the article is not written with bias. The article is more informative than persuasive. The structure of the article is not as helpful as I would have liked it to be. The article was separated into sections, but the sections were very large. It would have been more helpful to divide the information up, so that readers like myself would not be overwhelmed by information overload. All authors provided sources overload to support their article. This amount of references and sources really helped to strengthen the article in its arguments. The writers included drop text quotes, as well as information from case studies to support their claims in depth. Considering the structure of this article, the intended audience seems to be that of scholarly writers. While I do feel that the authors did a great job explaining the topic at hand, the presentation of the article is a bit intense. The article is also written with the expectation of knowing the background of previous information released. The article responds to other’s studies and observations. The article does provide pieces of other articles they are responding to, but the whole piece is not provided, therefore context is missing, so you have to kind of connect the dots of missing information.

__________________________________________________________

Information about article:

That is What a Feminist Looks Like: Identification and Exploration of the Factors Underlying the Concept of Feminism and Predicting the Endorsement of Traditional Gender Roles by Kaitlyn McLaughlin and Shelley Aikman

Gender Issues, June 2020, Volume 37 Issue 2. Published by Transaction Publishing

McLaughlin, K., & Aikman, S. N. (2020). That is What a Feminist Looks Like: Identification and Exploration of the Factors Underlying the Concept of Feminism and Predicting the Endorsement of Traditional Gender Roles. Gender Issues, 37(2), 91–124. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1007/s12147-019-09240-4

Topic: The topic and purpose of this article is to identify the concept of feminism through studies while discussing what factors shape our understanding of feminism.

Summary:

Feminism is defined as “a belief in equal rights for men and women or advocacy for women to have equal rights to men.” (McLaughlin and Aikman) Feminism covers a range of topics from physical health like sex to mental health such as eating disorders. While feminism is simply the fight for equal rights for women and most people support this, many do not identify themselves as a feminist. Feminism comes with a negative stereotype that many people do not want to be associated with. Estelle Freedman identified four components of feminism. The first component is equal worth. Equal worth is the argument that women’s behaviors should hold the same weight as men’s behaviors. The second component is identifying male privilege in legal rights and double standards. The third component of feminism, defined by Freedman is social movements that seek justice for women. The final component is intersecting hierarchies. Intersecting hierarchies means that feminism cannot only belong to women that are privileged, but to the marginalized women as well. As scholars research feminism, what they find is a conceptualized notion that feminism is people supporting feminist ideals. There are people on both sides of the spectrum supporting feminism and condemning it as bringing division to a nation.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

The article included two research test studies. The first study identified certain characteristics associated with being a feminist, while the second study revisited the previous studies to attempted the same goal. The article included detailed information about the studies, its procedures and its results. This experiment helped to support the claims about the characteristics of feminism. I appreciated the structure of the article, as it was very organized and beginner friendly. The words of choice were not intimidating, and the article was easy to follow. Despite the easiness of the article, I still feel like the information presented was quality and age appropriate for me. This article is helpful to my research because it helps explain why lipstick feminism came to be. Many people has those stereotypes of feminism and believes it to be unattractive, (in other ways than physical beauty). Lipstick feminism emerged because women still wanted to embrace the traditional standards of beauty, while still upholding the feminist values and beliefs.

________________________________________________________________ Information about article:

What makes a third wave? By Elizabeth Evans

International Feminist Journal of Politics, September 2016, Volume 18 Issue 3. Published by Taylor & Francis

Evans, E. (2016). What Makes a (Third) Wave? International Feminist Journal of Politics, 18(3), 409–428. https://doi-org.ezproxy.uno.edu/10.1080/14616742.2015.1027627

Topic & Purpose: The topic and purpose of this article is to give information on the third wave feminism and to bring clarity to the confusion surrounding the topic.

Summary:

The term “wave”, used in 1st waved feminism, 2nd wave feminism and 3rd wave feminism, is a metaphor to explain how some feminists design feminism with diverse goals and purposes. Understanding the concept of the term wave in terms of feminism is important because it aids in the understanding of the transitions and journey of feminism. Although feminism seems to be broken into “waves” that seems to divide the topic, using the wave narrative as umbrella topic helps to put the different waves into perspective by highlighting the similarities and differences between the 1st-3rd wave of feminism.

There is information to support that the third wave feminism emerged in the early 1990s for America and in the early 2000s for the United Kingdom. There has been conversations about the fourth wave feminism, but there is no evidence to support whether it has emerged or not. There are five approaches to take to define third wave feminism: chronological, oppositional, generational, conceptual and activist. The chronological approach is to follow the feminist waves. A new wave is defined by a revival of feminist activity in a certain point in time. Each wave is follows as a revamp of the previous wave. The oppositional approach is similar to the chronological approach, but it highlights the opposition or tension between the waves. The oppositional approach is evident in third wave feminists that are writers. These writers claim that third wave feminism brings something fresh with a different approach as well. The generational approach defines the waves of feminism by age. Third wave being associated with Generation X. The conceptual approach is the approach of having intersectionality as the defining feature of third wave feminism. Finally, the activist approach focuses on operation of the specific activism and the different types of individuals participating in the activism. There are also people who self-define as third wave feminism who do not fit any of those categories or do not want to be labeled as such.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

The article is very well written. It is structured in a manner that is easy to follow and understand. Considering the fact that this article is written to be informative and clarifying, I would assume that the audience Evans is writing to feminists looking to deeply understand third wave feminism. The article does a great job teaching the reader what is third wave feminism and how to understand third wave feminism. Evans was very successful in defining third wave feminism, not just from her own thoughts and definitions, but through studies and research. This information would be very helpful to my article on lipstick feminism as lipstick feminism is a variant of third wave feminism. Having this foundational understanding of third wave feminism helps understand lipstick feminism and how it came to be.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Information about article:

What is Lipstick Feminism by Mary Mahon

Mahon, M. (2022). What is Lipstick Feminism? Info Bloom. https://www.infobloom.com/what-is-lipstick-feminism.htm

Topic & Purpose: Defining Lipstick Feminism. Mary Mahon’s purpose for writing this article is to inform readers of what Lipstick Feminism is and how it came to be.

Summary:

Lipstick Feminism is a type of third wave feminism that argues that women can be an activist for women’s right while still embracing feminine aspects associated with being a woman. Lipstick feminists believe that women can wear feminine things like lipstick and high heels while still fighting for respect and equality in society. In the second wave of feminism, feminine qualities were viewed as a negative thing because of men oversexualizing women in society. Many women who were considered to be a part of the first wave feminism and the second wave feminism made statements with their appearance such as not shaving their body hair and not conforming to beauty standards they felt contributed to a patriarchal system in society. Women from the second wave feminism were radical in their approach to feminism, with the purpose of correcting social and legal inequalities for women. Because of the difference of embracing femininity, lipstick feminism is looked down upon by some women.

Interpretation/ Evaluation:

Megan Mahon’s purpose for writing her article is to inform readers on the topic of Lipstick Feminism. Mahon’s writing style is very clear and concise. Her article is sequential as it follows one point after the next. Mahon begins by defining what Lipstick Feminism is and why it came to be. She then begins to write on the history of feminism before it evolved into Lipstick Feminism. She discusses the Third Wave Feminism. This helps readers get a clearer understanding of the topic. Mahon remains unbiased in presenting the material as there are no phrases to influence readers to develop feelings for or against lipstick feminism. Mahon provides readers with critiques of Lipstick Feminism to give different viewpoints of the topic. The simplicity of the article shows that Mahon is writing to an amateur audience with limited to no understanding of the topic. I would have preferred if Mahon would have gone into more details of the critiques of lipstick feminism. I felt the article ended abruptly, with more to be said.