Each time we discuss feminism(s), we are drawn back to the two schools of thought: The Essentialists (Cixous) vs. The Not-Essentialists (de Beauvoir, Kolodny, Kristeva, etc). The Big Question: are there qualities that are essentially male or female, or are all gender roles socially constructed (and, many argue, oppressive)?
Which, naturally, made me think about Demi Moore.
Specifically, it made me think of the iconic head shaving scene from Moore's movie G.I. Jane (From about 1:15-3:00 in this video). This, to me, encapsulates these two sides of the feminist argument.
The Non-Essentialists: This is great! This scene represents the whole theme of the movie: she's defying traditional gender stereotypes to show that she can be just as athletic, strategic, and strong as men. In shaving off her hair, she's symbolically taking away all of the (oppressive) roles that have been forced upon her and is free to reach the same level of potential as her male counterparts. (This is the general opinion of the women in the film, and seems to be the intended reaction from the movie).
The Essentialists: But why is this a good thing? This scene (which does represent the whole film) is about how she becomes more successful by becoming more male. Success, in this film, is defined as "doing what boys can do," and if she succeeds in the end, she has only succeeded in playing in a man's game. If femininity is also a man's game, she hasn't really gained anything at all. Defying womanhood is not the same as becoming less oppressed.
Thoughts?
Amy,
ReplyDeleteSome would think that Demi is "un-sexing" herself in this scene, but she flashes so much skin (including her scalp), that I think the essentialists are right, in this case.