individualistic and subjective, tailored to insecurity and desire
April 12, 2016 9:13 AM   Subscribe

"The mix of things presumed to transmit and increase female power is without limit yet still depressingly limiting."
How 'Empowerment' Became Something for Women to Buy, by Jia Tolentino for NYT Magazine posted by amnesia and magnets (23 comments total) 16 users marked this as a favorite
 
Isn't this the fate of all movements under capitalism? The hippie counterculture became tie-dye and goofy phrases. You can buy anarchist "A" t-shirts at Hot Topic. Punk became trendy clothing and haircuts. You can get a MasterCard with Marx's face on it. How many serious attempts at finding meaning in alternative beliefs and philosophies have been boiled down into marketing for "alternative" food or health products?

The system absorbs anything it comes up against and renders it toothless.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:26 AM on April 12, 2016 [16 favorites]


Is there nothing that cannot be ruined by advertising?
posted by DreamerFi at 9:49 AM on April 12, 2016 [2 favorites]


I guess advertising itself can't be ruined by advertising
posted by clockzero at 10:01 AM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]


Back in the days, advertising meant something
posted by J.K. Seazer at 10:05 AM on April 12, 2016 [4 favorites]


This sort of co-opting has been going on since at least the 1950s. See
The Conquest of Cool: Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism by Thomas Frank for a history of advertising's and marketing's efforts to reach beyond Consensus Mass Culture for whatever's deemed "more authentic" and important. Then they strip it of its meaning beyond the most basic and inoffensive symbolism, and use it to sell stupid shit.

It never stops. What we can hope for is that its expressions are accidentally hilarious.

"We're not like other potato chip brands...Lay's is Woke As Fuck!"
posted by Harvey Jerkwater at 10:06 AM on April 12, 2016 [19 favorites]


Let us not forget that once upon a time, one could also inhale empowerement.
posted by sapagan at 10:10 AM on April 12, 2016 [2 favorites]


I found the most interest in the point made in this article about the falseness that empowerment has become:
Sneakily, empowerment had turned into a theory that applied to the needy while describing a process more realistically applicable to the rich. The word was built on a misaligned foundation; no amount of awareness can change the fact that it’s the already-powerful who tend to experience empowerment at any meaningful rate. Today “empowerment” invokes power while signifying the lack of it. It functions like an explorer staking a claim on new territory with a white flag.
There is a balance somewhere between personal responsibility, and corporate responsibility.
posted by rebent at 10:14 AM on April 12, 2016 [2 favorites]


OH OH OH let me talk about the scariest conference I've ever been to, including an oil conference where they had *very* scantily clad dancers w/ lots of alcohol: a WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT conference in Texas.

It looked awesome, with Marion Jones and Doris Kearns Goodwin! My company was sending me! At the time I was really struggling with sexism and it some interesting titled sessions, like being a woman in business. The final keynote was Rick Perry's wife, the First Lady of Texas. I knew I was in trouble when I showed up in jeans, no make up, and my hair barely brushed, sat at a table of women in business suits and immaculate manicures, and they all got up and left. (Not critical - although they definitely judged me - just descriptive.) I had brought literature from the Association for Women Geoscientists & other professional societies with the hope finding some STEM students/brand new professionals; by 10 AM, back in the car.

The whole thing was bullshit. IIRC it was Anita Perry's brainchild in some way. She introduced most of the speakers at least. It seemed mostly a way for Perry to pass money to her friends, including her trainer. Much of the messaging was around how I should BE EVERYTHING while not asking for anything -just shutting up and dealing with things, like how I should dress a certain way to succeed in business; many of the sessions were insultingly sexist. (My memory may be faulty, but I think there was a fashion show?) Marion Jones was really great - actually really inspiring - but there was this racist, classist tinge in Anita Perry's introduction and afterwards that made me want to puke. Goodwin did not understand her audience - she thought it would be similar to what I expected - so she ending up boring them.

I didn't want to leave because my company had paid for me to be there, so I resorted to just lifting up a butt cheek and farting at some of the more horrible messages from some of the speakers (like being sure to say please, thank you, and be humble and grateful that all those hard working men had decided to give me a job that another man who had a family might have needed). But after sitting partway through Anita Perry - who was terrifying in that Texas Lady kind of way that made me feel horribly judged, and judged wanting, don't know how else to describe this particular judgement I've come across only in Texas - I realized: this conference wasn't about empowering women. It was for someone to make a lot of money from companies - like my company - feeling like they were empowering women: mere, feel good window dressing on the very real problems they had. As the articles mentioned, it truly was looking like doing something instead of actually doing it, with profit. It was disgustingly objectifying.

At that point I realized the truly empowering thing to do was get up and leave, which I did in the middle of Anita Perry's speech. The entire room looked at me as I did so! I had violated some kind of code of women's empowerment! It made me super suspicious of anything like that. And my feedback on it caused a lot of trouble for me at my company, who thought I should be grateful and humble they had paid money for me to be empowered. The whole thing was gross and insulting from start to finish.
posted by barchan at 10:15 AM on April 12, 2016 [79 favorites]


Capitalism is a bacteria that can colonize any surface.
posted by praemunire at 10:42 AM on April 12, 2016 [5 favorites]


I like that the topic of selling women the illusion of "power" is getting more coverage.

It reminds me of the "Self-Care" FPP from a few months back, because there was a lot of great discussion on the industry of self-care. The idea of self-care is now thoroughly capitalist and corporatized, and in becoming so, turns "I have no time" into "Get a massage!" instead of "Resist an insane work culture and the sexist expectation that you'll manage all the domestic work when you get home!"

This is basically a variation on theme, offering a cheap consumer panacea instead of advocating for actual systemic change that would empower more women.

I realize revolutions aren't free, but "buy shit to change the world" is such a blatant distraction ploy, it gets aggravating to see how often it's trotted out.

(On a related note, it's not surprising that the useful messages in this piece are swaddled in a candy coating of celebrity and brand-name luxury.)
posted by sobell at 10:45 AM on April 12, 2016 [8 favorites]


But when I point out that the only thing that they can't absorb, repackage and sell back to you is putting their fucking heads on some fucking spikes, you want to act like I'm the one talking crazy.
posted by Parasite Unseen at 11:11 AM on April 12, 2016 [10 favorites]


Isn't this the fate of all movements under capitalism? The hippie counterculture became tie-dye and goofy phrases. You can buy anarchist "A" t-shirts at Hot Topic. Punk became trendy clothing and haircuts. You can get a MasterCard with Marx's face on it. How many serious attempts at finding meaning in alternative beliefs and philosophies have been boiled down into marketing for "alternative" food or health products?

Same thing for Nerd Culture. Comic books, video games, the whole Geek and Nerd Thing is one vast, Borg Collective of commodification. And while Nerdity has always had twin "purchasing and privilege as authenticity" problems, it's exploded all over the greater population now.
posted by Celsius1414 at 11:32 AM on April 12, 2016 [3 favorites]


But when I point out that the only thing that they can't absorb, repackage and sell back to you is putting their fucking heads on some fucking spikes, you want to act like I'm the one talking crazy.

You do realize they're the ones selling spikes. I.e. guns. And the only people being killed by them are the ones who most need help. I get where the sentiment comes from, but yeah.

my company [...] thought I should be grateful and humble they had paid money for me to be empowered.

Oh. I finally better understand where my recent new-woman-in-management woes have been coming from. Just for some initial background to answer fundamental questions: team of 12, not a single sick day in a year (only team that can say that), within budget, deliveries on-time, indicators all green, client satisfaction. But. I am "not putting in enough hours," am "behaving aggressively" (no one says this except upper management, who has never given specifics or suggested strategies to improve, and my team are very open with me because I cultivate safety, so I trust I'm not actually a monster), management adds that I "constantly mention problems without solutions" (one would think that hitting all the goalposts would BE a solution, but, uh, no?) and oh I SHOULD BE GRATEFUL TO BE MANAGING 12 PEOPLE ON A SALARY 30% LESS THAN ALL-WHITE-MALE MANAGERS WITH TEAMS OF 5 AND MY OFFICIAL CATEGORIZATION OF "EXPERT ANALYST" WHICH IS THREE LEVELS BELOW "PROJECT MANAGER" IN SPITE OF CONSISTENTLY ASKING FOR A RAISE AND CATEGORY PROMOTION ALSO I NEED TO BE NASTIER TO MY TEAMS BECAUSE I'M TOO NICE BECAUSE... BECAUSE THEY SAY SO AND NOT LISTENING TO THEM IS DISRESPECTFUL YES THEY SAID THIS TO MY FACE *cue fire-breathing* Is that aggressive? Or is it justified anger i.e. empowerment? (rhetorical question)

In brighter news, I was reading an article today where the reporter mentioned that the gig economy has contributed to a mass abandonment of "traditional employment" for freelancing that has never before been seen in France. A result of which the government is realizing, oh shit, we have to make freelancing viable because otherwise France's socialized healthcare system, which is funded by employee/employer contributions (not freelancers), will go kaput. So yes, while the gig economy has its drawbacks, frankly, our current iteration of capitalism and its fucking-over-everyone-except-the-elite-to-keep-profits-up can go die in the fire it has created. Improved freelancing conditions will help people go into business without the crutch of vampire-like centralized sites.
posted by fraula at 11:37 AM on April 12, 2016 [14 favorites]


You do realize they're the ones selling spikes. I.e. guns.

It's not like communists have never built a decent gun.
posted by Parasite Unseen at 12:07 PM on April 12, 2016 [2 favorites]


A result of which the government is realizing, oh shit, we have to make freelancing viable because otherwise France's socialized healthcare system, which is funded by employee/employer contributions (not freelancers), will go kaput.

So...are you eager as a freelancer to start paying what must be substantial contributions (both your part and the freelance employer's part) into the system? Or to be excluded entirely as a "voluntary noncontributor?" Because this scenario really doesn't have to lead to the positive outcomes you seem to be imagining. You could end up with the breakdown of your version of universal health care altogether. In the U.S., the increase in temporary employment is only leading to worse conditions for everyone.
posted by praemunire at 12:20 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]


I was struck by her point that no one uses "empowerment" seriously in everyday speech among the young feminist women the author knows. Because it's true; the only places I hear that word used are in advertising and sarcasm about exactly the kind of small self-centered changes the author describes.

And corporate bullshit like this is exactly why.
posted by sciatrix at 12:25 PM on April 12, 2016 [3 favorites]


What a great article, thanks for posting. I especially loved the conclusion:

"The mistake would be to locate further empowerment in choosing between the two. Corporate empowerment — as well as the lightweight, self-exculpatory feminism it rides on — feeds rav­enously on the distracting performance of identity, that buffet of false opposition. Sandberg and Kardashian are perceived by most to be opposites, two aesthetically distinct brands fighting for our allegiance, when each has pioneered a similar, punish­ingly individualistic, market-driven understanding of women’s worth, responsibility and strength. In the world of women’s empowerment, they say the same thing differently: that our radical capability is mainly our ability to put money in the bank."
posted by dialetheia at 12:25 PM on April 12, 2016 [7 favorites]


But when I point out that the only thing that they can't absorb, repackage and sell back to you is putting their fucking heads on some fucking spikes, you want to act like I'm the one talking crazy.

Rebellion has been a monster seller sine the 60s. They're have indeed absorbed, repackaged, and sold it back to you many times over, to the point that many of our ideas of rebellion come from them. The rebellion they've repackaged and resold helps ensure that no real rebellion will every happen.

But they're happy to let us vent and fantasize about it on the Internet.
posted by Sangermaine at 12:37 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]


Rebellion has been a monster seller sine the 60s.

Well, yes, of course. But not literal heads on literal spikes. Admission is generally free to that sort of an event. The greater problem is that literal heads on spikes really just allow middle management to move on up.
posted by klanawa at 12:53 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]


I really liked the NYT article. But I don't think the takeway should be that corporations are coopting the language of feminism and/or social justice and making it shallow and self-serving, and this is why we can't have nice things.

Full disclosure - I work in advertising, and I have worked on campaigns that try to include a pro-women message. And while some companies are that level of cynical, and ask for this, and then only buy and run the most lavender-tinted pablum possible, most of the time this is born from women working in advertising saying "how can I work a feminist message into this when I'm already required to sell something that could be seen as demeaning to women?" I think the Dove campaign - when it worked - was fantastic. I think the "like a girl" campaign did a great job of opening eyes. This spot is crazy heavy-handed, but for India? Wow. I'm not disputing that praising empowerment to sell beauty or cleaning products is pretty backhanded. But at the same time, whenever we talk about the wage gap, or rape culture, or emotional labor, the conversation always circles back to "it's not enough to address the issues - we have to change the culture."

Advertising is part of the culture. In many ways it's a really powerful force, because it's so hard to avoid, and simultaneously so easy to think we ignore it. If the background noise is starting to say the things we want our culture to say, I think that's worth encouraging. The whole argument about whether or not Beyonce or Kim Kardashian is a feminist or whether Lean In actually helps most women in the workforce is a good intellectual discussion to have, and I like the thought that went into all these pieces. But I also think that even shallow, self-serving, surface-level feminism can do a lot more good than it's being given credit for. Because it gives us a springboard to have those conversations.
posted by Mchelly at 1:45 PM on April 12, 2016 [8 favorites]


This article just may be the out I've been looking for, thank you! I've been trying to find a really gentle way of explaining this to my boyfriend's roommate, who pounces on me every time she sees me, begging me to come with her to her pole-dancing classes. "You feel so empowered," she tells me every time. Ah, so that's why she feels the need to mention it loudly every time we bring a male guest over. Because it's freeing you from pandering to the male gaze.

Sad face :(
posted by Mooseli at 1:58 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]


Mooseli, you might enjoy this, too: Choice feminism isn't a choice. "If there are only a handful of options available to you, then it's damn fortunate if you like one, but that doesn't make it OK that there aren't more. If your favorite pastimes are dieting, getting shiny hair, and having your legs looked at, hallelujah: You will receive plenty of support in doing the things you like best. But liking your limited options doesn't mean your choice is free. It's still constrained -- you just happen to be lucky."
posted by amnesia and magnets at 2:21 PM on April 12, 2016 [12 favorites]


Advertising is part of the culture.

It sure is. The part that gets shoved down our throats at every opportunity.
posted by telstar at 3:04 PM on April 12, 2016


« Older "I've gone through my whole life trying to avoid...   |   Great Blacks In Wax Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments