I’m sure how many times this needs to be said until it
sticks, but women can be sexy and strong. There is nothing inherently
anti-feminist about women wearing low cut or revealing clothing. Just because a
woman chooses to wear tight fitting or show off some skin does not somehow make
her less than. We need to stop this.
This weekend and early this week I was confronted with this
very topic on two different occasions. The first involves the story this
weekend regarding two teenage girls who were barred from boarding a United
flight because they were wearing leggings. Now, United has stated that the
girls were in violation of the dress code that applies only to employees and
family who are flying using the airline. It is the opinion of the airline that
when they are flying on their airline the employees or family members are
representing the airline to the public. Let me be honest, when I fly, I
couldn’t tell you who is an employee of the airline or not. I also couldn’t
care less about what someone is wearing when they fly. I just want to get on my
flight and get to wear I am going.
People were, in my opinion, rightfully angered by the
incident. I understand that there are rules and standards, but are those
standards fair? Like dress codes in school, I would say that the rules seem to
unfairly target women. Among the standards, clothing which bare midriffs; tight
spandex or form-fitting clothing; clothing intended as sleepwear or swimwear;
anything provocative, inappropriately revealing, or see-through; any article of
clothing that reveals any type of undergarment; or shorts that are shorter than
3 inches above the knee. This is no different than the rationale that restricts
what girls can wear in school because it might distract the boys. It unfairly
sexualizes women in declaring that anything that reveals an aspect of their
figure is somehow too dirty for the general public.
The other incident that tells me feminism has a long way to
go was when I read a theater review for a production of Shakespeare’s Coriolanus on a local online news site.
In the interest of full disclosure, I have worked quite frequently with the
theater group Prenzie Players and even worked as a SFX and props designer on
this particular production. However, as a feminist, I was angered by the
insinuation of the reviewer that because of the costume of Aufidia (normally a
male role, Aufidius) was short and revealing that somehow her portrayal was not
feminist. Again, I was confronted with this idea that a woman cannot be both
sexual and competent. The reviewer acknowledged that the portrayal was of a
woman who was strong, competent warrior despite the fact that she was wearing
makeup and a short tunic.
This was all after she acknowledged that the casting of a
woman in this male role was a “win” for feminists. She then proceeded to
discuss how the makeup and attire undercut the “feminist” intent. I would say
that this had the complete opposite effect. One thing that the reviewer got a
bit right was that the costume made the actress appear like a “Roman Wonder
Woman.” Well, I have to ask is this: what is wrong with that? When I look back
on my childhood, Wonder Woman is one of those characters that I could look to
as a role model. She was a strong woman, who was also beautiful. It wasn’t her
beauty that defined her. Instead, she was defined by her goodness and heroism.
The fact that people continue to sexualize women just
because of what they wear contributes heavily to the toxic environment that
excuses bragging about sexual assault as “locker room talk,” insinuates that
female celebrities who have their private photos and videos leaked to the
internet “deserved it,” or overlooks lewd comments made to women on the street
as “boys will be boys.” This is what I see as being anti-feminist. Everyone’s
feminism may look a little different, but ultimately, the heart of feminism is
that women should be treated like people not objects. The moment you begin to
define a woman by her attire, you become part of the problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment