Can Sparkle be Feminist?

30 thoughts on Can Sparkle be Feminist?

1. I love your term “sparkle”. I write a lot about this issue, and I always try to stress the difference between progressive and radical. Sparkle is a great tool for progressive feminism, and by that I mean micro victories, which are highly individual. Just as an example, if Paris Hilton struts around on stage in lingerie and claims this is a feminist act (um…suspend disbelief plz), she is doing nothing of the sort because her personae would make this specific act unintelligible as feminist. However, if Beth Ditto did the same thing, it would a progressive action, something that is understood on a micro level to be subversive given her legacy (for more on ditto).

   It’s not for us to say, across the board, that any act of Sparkle is or isn’t feminist, because it operates with extreme subjectivity.

   A radical action, with the potential to deal a crippling blow to patriarchy, tends to be either:
   1) the accumulative effect of progressive victories
   or
   2) an act of explicit political organization.

   The issue I have is that many radical feminists feel that Sparkle is at odds with their aims. Given #1 above, it would appear otherwise. Even if Sparkle applies symbolism and cultural currency already in circulation within patriarchy, doesn’t mean it necessarily is a stabilizing force. The staunch anti-sparklers are trying to monopolize feminism. This impulse to dominate is the only aspect of this conversation to which I take offense and will write(fight) against.

   I wrote about this issue by way of The Newlywed Game.

2. “Sparkle” is such a great term for it and exactly how I feel about my makeup and high-heeled shoes and my fun lingerie and dancing with my friends at a club on a special night. I do think that Donny Darko is on to something, though I wouldn’t characterize “empowered women” as synonymous with “professionals.” Maybe the comment is just out of context, though.

   I would choose A and C, but not B, if this was my multiple choice test. Leg-shaving, lipstick-smearing, push-up-bra-struggling can be “tools of the patriarchy” when they are blindly followed because they are the socially correct thing and because the “do-er” has no cultural context for other choices. However, performing gender for one’s joy or to make a political statement by doing these seemingly anti-feminist acts can be a feminist act, in the right context.

   For example, as a teen I refused to be seen (even on a 4-day hiking trip) without some form of makeup and was known to gush that if I was ever stuck on a deserted island, I would absolutely want my eyeliner there with me. I was also obsessed with shaving my legs and, later, at my then boyfriend’s request, my pubic hair, because I felt ugly if I didn’t do these things. That, in my opinion, is anti-feminist conformation to the patriarchal societal norm of beauty.

   These days, I choose not to shave my legs or pits, but I do shave my lady bits. I find it personally more comfortable and sexy. And I can leave the house without makeup and do so frequently. I enjoy dressing up and wearing makeup for fun and sometimes choose to, knowing that people will read me differently for seeing me performing a highly feminine gender. This is all compounded by the fact that I date a butch dyke/tranny boi and we are often recognized as a butch/femme couple. I wouldn’t classify myself as femme only because I hate the non-feminist patriarchal stereotypes that people impose on me if I admit to being femme. But I do clearly perform femininity at many times and do, personally, choose to identify as a “power femme.”

   Some of my reasoning about gender expression comes from dating and living with a partner that chooses a gender expression and gender identity that does not fit hier biological sex. And then having a variety of friends that identify as trans, andro, genderqueer, dyke, and more. To me, gender expression (male and femaleness) can be highly performative and, thus, both personally and politically radical. Whether it’s my partner living hier daily life, our gender dynamic as a couple, or the incredible work of Annie Sprinkle and Kate Bornstein.

3. Thanks for the link! With these sparkle — beauty, sex work, porn — discussions — great term! — I think hate the game not the player since women have so little power comparatively. Keep our eyes on the prize: equal pay and assets.

4. Pop Feminist — thanks for the link. I especially liked:

   “If radical feminism cannot capitulate with the above model of resistance, on what grounds, I ask, do they feel their militaristic battle will be waged? Quite frankly, they don’t have the funding, the ammo, or the (wo)manpower to fight the war they are proposing.”

   Yeah. While I agree with KaeLyn that Sparkle can be USED in an antifeminist way, I think in and of itself it’s pretty neutral. Although dropping it in some cases would be freeing, it’s hard to craft a bright line rule for when this is the case, and typically lecturing other feminists doesn’t help to define that. And certainly, attacking the patriarchy by way of a “revolution” that would entail ridding ourselves of Sparkle and exiting all “patriarchal” power structures (law, business, etc) with the idea of rebuilding in some way is horrifyingly unrealistic. Stuff like funding and ammo is better obtained, IMO, through subversive strategies.

   KaeLyn — I find it more difficult to argue that it could be used in a feminist way even though I take your point about performing. Do you see this as achieving a political rather than a recreational or self actualizational goal? I think self actualization (and recreation) are great and essential, but it’s hard for me to really see a proactive improvement for women and therefore a feminist action there. Granted I may be missing something here — curious as to your take on this.

5. Hey, that is a great term, Octo.

   I know I’ve often asked the question, which hurts more women, and worse, “sparkle” or, for example, shopping at Wal-Mart (for example)? Sparkle or welfare reform? Sparkle or the Iraq war? Sparkle or the persecution of migrant workers?

   I probably sound like a concern troll, but, you know, how much examining of our choices do we have to do before we can be okay with the fact that some women are sparkly and fine with it, and then move on?

6. I’m beginning to doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion!

   Sorry. That seemed appropriate given the word “sparkle” and the name “Donna Darko.”

   Anyway, I think this quote by KaeLyn sums it up: Leg-shaving, lipstick-smearing, push-up-bra-struggling can be “tools of the patriarchy” when they are blindly followed because they are the socially correct thing and because the “do-er” has no cultural context for other choices. However, performing gender for one’s joy or to make a political statement by doing these seemingly anti-feminist acts can be a feminist act, in the right context. I have been trying and failing to articulate that for such a long time, and you’ve just put it perfectly.

7. The problem I’ve found with Sparkle is that it is so soon appropriated, and I must fight a constant battle to keep it fresh. Take the burlesque movement. Here I was, happily enjoying Coney Island and the occasional Dirty Martini at the Bindlestiff Family Cirkus show.

   Then what happens? Goddamn Pussycat Dolls hit it big and now I can’t enjoy burlesque anymore, because I know that they originated out of the burlesque scene in LA – and they are not alone. This kind of show is the LEAST feminist version of Sparkle that I’ve ever seen, having sold out any pretense of feminism to exchange their hawtness for cash. The slick, media-driven version of Sparkle is the worst kind of empowerfulness, inspiring countless 13 year old girls to dream of pole dancing and pink boas instead of jobs with real power.

   So I think that Sparkle is fun. But dammnit if you don’t have to keep finding new ways to shine, because the Patriarchy gets its mitts on anything the minute it starts to be fun.

8. I don’t have much to add right now, but I wanted to say that your posts/comments have been rigtheously rocking lately Octo. Good to read you.

9. My issue is this:

   Women who mindlessly do sparkly stuff and women who critically examine their sparkle are all lumped together in the mind of the patriarchy.
   When walking down the street, men can’t tell the difference between the heavily made-up feminist woman wearing stilettos and the heavily made-up anti-feminist woman wearing stilettos. (That’s just an easily accessible, generic example of sparke.)
   They’re not thinking, “Oh, THAT woman is dancing because she’s empowered; I will view her as my equal and not as a slut who exists to satisfy my dudely fantasies.”
   Sparkle is performed by different women with different intentions, for sure. But is intent what matters, in the scheme of things, if the effect is the same?

10. I think it’s wrong to turn women into villains for choosing to participate in sparkle, especially when all of our culture is a laser targeted on women to perform in those ways.

    But I’m having difficulty dealing with the class implications of sparkle. What about women who must dress “up” and wear lipstick, have professionally done hair, etc. so as not to lose their jobs ? It affects women at higher levels of education and income, but it’s especially difficult for low-income women. I would rather we worked on finding solutions to the discrimination women experience when they don’t participate in beauty culture.

11. Pingback: Letter from the Editrix at Racialicious - the intersection of race and pop culture

12. Squirely said:

    “The slick, media-driven version of Sparkle is the worst kind of empowerfulness, inspiring countless 13 year old girls to dream of pole dancing and pink boas instead of jobs with real power.”

    Cannot agree more. I don’t agree with marketing sex work to teens, and also feel strongly that it’s not the ideal way to build up equity that can translate to equal economic power for women.

    Q Grrl: thanks!!!

    SarahMC: re “But is intent what matters, in the scheme of things, if the effect is the same?” Yeah, the fact that it’s often hard to tell is what makes the assertion that Sparkle is actively feminist hard to buy. Something actively feminist should translate to helping other women, otherwise it’s self actualization instead – which is good too, of course. It doesn’t help other women if it’s not clear what’s being said.

    Other Orange said:

    “I’m having difficulty dealing with the class implications of sparkle. What about women who must dress “up” and wear lipstick, have professionally done hair, etc. so as not to lose their jobs ? … I would rather we worked on finding solutions to the discrimination women experience when they don’t participate in beauty culture.”

    I think we can work towards making sure Sparkle isn’t used as a carrot or a stick in a way that harms women who don’t want to or cannot afford to avail themselves of a certain variety of it. Asking women to cast it off is not going to be a successful way to make that happen, though. I think with an emphasis towards, as Squirely indicated, a focus on real power for women, Sparkle will grow to have less undesired impact.

13. Lauren O, I forgot about that! and wasn’t crazy about the movie because the ending confused me.

    Octo, Patricia Hill Collins came up with some stereotypical masculine and feminine characteristics. They’re great for these sparkle (or any feminist) discussions!

    Masculine

    aggressive
    leader
    rational
    strong
    intellectual

    Feminine

    passive
    follower
    emotional
    weak
    physical

14. My gut reaction here as a rhet/comp person is to start with that word “sparkle” and its implications.

    Because right there, what’s the alternative? Dull? Is that what I am when I’m not participating in sparkle?

    And, as other orange notes, there are still fairly heavy penalties for women who fail to achieve the base-level gloss the patriarchy expects. Women who aren’t pleasing to the male gaze are still paid less than women who “sparkle.”

    So no, telling women they can’t wear makeup and heels and be a feminist isn’t going to solve the problem. But neither am I convinced that it makes sense for feminists to try to recategorize patriarchally sanctioned feminine behaviors as empowerment just so that we can feel better about our privilege in participating in them voluntarily while, for so many women, to *not* participate in them comes at a serious price.

15. I had a response all ready to go.

    Then I read Miriam’s above, and trying to respond to it when I’ve already responded so much on my own blog…(which Octo linked, and thank you!!!)

    “I think we can work towards making sure Sparkle isn’t used as a carrot or a stick in a way that harms women who don’t want to or cannot afford to avail themselves of a certain variety of it. Asking women to cast it off is not going to be a successful way to make that happen, though. I think with an emphasis towards, as Squirely indicated, a focus on real power for women, Sparkle will grow to have less undesired impact.”

    What she said. Also, about self-actualization….very good point. Which reminds me to go write that post about “liberation.”

16. Mirian — yup, I don’t see it as empowerment either. I go with the definition of empowerment (I think it’s the majority definition last time I did the research) that it involves creating larger change rather than just personally feeling good. Not that the latter is bad, of course.

    I’m a little wary about the word “privilege” because it suggests all luck and no hard work. While there’s inevitably some luck involved in any current success (whether physical, professional, economic) there’s often an element of hard word as well. For example, plenty of strippers come from impoverished backgrounds. One woman from my high school who is Latina and from a low-income family is now a Bond Girl. She used to work out all the time even back then. There’s an unfortunate downwardly mobile tendency in the feminist blogosphere to label female accomplishment “privilege” that I think is disincentivizing.

    That’s not to say we shouldn’t recognize our privilege and act accordingly, but either too much breast-beating (with very little follow-through) or calling it out in other women about whom we know very little — not on, IMO. Not saying that’s what you were doing, just voicing some discomfort with the word choice.

17. For example, plenty of strippers come from impoverished backgrounds.

    That, to me, also suggests that there are still two levels of “sparkle” and we have never really figured out a way to talk about them both at the same time. (Not that they even fit into the same discussion, necessarily.) Because on one hand we have generally middle-class women choosing to participate in burlesque and femme behaviors as forms of self-expression; and on the other hand we have women trying to feed their families/get an education/stay afloat in a harsh system that values their bodies more than their minds.

    And I do appreciate the “neither a carrot nor a stick” thing. That’s an extremely apt way to put it. 🙂 Because like it or not, women do get rewards for participating- that’s one of the hardest things to let go of.

    I would say that encouraging women who *can* cast off those behaviors with no fear of punishment, and who *want* to cast them off, isn’t the worst thing in the world, though. The more women/men/people we have saying “the patriarchal beauty regime doesn’t serve me, and I don’t serve it” the better, I’d think. I can’t imagine how else we’re going to get it thrown out.

18. “I would say that encouraging women who *can* cast off those behaviors with no fear of punishment, and who *want* to cast them off, isn’t the worst thing in the world, though.”

    True. Often what is objected to is the polar opposite though — either the women who cannot cast them off w/o fear of professional (or other) punishment, or those who do not want to cast them off and who have considered the costs/benefits of doing so, are the ones at the business end of the stick.

    I’ve gotten numerous rewards for sparkle and though I do like it on a personal level, I own that I also choose it for the rewards. I’ve lost some of it but kept other parts, mostly based on time convenience as the main factor.

    “I can’t imagine how else we’re going to get it thrown out.”

    I can. By encouraging women to fight for, and for those who can to fight on behalf of other women for, equal economic and professional power. Until we have that, we can toss the razors till the cows come home and it won’t make much difference in other women’s ability to do so with impunity. Women will be “the sex class” until we’re something else, which doesn’t happen by abandoning something that can serve temporarily as a poor substitute, but a substitute, for more long-term power.

19. Yo Octo!

    Nice to see you. Man, I’ve been turning this conversation over and over in my head and had just resolved to talk about it at my spot when you post this.

    To be honest, I always feel weird posting on these kinds of topics – the kind of conversations that tend to happen rarely discuss what “sparkle” (I call it the art of femme) means to those of us outside of societal beauty standards, and how to some extent, there is a reclaiming going on.

    For example, Mama Popcorn of Brown Girls Burlesque [1] is going to write something about how the face of burlesque is white and how, traditionally, many WoC have been excluded from this kind of sensual art.

    Check the mission statement:

    Brown Girls Burlesque (BGB) is a collective of women of color dedicated to creating our own reflection in an art form that we have supported and enjoyed but traditionally, has not well-represented people of color.
    Our mission is to take our rightful place on the stage to celebrate our cultures, sexuality and artistry with humor, fierceness and nudity.
    *In case you really need clarification, all self-identified women of African / Black/ Caribbean, Arab, Asian & Pacific Islander, Latina/o, and Native/Indigenous descent.

    Her narrative is especially important considering that the bodies of women of color are so often viewed as the property for others, something for the gratification of others – the art of the dance and props and all in burlesque all act as talismen of a sort to mark this transition – you may ask me to pop my ass in booty shorts and a tank, but I like heels and lingerie.

    However, all of these conversations take place against the backdrop of WoC’s images as sexually deviant, something that drives many of us to suppress our natural sexual desires for fear of playing into stereotypes. Andrea Plaid wrote a post about it [2] and we are going to expand upon that point – for many of us (and I am speaking from a black female standpoint, but my readers have also echoed this point) there is a lot of fear associated with sex and sexuality, particularly a woman’s right to pleasure. So, with that mindset, what is more important – avoiding reinforcing stereotypes or pursuing your own personal gratification?

    And while I agree with your main point, that these actions are not necessarily feminist on unfeminist, how does something become feminist? So, with some of the classes I take, one of them is called Strip-ology, which is a burlesque/strip hybrid. The class on its face is not revolutionary, but looking at the class base it could be interpreted that way. It is primarily a class for black women (with other minorities who come through) who face this strange dynamic of being hypersexualized or desexualized, but very little between ground. The studio stocks sizes in XS to 3X (regular stock – you can order other sizes) and caters to many women who are overweight and afraid of fitness. It forces us to challenge ourselves with a studio length mirror where you can spend your time obsessing about your flaws – or seeing what your body can do. And while the studio oozes sensuality, the topic of men doesn’t come up all that often. All the toys they sell are for self-pleasuring, the focus is on movement, not necessarily on sex, and even in stripology, the idea is to exude that “it-girl” swagger, not necessarily to please your man.

    And then, what about things like make up? Is it sparkle if paint my face with designs? Or is it only anti-feminist if I cover flaws? And what about those of us who find strength in these crazy ass rituals? There was a great essay in this book called Naked: Black Women Bare All About Their Skin, Hair, Hips, Lips, and other Parts [3] about a woman who watched her mother go through an elaborate make up ritual each day. She called it her mother’s armor, the protection with which she faced the world.

    There are too many aspects to this to think about, so I am going to break here and think on this a bit more.

    Oh, and because I am to fucking lazy to add HTML to this post:

    [1] http://www.myspace.com/browngirlsburlesque
    [2] http://www.racialicious.com/2008/05/26/what-color-is-your-orgasm-sex-positive-advice-in-black-and-white/
    [3] http://www.amazon.com/Naked-Black-Women-About-Their/dp/0399531637

20. Latoya–Wow, yeah… You really just articulated one reason that I often have little to say in these conversations about “sparkle,” as a women who falls outside of societal beauty standards. I hadn’t actually been able to articulate it before. I can’t wait to read your post! Please link here.

21. I see this as an issue of acceptance, because it seems to be about women loving themselves for who they are. The “anti sparkle” folks seem to think women who perform femininity are self-loathing becaues they pluck, powder, tease and paint away their true form. The “pro sparkle” folks seem to think the “anti sparlers” unfairly deride them for doing something they enjoy, and/or may find personally empowering.

    Isn’t the answer, then, just to love people for who and what they are? If a woman doesn’t want to sparkle- great. She should be supported and accepted by her feminist peers. If a woman wants to sparle- that’s great, too. She should be supported and accepted by her feminist peers. Where I think there is valid room for criticism is when either camp tries to say the other is not “real”- not a real feminist, not a real woman- if they don’t do what that particular group advocates.

    I wrote about this in the context of some specific posts at my place a while back.

22. Latoya, great to see your post!

    You bring up some interesting issues. First, w/r/t those outside typical beauty standards. If there is a reclaiming going on, is that feminist more so than when those within typical beauty standards do it? I don’t know. On the one hand, it could send a message of power to other women. On the other, it’s using some traditional tools to do it. Hard to say.

    Regarding WOC –

    First, were you referring to “outside of societal beauty standards” as based on race, or based on body type? (I think many WOC are within societal beauty standards, even given the white-centrism of those standards, and many who are within the SBS’s are not excluded, as much, from Sparkle).

    I love the mission statement of BGB. It works for burlesque, it would also work for a whole bunch of venues that don’t represent WOC well. So from that standpoint I can see how this is a feminist statement, as it naturally extends this idea to other venues beyond the sexuality/nudity which are all well and good but don’t go beyond the traditional female role. In any case, it certainly is a great self-actualizing statement. In a way, maybe a white woman cannot accurately say whether it’s a feminist statement in this context. I do feel strongly that a feminist statement must empower women to do more than feel good about our individual bodies, but must also empower us vis a vis men. But perhaps this does occur in such a context.

    I loved the book “Naked.” And I understand the story about the girl’s mom’s makeup ritual. When I was a pre-teen and young teen social pariah (think Ally Sheedy in Breakfast Club), I adopted similar kinds of masks, and they worked pretty damn well.

    In the essay “Playing the Vixen” by Margeaux Watson in “Naked,” Margeaux, who is an entertainment correspondent for Entertainment Weekly and also writes for O (Oprah’s Mag), Vibe, Rolling Stone and GQ, says that she finally took control of Sparkle (she describes her body as “a living, breathing, gorgeous instrument of power”) by “achieving professional and financial success.” She still gets unwanted comments, but now feels unintimidated by it.

23. The problem isn’t sparkle. The problem is who controls its interpretation. And the answer to that question is that, in a patriarchal society, anything sexual by women that is thrown “out there” (i.e., in the mainstream world) will be reinterpreted within the conceptual framework of patriarchy: as in, oh, this is all for us! (read: men). The only way to *avoid* this is through very, very careful screening… which becomes impossible when, obviously, a$$hole guys will pose as feminists to subvert and coopt our sexuality. So unless we control the society in which our sexuality is expressed, it will forever be used against us.

24. excellent post Octo, I love it. A lot of folk (female and male) have a love of art, drama, change, “flair” and sparkle often is and can be a part of that. Like anything, sparkle can be a huge part of self expression and a way to project ones moods or feelings, and I think that’s pretty cool.

25. Pingback: Feministe » Are you wearing your Feminist Lesbian uniform?

26. Because it’s relevant:

    I think that “master’s tools” quote gets misused a lot. I’m not sure Lorde meant “sparkle” and such when she said it. I think it’s important to keep in mind what she was talking about — the exclusion of women of color from feminist fora — when we discuss that quote.

    Not meaning to put you on the spot there, Octo. Just — I think a lot of people neglect the context of that quote so they can say that women’s individual choices, like sparkle, involve collusion. When really, I can’t say I know if Lorde would have thought so (though she definitely had some negative things to say about pornography and pornographized sexuality, so maybe so)…

    …but it does seem to me that she’d be rolling over in her grave to see people using a quote about how women’s differing backgrounds have been ignored in white feminisms to make the point that some women make bad choices.

27. Trin, did you notice that I was stating that other people tend to use that expression? I was not using it, nor was I condoning their use of it. I was simply stating a fact. I’m pretty precise, and also aware (surprise) of the context of Lorde’s expression. I’d appreciate the same in return, many thanks.

28. Pingback: season of the bitch » That Video
29. Pingback: What if make up wasn’t used as barometer of feminist cred? « Professor, What If…?
30. Pingback: Sparkle and Embracing the Feminine « Avowed Virago

Comments are currently closed.