#PostFeminism

[yssjj]

erasing meaning from gangnam style

Since we’re an Asian-interest magazine, I’m going to assume that you know what K-pop is, if you aren’t vaguely familiar with it. Living through the 2000s has been a very exciting time for Korean identities in the mainstream. One could sense the time dependence of my identity in the US; in elementary school, I mostly interfaced with the American joke wondering if I had come from the North or South, which failed to consider that all of my grandparents had come from the North, and would never see their family or friends again due to US intervention. But by high school, my fortunes had turned around! At this point, we were being accosted in Marshalls by well-meaning parents who wanted to ask us about BTS because their daughter looooved K-pop, which raised another question: how did they know we were Korean in a primarily Chinese community? 

But regardless of my personal bitterness, it’s important (to me) to consider how this happened. And it was a gradual change, to some extent, but really a large paradigm shift happened to change the visibility of the Korean identity in the US, around when I was in 6th grade. K-pop at this point had been what my other Korean friend and I watched on old YouTube during playdates for her to fangirl over, and for me to vaguely stare off into. It’s not like K-pop hadn’t had any international success, but it felt limited to the Korean-American diaspora and niche internet communities. “Gee” by Girls Generation is a song I would like to argue really first crossed the border into mainstream success, but I think that’s wishful thinking for an iconic song I happen to like (seriously, go watch it). 

I don’t think it would be a controversial statement to say that “Gangnam Style'' was a really big deal. Statistically speaking, it topped iTunes charts in 31 different countries, it was the first video with a billion views, and it’s still the 11th most watched video on YouTube. But I’m sure just mentioning it brought you back to whatever you were doing while I was arguing about how stupid Harry Styles and Call of Duty were (I wasn’t a particularly critical-thinking middle schooler). Gangnam style was all over the radio, blessing my 7 a.m. rides to school in my mom’s Corolla, and I’d climb back onto my main after-school activity of the desktop computer to see the thumbnail on YouTube before clicking away and watching two very large buff men put together a mega burger made out of bacon instead.

Not that I had a global perspective of things at the time, but what was interesting about the virality of “Gangnam Style” is that it seemed to originate from completely different reasons across the US and its original target audience in Korea. I sensed this as one does through the American cultural hegemony, another middle schooler friend, who confided to me that it was great that Korea would be seen in such a positive light thanks to “Gangnam Style”. I wasn’t sure. I felt a little uneasy knowing that my cultural diplomat was PSY freaking out over a lady’s ass. 

“It’s awesome,” the guy who oversaw our after-school pick-up told me. 

“Did you know,” I said, pausing my round of Touhou 7 that I would bring in on a USB, “that it’s actually about capitalist critique?” I had learned this after Googling the lyrics because it felt a little rude to not know what a song in my own language meant. I wasn’t 100% sure what that meant, either, but they were words I knew went together according to Tumblr. 

The entire video, really, made me a little nervous. Who was I in the eyes of others at school? PSY? Who even was he?

I didn’t really want to be associated with this goofy Korean man who wasn’t very handsome. I wanted to be taken seriously.

We can chalk this up to the nervous identity crisis and desire for acceptance of any middle schooler, but this difference in understanding “Gangnam Style” wasn’t just personal, but a symptom of cultural differences. Not just cultural differences, but a refusal to translate or understand the spectacle of Korean messaging in the US. We can look at this with post-feminist theory as well as the pervasive use of ironic justification in the 2000s-2010s.

Background history

In Korea, PSY was already known for being a runaway success, starting as an underground artist who began to produce hit after hit, starting in 2001 with the success of his first full-length album because of his non-traditional styling (compared to the extremely polished and conventionally attractive looks of K-pop groups), use of comedic lyrics, as well as vulgar lyrics criticizing Korean society. So “Gangnam Style” wasn’t a far departure from that. 

The lyrics of “Gangnam Style” feature a guy who describes himself as “macho” and wants a girl who “looks quiet but parties hard when she goes to party,” or is “sexier covered up than a girl who is scantily dressed.” This narrator’s thoughts lean into the post-feminist sexism of the idea of a “girl who isn’t like other girls,” but PSY openly mocks the narrator’s preferences through the narrator’s parallel ideas on his own looks and perceived attractive features. This narrator brags that he also “can get crazy passionate” and “has bulging brains instead of bulging muscles.” While not necessarily as applicable in the Korean feminist scene during this time period, in the US this can be understood as the attempt to validate “alternative masculinities” that are not based on the traditions of physical power, but instead “intelligence” that became popular in the 2000s and 2010s. 

The hook, “Oppa Gangnam style,” can be understood as the narrator calling himself a cool guy from the Gangnam district, which can be thought of as posturing that you’re from a rich, high-culture district. The classical comparison is to Beverly Hills, but you can also think of people who brag about going to Harvard, being snotty about New York City, or so on. It mocks the idea of constructed masculinity through materialistic attempts at class mobility with commercial goods (the Mercedes car) and images of lifestyle (lounging at a “beach,” going to high-end spas) by showing these as tasteless, corny, and crass. “Gangnam Style” critiques the materialistic culture of Korean youths, who aspire to come off as rich and upper class through elegance and “taste.” But PSY lampoons this through an overtly corny music video that claims that he is portraying these “elegant” people who ultimately are chasing after masculine ideals of being considered attractive and meeting women who are feminine ideals in aesthetics. These men treat women like objects because they believe that they can achieve their masculinity through materialism and class.

But how many Americans know that “Gangnam Style” is a satirical critique of Korean materialism?

At the risk of being unfair, my two examples certainly didn’t know. Most other K-pop music videos have English captions, including the videos that were released before “Gangnam Style” caused a huge growth in interest in the genre. But “Gangnam Style,” 10 years after it’s been released, still has no translations on the video itself. Which seems strange since so much of the music video is guided by the lyrics. If the lyrics are lost on the American audience, where does the international appeal come from?

International Appeal

The answer is that the themes behind the lyrics were never part of the appeal. Most of the appeal comes from the music video. T-Pain tweeted, “words cannot even describe how amazing this video is...”, which is directly linked to the skyrocketing popularity of the video as news sites began to cover it. So the virality of “Gangnam Style” in the US must be studied through the lens of pleasure removed almost completely from the lyrics. Taking the music video at face value, then, we can get a different reading using post-feminist themes of irony, the choice of objectification, masculinities, as well as the construction of the consumer through advertising and sexuality.

The positive response to “Gangnam Style” has generally been attributed to the absurdist nature of the scenes in the video, as well as the dance itself. The Washington Post claimed that “'Gangnam Style' has made an extraordinarily stupid-looking dance move suddenly cool,” ignoring the fact that the dance was chosen to look stupid in the first place.

The Sydney Morning Herald claimed that the video “makes no sense at all to most Western eyes" and it "makes you wonder if you have accidentally taken someone else's medication."

The deliberate removal of meaning from the video is reminiscent of Adorno’s concept of the culture industry. The video loses the power of “psychology” over the “structure” of the music video. The Western viewers thus avoid the confrontation of culture in the music video by brushing the visual themes aside as “meaningless.” So it becomes “uncritical fun” and viewers can thus transcend the need to even know the lyrics. There is a racial aspect to this as well—the Korean-focused message is brushed aside since it “makes no sense at all” to a Westerner. So the minority Korean message is subjugated and destroyed, made invisible by mocking the silly Asian man doing his silly dance. In this way it becomes pleasurable to an audience that may otherwise be alienated by its themes.

Another way “Gangnam Style'' is understood in the US is through sexuality, as advertisements and other video forms have already created this sexualized “set of images.” It is likened to LMFAO, probably in reference to “Sexy and I Know It” for their satire of the grandstanding of masculinity. But LMFAO creates satire through the focus on male genitalia and body humor. The comparison of “Sexy and I Know It” can be understood by “Gangnam Style'' being seen as a video about a satire on male sexuality instead of consumerism, with American viewers focusing on the nudity and Noh Hongchul’s pelvic-thrusting dance. The latter dance is actually a trademark of Noh Hongchul’s comedy acts, but the American audience doesn’t know this, and thus interprets it in the language of images they are familiar with. As Sut Jhally puts it in “Advertising, Gender and Sex: What’s Wrong with a Little Objectification?”, the viewers are informed through the “system of images'' that are present in American society, and also happen to be obsessed with “gender and sexuality.” The one English lyric in the song is “Hey, sexy lady”—which adds to this perception and leads to a later ironic reading of other scenes where women are sexualized.

So of course there is no closed captioning—PSY understands the appeal for American audiences includes taking the lyrics as nonsensical and meaningless.

Another distinctly American reading occurs for the objectification of women, notably the yoga lady image that became the icon of “Gangnam Style.” With the context of the lyrics, it’s clear that this is a direct critique of the sleazy nature that comes from commodifying women. The women present in the music video are also traditionally beautiful, with the woman who seems to be interested in PSY in the music video being an idol herself. Without the context of the lyrics that deconstruct the delusion of a romantic, classy lifestyle where women only have value from being traditionally beautiful, however, this scene is transformed into the post-feminist “irony” that Rosalind Gill talks about in her paper “Postfeminist Media Culture.” American viewers thus participate in the sexualization of these women by the constructed “silliness” of the music video. By making “Gangnam Style” absurdist and bereft of meaning, PSY’s yoga lady scene is seen as “funny” and “subversive” towards sexism, even though the original critique is on materialism and commodification.

The real absurdity is the American response to “Gangnam Style” as a force to “understand Korea” in the US by Obama, and even as a way to hail world peace by the UN.

Even Noam Chomsky was part of an MIT parody of “Gangnam Style,” partaking in “mindless fun.” I felt a little disturbed at the time that this might be the image of Korea constructed for the American mind as actual interest in the culture was swept away by the exaltation of the video as nonsensical and meaningless. As a 6th grader, this wasn’t how I framed it to myself, but the way the Western viewpoint became dominant over the original meanings of the video signaled to me that my Korean experience would become destroyed and overwritten by the white, American viewpoint. The post-feminist mindset also created a post-racial mindset where irony was used to mock other cultures, setting a white gaze in media much like the male gaze asserted by Laura Mulvey in “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” That’s why so many TV shows were able to partake in blackface (like The Office and 30 Rock, just to name a few) and take pleasure in unashamed racial violence—to the white gaze, it is funny, because the original meaning of racial violence can be stripped away.

 

References

Gill, Rosalind. “Postfeminist Sexual Culture.” The Routledge Companion to Media & Gender, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203066911.ch54.

Horkheimer, Max, et al. Dialectic of Enlightenment. Stanford University Press, 2020.

Jhally, Sut. “Advertising, Gender and Sex: What's Wrong with a Little Objectification?” (1989).

Mulvey, Laura. Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. 1999.

[gisidaronta]

The "men and women are different but equal" narrative is used to forget that men and women are diverse in their preferred gender expressions, that hundreds of millions of men are not masculine and hundreds of millions of women are not feminine. The diversity of men in preferred gender expressions is primarily silenced.

[augustjjane]

Feminist analyses of women’s work alienates and others patriarchy in a way that is necessary to any possible movement through the feminist sphere. Without this analysis, it becomes impossible to locate harm and its roots within the pervasive misogynist culture, leading to a stagnation of feminist action. Without thinking, we cannot act. So we must think, and continue to think, using a feminist mode.

from my substack post the thought gap <3

[bwhitex]

Metamodernism in US: Analysis of Our Future too

The cultural and philosophical landscape of the United States is it a crossroad, where the potential for change could embrace a Meta modern ethos. But first, what is meant by Meta modern ethos? What is Meta modern?

Metamodernism is a cultural approach that oscillates between modern optimism and postmodern skepticism, striving to reconcile a longing for universal truths with an acceptance of their complexity.

In contrast to postmodernism's irony and doubt, metamodernism seeks to re-engage with hope, sincerity, and a quest for meaning, albeit while recognizing the fragmented nature of reality.

In today's metamodern world, we see a blending of earnestness and irony across culture, politics, and social attitudes, reflecting a desire for authenticity and progress amidst ongoing uncertainty and diverse perspectives. Postmodernism does not have a clear end year, as cultural movements transition gradually. However, discussions of a shift toward metamodernism began to emerge in the early 21st century, particularly around the 2010s.

Introduction

Meta modernism, with its interplay of progression and skepticism, offers a framework through which to view the complexity of American society. This lens encourages the integration of diverse and often conflicting perspectives, fostering a dialogue that seeks not only to understand but to synthesize and transcend these differences. By exploring how metamodernism might manifest in the U.S., this discussion aims to illuminate the possibilities for a future that acknowledges the value in every aspect of its cultural fabric. As we delve into the various manifestations of metamodernism, it becomes imperative to consider how they might shape the American narrative, enriching the collective identity and guiding the nation towards a more cohesive and adaptable society.

Religious Atheism

Religious Atheism represents a metamodern synthesis that could redefine the American spiritual landscape. By fusing the communal benefits of religious practice with a secular, scientific worldview, this movement has the potential to create a new form of community that resonates with the increasingly non-religious population. In a society where the number of individuals identifying as non-religious continues to rise, the emergence of secular organizations that provide the same sense of belonging and moral framework as traditional religious institutions could address a growing need (Zuckerman, Galen, & Pasquale, 2016). Such organizations might incorporate elements of religious ritual and fellowship without invoking the supernatural, thereby offering a meaningful alternative for those seeking existential comfort and ethical guidance in a secular context. As this movement grows, it could challenge the dichotomy between religiosity and atheism, fostering an environment where spiritual fulfillment and rational thought are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary.

According to Dr Charles William Dailey's analysis though, in his work called “The Psychology of the Anti-Trumpian: Part 1 breaks down the anti-Trump movement's behavior and ideology into several key points. As there is evidence of a purity cult framework. The anti-Trump group is likened to a purity cult, where members are expected to strictly follow a set of doctrines that define their collective identity. This binary moral system labels those who conform as 'pure' and those who don't as 'impure' or morally corrupt.

They use the projection of white supremacy as a tool validate their behavior. The group projects the issue of white supremacy onto Trump and his supporters. Dailey implies that the anti-Trump movement's focus on accusations of racism and extremism against Trump serves as a mechanism to validate their own identity and narrative.

There’s a cult like obsession with race and class. The movement fixates on race and class, demonizing Trump as the embodiment of what they oppose: wealth, Northern European heritage, and assertiveness. These characteristics are seen as the antithesis of the progressive ideals the anti-Trump group champions. The extreme focus on anti-racism within the group is compared to a religious doctrine, becoming the central tenet of their belief system. This singular focus could lead to the group's identity crisis if the perceived threat of Trump's influence is removed. The use of dehumanizing language, as seen in Clinton's "deplorables" comment, is a tactic to reinforce the group's ideology. It serves to shame and marginalize those outside their ideological bounds, akin to propaganda methods that dehumanize opponents to maintain ideological dominance.

The anti-Trump movement, is a secular form of religion, and it is portrayed as a secular religion with its own set of beliefs and rituals too. This includes the demonization of Trump and his supporters as heretics or 'non-believers' of the movement's ideology.

It’s a cult, born through intergenerational social conditioning in public schools and academia and it’s centered around regressive forms of collective identity and control. By employing these elements, the movement creates a strong collective identity. This identity is used to exert control and maintain influence within its social and political sphere.

Dailey's portrayal suggests that the anti-Trump movement operates with a level of fervor and organizational structure similar to that of a religious or cult-like group, using ideological purity, demonization of the 'other,' and a strong collective identity to sustain itself and its objectives.

There’s one more, religious atheism, environmentalism. The US is still religious. People believe in eco-revaluations and ecological stewardship. This brand of religious atheism, called environmentalism, and in simpler terms, there's a movement where people are rethinking how we should take care of the environment. They're not religious in the traditional sense because they don't believe in a god. Instead, their "religion" is the environment itself. They have a deep respect for nature and feel strongly about protecting it.

These folks might not pray or go to a traditional church, but they still have a kind of spiritual connection to the Earth. They treat the planet as sacred and believe we all have a responsibility to look after it. This way of thinking takes cues from different ideas out there, like deep ecology, which says nature has rights just like people do, and secular humanism, which is all about focusing on human values without involving religion.

So, even though they don't follow a god, these people are passionate about green issues and believe it's up to us to make sure the planet stays healthy for everyone and everything living on it. But they do believe the world will have apocalyptic reckoning, and will infact “end”, if you don’t do what they say.

Extreme Liberalism with Monastic Discipline

The confluence of Extreme Liberalism with Monastic Discipline signals, and desire for the development of a new form of progressive community within the United States. This integration marries the ideals of freedom and social justice with the virtues of self-regulation and community responsibility. The resulting communities may resemble eco-villages or urban collectives that prioritize environmental sustainability and social equity while maintaining a structured and disciplined lifestyle. Such models could offer a practical response to the challenges of climate change and social inequality, demonstrating the feasibility of a lifestyle that is both ethically conscious and personally fulfilling (Klein, 2014). By embracing this dual commitment, Americans could create living spaces that exemplify the balance between individual liberty and collective well-being, providing a template for sustainable development that aligns with the core values of freedom and equality.

Now, let us consider a groundbreaking innovation that might be at the heart of such communities: smart concrete. This is not the gray, lifeless substance we walk upon indifferently. This is a material reimagined, a composite that heals its own wounds and whispers its state of being to those who can interpret its signals. Smart concrete represents the bleeding edge of building materials, infused with technology that allows it to self-repair when it cracks, thanks to embedded bacteria or fibers that fill in the gaps (Shaikh, 2020). Buildings and structures become more resilient, long-lasting, and environmentally friendly as a result of this self-healing property, which reduces the need for repairs and maintenance.

But there's a twist in this modern tale. The sensors within smart concrete, which enable it to communicate structural health, could also serve as a network for surveillance. These sensors could monitor the movements of people, gauge how many individuals are present in an area, and potentially even listen in. It's a dual-use technology that could transform our eco-villages into monitored landscapes.

Imagine a community that's a beacon of freedom and responsibility, all while being under the watchful eye of state-of-the-art technology. Picture eco-villages where smart concrete not only heals itself but also has the ability to track the comings and goings of every resident (Shaikh, 2020). It's a bold blend of Extreme Liberalism with Monastic Discipline, but with an added twist: the ever-present gaze of surveillance.

These aren't just communities; they're potential hubs of monitoring, where every step towards sustainability and social equality is matched with a step towards increased observation. And here's the kicker: this vision is backed by funding from China's Green New Deal, a strategic move that could make the U.S. reliant on foreign technology for its eco-dreams.

To build. These eco-villages. They would use what is called “self healing concrete”. Sounds a little sci-fi but the self-healing concrete is a type of concrete that can automatically repair its cracks without human intervention, extending its lifespan and reducing maintenance. It typically incorporates bacteria that produce limestone to fill in cracks or uses embedded chemicals that react to form solid compounds when exposed to water or air. This innovative concrete enhances durability, sustainability, and safety in construction.

The self-repairing concrete, while a marvel of engineering, is also double whammy too, it tracks people and stares their data. It’s no ordinary concrete too. It serves as a network of sensors, creating a digital panopticon that knows your every move. This dual nature raises questions about the trade-offs between innovation and privacy, freedom, and control (Klein, 2014). The very materials that make up these progressive communities could serve a dual purpose—not only to uphold the community's infrastructure but also to uphold a system of surveillance that could be seen as a form of authoritarianism dressed in the garb of Extreme Liberalism.

This approach to community living promises a future where the balance between individual liberty and collective security is constantly negotiated. As these eco-villages strive to be models of sustainable development, they also reflect a new socio-political reality—one where the line between being watched over for safety and being watched for control becomes increasingly blurred.

The implications of such a model are profound. By relying on technology that could make the U.S. dependent on China, there are geopolitical and ethical considerations at play. How much of this is about creating a sustainable future, and how much is about creating a new sphere of influence under the guise of environmental stewardship?

As these eco-villages emerge, they may indeed offer a compelling template for development. Still, they also serve as a cautionary tale about the complexities of intertwining cutting-edge technology with societal values, where the promise of utopia comes with strings attached strings that could bind the very freedoms they aim to promote. The reality is that we already have the self healing concrete. It’s real, and it’s going to get used too.

Emergence of Audiotarianism

Audiotarianism suggests a metamodern approach to governance that could reshape the American political scene. This style of leadership emphasizes the importance of listening to the multitude of voices within the population while maintaining a firm commitment to clear policies and the rule of law. Such an approach could mitigate the polarization and gridlock that often characterize contemporary politics, fostering a more inclusive and effective decision-making process (Sunstein, 2018). Innovative civic engagement platforms will facilitate widespread participation, ensuring that policy reflects the diverse needs and concerns of the citizenry. By balancing the need for order with the imperative to hear and understand the populace, audiotarian leaders could guide the United States toward a more democratic and responsive political system that is equipped to address the complexities of modern governance.

Audiotarianism, as a proposed political philosophy, seeks to blend attentive listening with decisive governance. In theory, this philosophy would ensure that the voices of the people are heard and that policies are implemented in a manner that is both efficient and reflective of the public will. Key components of audiotarianism include a commitment to engaging with a diverse array of stakeholders, maintaining a clear and consistent policy framework, adhering to the rule of law, reducing political polarization, employing innovative tools for civic engagement, and fostering responsive decision-making (Sunstein, 2018).

However, when we contemplate a dystopian future where audiotarianism is perverted, the picture changes dramatically. In such a world, the government, which outwardly commits to listening to its citizens, might instead use this as a pretext for enforcing authoritarian control. The mechanisms designed to facilitate public input could be manipulated to suppress dissent and maintain power. Policies might be applied selectively to benefit those aligned with the ruling ideology and silence opposition. Divisions within society could be exacerbated by the state to justify increased control, and civic engagement platforms might serve as tools for surveillance rather than genuine dialogue.

In this distorted reality, the appearance of inclusive decision-making is upheld, but real choices are made by a powerful few whose decisions are insulated from public influence. The result is a society where democratic participation becomes a hollow exercise, and the principles of audiotarianism are used to legitimize a regime that stifles freedom under the guise of order and responsiveness.

This dark scenario serves as a cautionary tale about the potential for any political philosophy, no matter how well-intentioned, to be twisted by those who seek to consolidate power at the expense of democratic ideals and individual rights. It underscores the importance of vigilance in preserving the balance between listening to the public and maintaining the integrity of governance processes (Sunstein, 2018).

Postfeminism Married to Neomasculinism

The integration of Postfeminism with Neomasculinism represents a metamodern reimagining of gender roles in American society. This synthesis acknowledges the constraints that traditional gender norms impose on both men and women, striving for a redefinition of these roles that empowers all individuals. Such an approach will foster a culture that values gender equality not just in terms of opportunities but also in the freedom to express identity beyond prescribed norms (Halberstam, 2018). As society moves toward this integrated perspective, it comes with the emergence of policies and practices that support a more fluid understanding of gender, and eventually the dismantle the binary in favor of a spectrum that accommodates diverse expressions of identity. In doing so, the United States has led the way in creating a more inclusive world where each person has the space to define and pursue their own version of fulfillment without the limitations of outdated gender expectations.

But could this be dystopian future, where the marriage between postfeminism and neomasculinism presents a nuanced fabric of societal dynamics where the intent for gender balance could ironically cement traditional power structures, all under the bright banner of equality and empowerment? If so, such a world might show gestures toward gender fluidity and parity; however, the lived experience could starkly contrast with these ideals. The state's proclamations of gender equality might exist while simultaneously benefiting those adhering to age-old gender scripts. Women, though outwardly spurred to climb professional ladders and fill leadership voids, could still bump against invisible barriers and disparities in compensation. Men, on the other hand, might receive nominal acceptance to show vulnerability, yet find themselves on the fringes of society for doing so.

Media narratives have painted this evolving gender dynamic as forward-thinking but might also play a role in exploiting and packaging femininity and masculinity in such a way that it ultimately cycles back to entrench stereotypical images. Women, for instance, who tap into traditionally masculine qualities might find the spotlight, but only insofar as their images can be monetized to fuel a consuming public.

Legal reforms are touted as strides toward gender equality but might be riddled with gaps that ensure the persistence of the old guard. Policies like family leave might be universally promoted, yet the tug-of-war between societal expectations and financial motivations could steer individuals back into conventional familial roles.

Technological advancements have become instruments for scrutinizing and nudging people toward sanctioned gender expressions. Algorithms on social media platforms might prioritize and proliferate conventional gender portrayals, sidelining those who dare to diverge by making them less visible or even subject to censorship.

Masculinity and femininity has undergone a rebranding where neomasculinism clings to notions of dominance and competitive spirit as laudable traits, whereas postfeminism might hijack feminist discourse to declare a premature victory in the fight for equality, thereby stalling genuine progress towards fair treatment.

In today's world, this dystopian scenario has not fully taken shape, but certain indicators could be harbingers of such an outcome. The commodification of empowerment is apparent in marketing strategies that exploit feminist and masculine motifs without ushering in substantive transformation. There is resistance against the tide of gender equality movements, with some cohorts using equality rhetoric to challenge feminist advancements or to champion traditional gender norms. Government policies might seem to champion gender equality on the surface yet fall short in grappling with entrenched issues like the gender wage gap or equitable representation in spheres of influence.

The real test is to navigate the integration of postfeminism and neomasculinism without inadvertently replicating or bolstering existing inequalities. It demands unrelenting scrutiny to confirm that policy and social evolution genuinely embrace inclusivity and foster a variety of gender expressions, steering clear of unintentionally establishing new modes of oppression.

Radical Conservatism

Radical Conservatism, as a potential negative manifestation of metamodernism, warns of the dangers inherent in an uncritical blending of ideas. This extreme stance could hinder the United States' ability to adapt to changing circumstances, impeding innovation and progress (Mudde, 2017). A rigid adherence to traditional values and an unwavering resistance to change could exacerbate social divisions, leaving little room for the kind of flexible thinking that complex modern challenges require. In an era where social needs are evolving rapidly, a radical conservative approach might neglect the emerging issues that demand attention, such as climate change, technological disruption, and shifting demographics. To avoid the pitfalls of such an uncompromising ideology, American society must strive to maintaina balance between preserving beneficial traditions and embracing necessary change.

And as the United States navigates the complexities of the 21st century, the political landscape is ripe for transformation. The emergence of new political movements reflects a society in flux, grappling with rapid technological change, environmental challenges, and shifts in cultural values. There are some of the movements that could shape the future of American politics.

For example building on historical principles reminiscent of the Republican Party's emphasis on traditional values, Radical Conservatism in the metamodern future would advocate for a revival of cultural homogeneity and national identity, echoing past sentiments while confronting the perils of modernity and postmodernity. This movement would grapple with integrating the necessity to address environmental concerns, perhaps a nod towards elements of the Green New Deal, while striving to maintain the social fabric against the tides of globalization.

The Progressive Techno-Optimism movement could capture the spirit of the Democratic Party's progressive wing, placing faith in technological solutions to societal issues. This movement would likely embrace artificial intelligence and biotechnology, pushing for a future where digital democracy and renewable energy are cornerstones of national policy, reminiscent of the technological optimism found within the American Technocracy Movement.

Within the Democratic Party's increasing recognition of climate change, the Ecosocialist Renewal movement would take this to new heights, intertwining ecological sustainability with socialist ideals. This movement might advocate for reforms that reflect the urgency seen in the Green Progressives Party, pushing for community ownership of energy and a restructuring of the economy to prioritize the planet and people over profit.

The New Federalists could draw inspiration from the Liberty Union Party's libertarian values, championing states' rights and local governance. This movement would advocate for a reimagined federal system that allows for more nuanced and tailored approaches to governance, resonating with those who seek to decentralize power and promote autonomy. With a mission to rebuild trust in public institutions and emphasize civic responsibility, the Civic Renaissance movement would focus on education and community involvement. This movement might find common ground with historical efforts by both the Democraticand Republican Parties to promote civic education, aiming to forge a united and informed citizenry.

The Transhumanist Expansion movement would go beyond traditional party lines, exploring the ethical and policy implications of human enhancement and the integration of humans and machines. This movement might intersect with the concerns of the Cybersecurity and Privacy Alliance, as both grapple with the implications of technology on society and individual rights.

Then there is the Intergenerational Justice League that may emerge as advocates for future generations, ensuring that policy decisions today do not jeopardize tomorrow. This movement would reflect a synthesis of concerns from various parties, focusing on sustainable policies that address long-term issues like climate change, national debt, and social security.

Each of these futuristic movements showcases a unique response to the evolving challenges of our times, suggesting that the political landscape is not static but a living tapestry of ideas and ideologies. As they draw from and react to established parties and movements, these new movements would contribute to the dynamic interplay of governance, culture, and technology will redefine American political life.

Scientific Racism Re-Emerging

The concept of Scientific Racism serves as a stark reminder of the misuse of scientific inquiry to justify social inequalities and maintain power structures (Saini, 2019). Despite advancements in understanding the human genome and the debunking of race as a biological reality, the legacy of this ideology lingers, influencing policies and social attitudes. In promoting a metamodern future, the United States must remain vigilant against the resurgence of such pseudoscientific beliefs. Engaging in critical examination of research methodologies and ensuring that science serves the cause of equality rather than discrimination will be crucial in dismantling the remnants of scientific racism. Education and public discourse that elevate the value of diversity and inclusivity will be central to this effort, challenging the narratives that have historically marginalized certain groups.

One example of the re-emergent of scientific racism, and ironically has come under the guise of being a real “scientific” theory too, is Critical Race Theory (CRT). Which has people in the US, religiously believing it and applying it too. One the best examples of CRT being pseudoscientific theory is that it is based on time, location and era, and that time location and era, has passed. CRT, like other scientific racism of the past, uses race as a central, immutable category to explain social inequalities and outcomes, which some perceive as a reductionist and essentialist view. The argument contends that, by focusing on race as the predominant factor in societal issues, CRT may inadvertently reinforce the same racial categorizations that it seeks to critique.

Scientific racism was historically marked by its use of purportedly empirical methods to justify racial discrimination and hierarchy, often by suggesting that certain races were inherently superior or inferior in terms of intelligence, morality, or other characteristics. While CRT does not posit inherent racial differences as scientific racism did, critics argue that it still places race at the forefront of discourse in a way that could perpetuate division.

Moreover, CRT can be compared to pseudoscience because, it operates with a set of assumptions that are not always subject to rigorous empirical testing or falsifiability. This is a key criterion for scientific inquiry. The theory was founded by feminist examining material like the color of bandaids. CRT often relies on anecdotal evidence and narrative rather than on quantifiable data, which could lead to generalizations and assertions that are difficult to challenge or disprove.

It is also argued that the concept of white privilege, as it is often presented, lacks the nuance necessary to account for the complex interplay of socioeconomic status, geography, education, and individual agency. It can be asserted that white privilege, is an egoistical concept, that appeals to the prejudices of people of color, and becomes a concept for white people to form hierarchies over one another, and weaponizing the feelings of people of color against other white people, as well. This egotistical concept also simplifies the complexities of privilege into a single dimension of race, thereby excluding other factors that contribute to social inequities.

From this perspective, the emphasis on systemic racism and white privilege is critiqued for potentially leading to a form of reverse racism, where individuals of a particular racial group are collectively assigned blame or moral responsibility for historical and systemic injustices. Critics worry that this could create a sense of guilt by association, rather than fostering individual accountability and agency.

In summary, the critique of CRT as pseudoscientific and racist is rooted in the concern that it may oversimplify the complexity of social issues by overemphasizing race, potentially leading to division and reverse discrimination rather than fostering understanding and reconciliation.

The re-emergence of National Socialism

The historical example of National Socialism, with its catastrophic consequences, exemplifies the dire results of combining nationalism with socialism under a totalitarian regime (Kershaw, 2000). The metamodern lens urges caution in the synthesis of opposing ideologies, advocating for a nuanced approach that prevents the slide into authoritarianism. As the United States contemplates its future trajectory, it may need to ensure that the pursuit of national unity and social welfare does not come at the expense of individual liberties and democratic principles. The challenge will be to create policies that foster a sense of collective identity and support a robust social safety net while upholding the rights and freedoms that are the bedrock of American democracy. A form of Civic National Socialism, The term "Civic Nationalism" is a concept that refers to a form of nationalism that is inclusive and focused on equal rights, unity, and civic duty among all citizens regardless of their ethnic backgrounds. It stands in contrast to "Ethnic Nationalism," which defines nationhood in terms of ethnicity and often excludes certain groups.

In this world, the United States is evolving towards an ideology called, civic national socialism, and it’s mostly and unconscious chose too. As the US becomes indebted, a surging state then becomes nationalistic, or it faces extinction. As a response it indebted its citizen with socialist ideologies, and natural outcomes then, is both. Being that this is a natural out come of public discourse and conditioning, the nation seeing itself straddling, in debt and indebted its own citizens in student loans, with interest rates enough to counter some of this debt and in the face a delicate balance between heightened state involvement in economic and social affairs and a renewed emphasis on civic duty and national identity. The values of the country would ostensibly be centered around the collective well-being of its citizens, with policies aimed at ensuring social security and economic equity.

If the United States government were to be personified as an individual in survival mode in response to the adoption of "civic national socialism," the psyche of this entity might be characterized by several distinct survival instincts. Meaning, just as a person in survival mode might become more guarded and protective, the U.S. government might adopt a defensive stance against external and internal threats. This could manifest as increased security measures, a focus on self-reliance, and an emphasis on protecting national interests.

The US may evolve towards governing on what is called the scarcity mindset. The looming debt crisis could cause the government to operate from a scarcity mindset, prioritizing the allocation of resources and perhaps rationing social services to ensure long-term sustainability. Economic policies might become more conservative, with a focus on reducing waste and increasing efficiency.

Adaptability, in survival mode, adaptability is crucial. But maladaptiveity is the highest likelihood of outcomeand likeliest outcome. The government might become more willing to experiment with new policies and social programs that align with the "civic national socialism" ideology, even if these represent a significant departure from traditional American principles and values in policies.

The US may evolve to become a system of governance that is hyper-vigilance, and much like a person who is constantly on the lookout for danger, the government might become hyper-vigilant, closely monitoring both the global stage and domestic affairs to preempt challenges before they fully manifest. Hyper-viligilant, is actually “hyper sensitivity” in behavior too. The government will become

Increasingly sensitive to criticism, as it faces two existential crisis, one within through revolt and without through invasion for debts owed. Using “equity”, as the excuse.

The government’s ability to be resourceful, most likely will become a weapon against “we the people”, too. The government is likely become more resourceful, in ways to collect debt, or prevent an existential crisis too. By finding innovative ways to reduce debt and generate revenue, possibly through restructuring student loans or other debt instruments in a manner that could also serve to bolster national identity and civic responsibility too.

At some point the nation will be in self-preservation mode. At its core, a person in survival mode is focused on self-preservation. For the government, this would mean ensuring the continuity of the state and its institutions, even if it requires drastic measures that may alter the fabric of society. Resilience is key to surviving any crisis. The government would strive to bounce back from setbacks, perhaps drawing on a sense of historical resilience and the collective will of its people.

In this state of mind, the government might exhibit a mix of anxiety and resolve, constantly balancing the need to respond to immediate crises with the imperative to plan for a sustainable future. The "civic national socialism" ideology might be embraced as a means to galvanize the population, forge a stronger sense of national unity, and create a narrative of collective effort and sacrifice for the greater good. What would that good be, though? Equity!

If an ideology like "civic national socialism" were to use the concept of equity as a pretext for authoritarian measures and to stifle criticism and evade accountability, it would represent a significant deviation from democratic principles. In such a scenario, the government might employ the following tactics:

The US will justify authoritarianism, there will be leadership that will argue that strong, centralized control is necessary to achieve equity and fairness for all citizens. This could be presented as a temporary measure needed to address systemic inequalities, but with the risk of becoming a permanent fixture of governance. Suppressing dissent, the US in order to maintain “social harmony” and to ensure equity, the government might crack down on dissenting voices online . Free speech and open debate becomes restricted under the guise of preventing hate speech, misgendering, misinformation, or anything deemed counterproductive to the collective goals. Control of information, the state might take steps to control the flow of information, framing it as a way to protect the public from harmful or divisive content. This could lead to censorship, propaganda, and the manipulation of media to maintain a favorable narratives.

The US, using the pretext of ensuring equitable outcomes and compliance with new social policies, the government might expand surveillance of its citizens, eroding privacy rights and justifying it as a necessary trade-off for the greater good. Limiting political opposition could be characterized as selfish or elitist, standing in the way of achieving equity for the masses. Political rivals might face legal or social barriers to their activities, with the state branding them as obstacles to progress.

Centralizing power, there will be an executive branch or central government might accumulate more power, undermining the checks and balances that typically hold a government accountable. This could be justified as streamlining decision-making to better address inequality.

Enforcing compliance, there will be us of law-fare, and laws and policies might be strictly enforced with harsh penalties for non-compliance, all in the name of preserving equitable outcomes. This could lead to an overbearing legal system that punishes minor infractions severely.

It is crucial to recognize that while the pursuit of equity sounds like a noble goal, using it as a shield for authoritarianism is a betrayal of the very principles of fairness and justice that equity stands for. When accountability is lost, and criticism is silenced, the risk of corruption and abuse of power increases dramatically. In a healthy society, equity should be pursued through transparent, accountable governance that respects the rule of law and the rights of all citizens to participate in the political process.

This shift would likely be driven by a desire for more social cohesion and unity, with the government taking a proactive role in addressing disparities and fostering a sense of common purpose among Americans. The political narrative would stress the importance of citizens actively participating in the betterment of their communities and the nation as a whole.

Economically, there might be a move away from laissez-faire capitalism towards more state-directed initiatives, possibly including the nationalization of certain industries, to protect them from global market fluctuations and to secure jobs for American workers.

The US will change culturally too. There could be a stronger push to define and promote what it means to be an American and it’s not “white black or brown, but all”, and beyond the lines of race, ethnicity, or religion, focusing instead on shared values and civic responsibilities.

Conformist Individualism

Conformist Individualism has manifested in our society as a superficial celebration of individuality that, paradoxically, enforces a narrow set of acceptable behaviors and expressions (Cushman, 1995). In the United States, where individualism is often touted as a core value, metamodernism invites reflection on the ways in which societal pressures may inadvertently stifle true self-expression. Embracing a more authentic version of individualism requires creating spaces where diversity in thought, identity, and lifestyle is genuinely valued and protected. By fostering an environment that encourages individuals to explore and embrace their unique paths without fear of social sanction, the U.S. can cultivate a culture that truly honors the diversity of its people.

In the modern context, metamodernism provides a lens through which we can examine this phenomenon. Metamodernism suggests a movement between and beyond the polarities of modernism and postmodernism, incorporating elements of both. It acknowledges the desire for sincere expression and the recognition of complexity, ambiguity, and the coexistence of multiple truths.

In exploring the intricacies of conformist individualism, it's fascinating to consider how the very pursuit of individuality can, quite paradoxically, steer us towards a collective norm. Take fashion, for instance. It's an avenue where people often express their distinctiveness, yet, curiously, this self-expression frequently aligns with current trends. There's a dance of sorts between showcasing one's personality and adhering to an aesthetic that's in vogue, which might inadvertently lead to a uniformity in appearance despite the intention to stand out.

This paradox extends into the digital realms of social media, where our online personas are meticulously crafted to project an image of our unique lives. The irony, however, lies in the underlying uniformity of these personas. The filtered snapshots of perfection, the carefully chosen hashtags, and the pursuit of viral content create a mosaic that, from a distance, reflects a singular picture of what individuality should look like online.

The professional sphere isn't immune to this phenomenon either. Success is often painted with a broad brushstroke that highlights wealth, status, and prestige. As people climb the proverbial ladder, they may inadvertently conform to a narrow, socially approved definition of what it means to be successful, potentially sidelining their personal values and unique aspirations in the process.

Consumerism, too, tugs at the strings of our desire to be unique. Advertisements whisper the promise that certain products will elevate our individuality, yet the end result is a homogenization of tastes and preferences. From the gadgets we use to the cars we drive, the quest for differentiation often leads to a convergence of choices among those who are likewise seeking to express their singularity.

Even our engagement with culture and spirituality can be touched by the hand of conformist individualism. There's a yearning to connect authentically with our roots or to embrace the exotic allure of foreign traditions. Yet, this yearning can be co-opted by a market that packages culture into digestible, purchasable experiences, diluting the profound depths of these traditions into a more palatable, and often stereotypical, form.

The concept of personal branding similarly illustrates this conundrum. In an effort to stand out, individuals may adopt prescribed strategies that promise distinction. But these strategies, being widely advocated as effective, can lead to a sameness in self-marketing, obscuring the nuanced facets of individual identities.

Education choices, too, are sometimes made with an eye on societal approval rather than personal passion. Degrees from prestigious institutions and fields deemed as successful are often pursued not for the love of the discipline but for the laurels they promise, inadvertently funneling a diverse population into a narrow corridor of educational and professional pursuits. Lastly, the health and fitness industry has not been spared from this phenomenon. The chase for an idealized body type or the optimal health routine, often marketed as a path to personal empowerment, can result in a uniform striving towards a one-size-fits-all standard of health and beauty. Thus, in each of these domains, the quest for individuality can sometimes lead us down a path that circles back to conformity. It's a subtle and often unintended journey where the destination of uniqueness is reached by paths well-trodden by others seeking the same.

There are four ways that Conformist Individualism and can intersect with the celebration of individuality in the United States. In a culture that promotes individualism, there is often a proliferation of messages encouraging people to "be themselves." However, these messages can come with implicit standards or ideals that, paradoxically, create a narrow scope of what is considered acceptable or desirable. This can lead to a homogenized version of individuality, where certain lifestyles, consumer choices, and behaviors are valorized as the "right" way to be unique.

The second thing Americans can do is manage the societal pressures and and embrace their true self-expression. Metamodernism encourages introspection about societal pressures that may limit genuine self-expression. While societal norms and cultural narratives can guide behavior, they may also suppress diversity in thought and identity. There's a recognition that while individualism is celebrated in theory, in practice, it can sometimes lead to conformity.

Another important thing that Americans can do to counter conformist individualism is by embracing their own authentic individualism. To move toward a more authentic version of individualism, society must create and maintain spaces where diversity is genuinely valued not just in theory but in action. This means protecting the rights of individuals to express their identities, thoughts, and lifestyles without fear of marginalization or punishment.m, without marginalizing them as oppressed or oppressor too.

Lastly, cultivating a diverse culture. By fostering an environment that supports individual exploration and acceptance, the U.S. can better honor the diversity of its people. This involves education, policy, and societal attitudes that not only tolerate but celebrate differences. It also means challenging the commercial and media-driven narratives that often dictate the terms of individuality.

In summary, Conformist Individualism as a concept highlights the contradiction between the celebration of individuality and the conformist pressures that exist within a society. Metamodernism, as a framework, invites individuals and societies to reflect on these contradictions and to strive for a balance that allows for true diversity and authentic self-expression.

Spiritual Materialism

Spiritual Materialism highlights the potential for commercialization to strip spiritual practices of their depth, reducing them to mere commodities or status symbols (Trungpa, 2002). In a consumer-driven society like the United States, there is a risk that the quest for spiritual growth could become entangled with material pursuits. Metamodernism advocates for a spirituality that transcends materialistic aims, seeking to enrich the inner lives of individuals without becoming another avenue for profit. Encouraging a culture that respects the sanctity of spiritual exploration and resists the temptation to commodify every aspect of human experience can lead to a more grounded and meaningful engagement with the transcendent aspects of life.

Spiritual Materialism, as articulated by Chögyam Trungpa, suggests that spirituality can be co-opted by ego-driven desires, leading to a practice that is more about self-aggrandizement and material gain than genuine spiritual development. This concept can be applied to various forms of identity pride, including gay and black pride, when considering the potential for these movements to become influenced by consumerism and commercial interests. In contemporary society, both gay pride and black pride have been embraced by corporate entities, especially during events like Pride Month and Black History Month. Although pride is an ego-driven celebration, quite literally, and these movements likely perpetuate different forms of collective narcissism. They have both been co-opted by consumerism and these two movements, how ever egotistical they may be, are also good examples of spiritual materialism too.

According to Bruce, K. (2016), in his work called "We Are All Royalty": Narrative comparison of a drag queen and king, Gay Pride, originally a movement that emerged from the struggle for LGBTQ+ rights and acceptance, gay pride has seen increasing commercialization. During Pride Month, a plethora of products and services adorned with rainbow motifs become available, and numerous companies participate in pride parades with branded floats. One could argue that this has led to a dilution of the movement's political and social objectives, replacing them with consumer-driven activities that prioritize profit over progress.

Instead of focusing on the ongoing struggles for equality, legal protections, and the fight against discrimination, the emphasis can sometimes shift toward buying and displaying products as a means of showing support. This form of engagement can be critiqued as a superficial replacement of the deeper values and goals of the gay pride movement.

According Weems, R. E., Jr. (2009), in Black business in the Black Metropolis: The Chicago Metropolitan Assurance Company, 1925-1985, he highlights that Black pride, being rooted in a history of resistance against systemic racism and the celebration of African American culture and heritage. However, to him there is an advent of commercial interest in black culture, there's a risk that the profound messages of empowerment and social justice are overshadowed by product lines, branding efforts, and marketing campaigns. This commercialization can be seen as reducing the rich tapestry of black history and resistance to a set of marketable symbols and slogans. While the intention may have been to honor black culture, the commercial aspect has sometimes come at the expense of the grassroots activism and community-building that are at the heart of black pride. When consumerism becomes the primary mode of engagement, it can supplant the transformative values of the movement with a transactional relationship between businesses and consumers.

In both cases, the core values of the movements equality, justice, and community empowerment, have been overshadowed by a focus on consumption and material displays of support. From the perspective of Spiritual Materialism, such a shift can be seen as a misalignment between the original spiritual or moral goals of these movements and the materialistic forms they can sometimes take in a consumer-driven culture.

Advocates for the integrity of these movements are calling for a return to the foundational principles that inspired them. This means emphasizing activism, education, and community support over commercial participation, and encouraging individuals to engage in ways that foster real change as opposed to purely symbolic acts of consumption. It's about ensuring that the pride and celebration of identity remain connected to the lived experiences and struggles of the communities they represent, rather than becoming commodified and stripped of their transformative potential.

Conclusion

To conclude, it’s through the lens of metamodernism, the United States has the opportunity to chart a course that is both forward looking and deeply rooted in the rich tapestry of its cultural history. By embracing the interplay of seemingly contradictory ideas and values, American society can navigate the complexities of the modern world with a sense of purpose and inclusivity. It is this synthesis of diversity, this ability to hold and work through tensions, that will enable the U.S. to evolve and thrive in the metamodern age. As we consider the various ways in which metamodernism might manifest, it is clear that the path ahead is one of engagement, reflection, and the constant pursuit of a more enlightened and harmonious society.

References:

Bruce, K. (2016). "We Are All Royalty": Narrative comparison of a drag queen and king. Journal of Homosexuality, 63(7), 937-955.

Weems, R. E., Jr. (2009). Black business in the Black Metropolis: The Chicago Metropolitan Assurance Company, 1925-1985. Indiana University Press.

Alexander, M. (2012). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press.

Coates, T. (2014). The Case for Reparations. The Atlantic.

Williams, D. R., & Mohammed, S. A. (2009). Discrimination and racial disparities in health: evidence and needed research. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 32(1), 20-47. DOI: 10.1007/s10865-008-9185-0

Zuckerman, P., Galen, L. W., & Pasquale, F. L. (2016). The Nonreligious: Understanding Secular People and Societies. Oxford University Press.

Klein, N. (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Simon & Schuster.

Sunstein, C. R. (2018). #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton University Press.

Halberstam, J. (2018). Female Masculinity. Duke University Press.

Mudde, C. (2017). The Far Right in America. Routledge.

Saini, A. (2019). Superior: The Return of Race Science. Beacon Press.

Kershaw, I. (2000). Hitler, 1936-1945: Nemesis. W. W. Norton & Company.

Cushman, P. (1995). Constructing the Self, Constructing America: A Cultural History of Psychotherapy. Addison-Wesley.

Trungpa, C. (2002). Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism. Shambhala Publications.

Klein, N. (2014). This changes everything: Capitalism vs. the climate. Simon & Schuster.

Shaikh, F. U. A. (2020). Self-healing concrete: A new era of construction. Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Technology, 11(4), 87-96. https://doi.org/10.5897/JCECT2020.0493

[jodjuya]

I think I'm no longer a feminist.

Now I'm a gender abolitionist. I don't know if that's the word for the thing I am, but that's what feels like the right name. Something to investigate...

It's not about discarding and disavowing feminism, but rather, taking the stance that feminism is the giant upon whose shoulders we are standing, and it's come time to work together to build a new thing as feminism itself did to the suffragettes.

[I think I'll find a lot of groundwork for this new thing in anarcho-feminism, so that's something else for me to go investigate.]

Gender Abolitionism, henceforth "GA", is what it says on the tin, in the sense of focusing on improving people's lives when problems are caused by their gender, regardless of their gender.

The long and short of it is that it's a bundling together of feminism, queer rights, trans rights, men's liberation, and transhumanism (for future-proofing) with the aims and ambitions of all those movements amalgamated and unified and everything as hard LibLeft as possible.

I'm not going to dignify their eventual outcry by preemptively addressesing any criticisms of GA i could imagine from reactionary crybabies and their shitty hot-takes made in the absolute worst faith possible. Not worth my time, blood pressure, serenity, or effort. But the long and short of it would be an affirmation that, no, we're not here just to be Negative Nancy over a bunch of made up nonsenses that aren't even real issues, and we're certainly not trying to "ban gender" or whatever the fuck.

No, we're actually here because everyone will have a much nicer time in their lives if they just stop allowing the concept of gender to cause so dang many problems in the world...

We're here, that is to say, because Gender Abolitionism is fun. Much more fun than the alternatives, at least.

Don't get me wrong, GA is still dignified and serious and sensible work, of course!

but it never stops seeking the positive, never stops centering and celebrating hope and love and dignity and connectedness and sexiness and all the other joys of a life well-lived. Yelling at people "just for believing in gender" isn't what we're here to do.

"IF I CAN'T DANCE... I DON'T WANT TO BE PART OF YOUR REVOLUTION"

as Emma Goldman didn't say.

[percy-rose-writes]

A short, imperfect overview of 21st century gender trends in children's literature.

[karingottschalk]

SAGE Journals: European Journal of Cultural Studies: Enduring inequalities: Fifty years of gender equality talk in the media and cultural industries

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13675494221145307 “Abstract This article provides a critical overview of gender equality talk within the media, arts and cultural industries, focusing on a case study of Australian cultural policy discourse from the 1970s to 2020s. It aims to expand on existing understandings of postfeminism and popular feminism by exploring how these sensibilities have…

[legallybrunettedotcom]

BUFFY READING LIST

As promised @possession1981 and I have compiled a list of Buffy the Vampire Slayer (and Angel) related academic text and books. I think this is a good starting point for both a long time fan and for someone just getting into the show, or just someone interested in vampire lore. I have included several books about the vampire lore and myth in general as well. Most of these are available online.

BOOKS

Fighting the Forces: What's at Stake in Buffy the Vampire Slayer; edited by Rhonda V. Wilcox & David Lavery

Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Philosophy - Fear and Trembling in Sunnydale by James B. South

Buffy Goes Dark: Essays on the Final Two Seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer on Television, edited by Lynne Y. Edwards, Elizabeth L. Rambo & James B. South

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Myth, Metaphor and Morality by Mark Field

Televised Morality: The Case of Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Gregory Stevenson

Undead TV: Essays on Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Elana Levine

The Aesthetics of Culture in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Matthew Pateman

Girls Who Bite Back: Witches, Mutants, Slayers and Freaks by Emily Pohl-Weary

Why Buffy Matters: The Art of Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Ronda Wilcox

Into Every Generation a Slayer Is Born: How Buffy Staked Our Hearts by Evan Ross Katz

The Lure of the Vampire: Gender, Fiction, and Fandom from Bram Stoker to Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Milly Williamson

Blood Relations: Chosen Families in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel by Jes Battis

Sex and the Slayer: A Gender Studies Primer for the Buffy Fan by Lorna Jowett

Diseases of the Head: Essays on the Horrors of Speculative Philosophy; edited by Matt Rosen (chapter 2 Death of Horror)

Public Privates: Feminist Geographies of Mediated Spaces by Marcia R. England (chapter 1 Welcome to the Hellmouth: Paradoxical Spaces in Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Open Graves, Open Minds: Representations of Vampires and the Undead From the Enlightenment to the Present Day; edited by Sam George and Bill Hughes (chapter 8 ‘I feel strong. I feel different’: transformations, vampires and language in Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

The Contemporary Television Series; edited by Michael Hammond and Lucy Mazdon (chapter 9 Television, Horror and Everyday Life in Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Joss Whedon and Race: Critical Essays; edited by Mary Ellen Iatropoulos and Lowery A. Woodall III

Buffy and the Heroine's Journey: Vampire Slayer as Feminine Chosen One by Valerie Estelle Frankel

The Existential Joss Whedon: Evil and Human Freedom in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Angel, Firefly and Serenity by J. Michael Richardson and J. Douglas Rabb

Buffy the Vampire Slayer 20 Years of Slaying: The Watcher's Guide Authorized by Christopher Golden

Reading the Vampire Slayer: The Complete, Unofficial Guide to 'Buffy' and 'Angel' by Roz Kaveney

Hollywood Vampire: The Unnoficial Guide to Angel by Keith Topping

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: The Monster Book by Christopher Golden

Slayer Slang: A Buffy the Vampire Slayer Lexicon by Michael Adams

What Would Buffy Do? The Vampire Slayer as Spiritual Guide by Jana Riess

ARTICLES, PAPERS ETC.

Bibliographic Good vs. Evil in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by GraceAnne A. DeCandido

Undead Letters: Searches and Researches in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by William Wandless

Weaponised information: The role of information and metaphor in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Jacob Ericson

Buffy, Dark Romance and Female Horror Fans by Lorna Jowett

My Vampire Boyfriend: Postfeminism, "Perfect" Masculinity, and the Contemporary Appeal of Paranormal Romance by Ananya Mukherjea

Buffy, The Vampire Slayer as Spectacular Allegory: A Diagnostic Critique by Douglas Kellner

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer": Technology, Mysticism, and the Constructed Body by Sara Raffel

When Horror Becomes Human: Living Conditions in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" by Jeroen Gerrits

Post-Vampire: The Politics of Drinking Humans and Animals in "Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Twilight", and "True Blood" by Laura Wright

Cops, Teachers, and Vampire Slayers: Buffy as Street-Level Bureaucrat by Andrea E. Mayo

"Not Like Other Men"?: The Vampire Body in Joss Whedon's "Angel" by Lorna Jowett

Buffy the Vampire Slayer and the Domestic Church: Revisioning Family and the Common Good by Reid B. Locklin

“Buffy vs. Dracula”’s Use of Count Famous (Not drawing “crazy conclusions about the unholy prince”) by Tara Elliott

A Little Less Ritual and a Little More Fun: The Modern Vampire in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Stacey Abbott

Undressing the Vampire: An Investigation of the Fashion of Sunnydale’s Vampires by Robbie Dale

"And Yet": The Limits of Buffy Feminism by Renee St. Louis & Miriam Riggs

Meet the Cullens: Family, Romance and Female Agency in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Twilight by Kirsten Stevens

Bliss and Time: Death, Drugs, and Posthumanism in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Rob Cover

That Girl: Bella, Buffy, and the Feminist Ethics of Choice in Twilight and Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Catherine Coker

A Slayer Comes to Town: An Essay on Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Scott Westerfeld 

Undead Objects of a “Queer Gaze” : A Visual Approach to Buffy’s Vampires Using Lacan’s Extended RSI Model by Marcus Recht

When You Kiss Me, I Want to Die: Gothic Relationships and Identity on Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Ananya Mukherjeea

Necrophilia and SM: The Deviant Side of Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Terry L. Spaise

Queering the Bitch: Spike, Transgression and Erotic Empowerment by Dee Amy-Chinn

“I Want To Be A Macho Man”: Examining Rape Culture, Adolescent Female Sexuality, and the Destabilization of Gender Binaries in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Angelica De Vido

Staking Her Claim: Buffy the Vampire Slayer as Transgressive Woman Warrior by Frances H. Early

Actualizing Abjection: Drusilla, the Whedonversees’ Queen of Queerness by Anthony Stepniak

“Life Isn’t A Story”: Xander, Andrew and Queer Disavowal in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Steven Greenwood

S/He’s a Rebel: The James Dean Trope in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Kathryn Hill

“Once More, with Feeling”: Emotional Self-Discipline in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Gwynnee Kennedy and Jennifer Dworshack-Kinter

“The Hardest Thing in This World Is To Live In It”: Identity and Mental Health in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Alex Fixler

"Love's Bitch But Man Enough to Admit It": Spikes Hybridized Gender by Arwen Spicer

Negotiations After Hegemony: Buffy and Gender by Franklin D. Worrell

Double Trouble: Gothic Shadows and Self-Discovery in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Elizabeth Gilliland

'What If I'm Still There? What If I Never Left That Clinic?': Faërian Drama in Buffy's "Normal Again" by Janet Brennan Croft

Not Gay Enough So You’d Notice: Poaching Fuffy by Jennifer DeRoss

Throwing Like A Slayer: A Phenomenology of Gender Hybridity and Female Resilience in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Debra Jackson

“You Can’t Charge Innocent People for Saving Their Lives!” Work in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Matt Davies

Ambiguity and Sexuality in Buffy the Vampire Slayer: A Sartrean Analysis by Vivien Burr

Imagining the Family: Representations of Alternative Lifestyles in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Vivien Burr and Christine Jarvis

Working-Class Hero? Fighting Neoliberal Precarity in Buffy’s Sixth Season by Michelle Maloney-Mangold

A Corpse by Any Other Name: Romancing the Language of the Body in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein for the Adam Storyline in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Amber P. Hodge

Sensibility Gone Mad: Or, Drusilla, Buffy and the (D)evolution of the Heroine of Sensibility by Claire Knowles

"It's good to be me": Buffy's Resistance to Renaming by Janet Brennan Croft

Death as a Gift in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Work and Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Gaelle Abalea

“All Torment, Trouble, Wonder, and Amazement Inhabits Here": The Vicissitudes of Technology in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by James B. South

Staking Her Colonial Claim: Colonial Discourses, Assimilation, Soul-making, and Ass-kicking in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Jessica Hautsch

“I Run To Death”: Renaissance Sensibilities in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Christine Jarvis

Dressed To Kill: Fashion and Leadership in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Christine Jarvis and Don Adams

Queer Eye Of That Vampire Guy: Spike and the Aesthetics of Camp by Cynthea Masson and Marni Stanley

“Sounds Like Kinky Business To Me”: Subtextual and Textual Representations of Erotic Power in Buffyverse by Lewis Call

“Did Anyone Ever Explain to You What ‘Secret Identity’ Means?”: Race and Displacement in Buffy and Dark Angel  by Cynthia Fuchs

“It’s About Power”: Buffy, Foucault, and the Quest for Self by Julie Sloan Brannon

Why We Love the Monsters: How Anita Blake, Vampire Hunter, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer Wound Up Dating the Enemy by Hilary M. Leon

Why We Can’t Spike Spike?: Moral Themes in Buffy the Vampire Slayer by Richard Greene and Wayne Yuen

Buffy, the Scooby Gang, and Monstrous Authority: BtVS and the Subversion of Authority by Daniel A. Clark & P. Andrew Miller

Are Vampires Evil?: Categorizations of Vampires, and Angelus and Spike as the Immoral and the Amoral by Gert Magnusson

BOOKS ABOUT VAMPIRE LORE AND MYTH IN GENERAL

The Vampire Lectures by Laurence A. Rickels 

Our Vampires, Ourselves by Nina Auerbach

Vampires, Burial, and Death: Folklore and Reality by Paul Barber

The Secret History of Vampires: Their Multiple Forms and Hidden Purposes by Claude Lecouteux

The Vampire Cinema by David Pirie

The Living and the Undead: Slaying Vampires, Exterminating Zombies by Gregory A. Waller

Vampire Forensics: Uncovering the Origins of an Enduring Legend by Mark Jenkins

Slayers and Their Vampires: A Cultural History of Killing the Dead by Bruce A. McClelland

The History and Folklore of Vampires: The Stories and Legends Behind the Mythical Beings by Charles River Editors

Encyclopedia of Vampire Mythology by Theresa Bane

Vampires of Lore: Traits and Modern Misconceptions by A. P. Sylvia

The Vampire: A New History by Nick Groom

Vampyres: Genesis and Resurrection: from Count Dracula to Vampirella by Christopher Frayling

Race in the Vampire Narrative by U. Melissa Anyiwo

Vampires, Race, and Transnational Hollywoods by Dale Hudson

[breha]

Is Lestat's relationship to Claudia ever that of an uncle? What other reason might there be for Claudia to call one of the men "Daddy" and the other "Uncle"? Consider the setting.

Why might the filmmakers have chosen to include references to A Doll's House, Madame Bovary, Marriage In A Free Society by Edward Carpenter, and Pelléas et Mélisande? What themes, if any, do these references reinforce?

Claudia calls Louis "the housewife" and Louis later describes himself as "ignoring all other duties of the role Claudia had mocked me for... the unhappy housewife." What does this indicate about attitudes towards gender and sexuality in the society in which the characters live? What is the significance of the word "role" here in relation to Lestat's promise in the first episode to free Louis from "all these roles you conform to"?

When Claudia first introduces the idea of reconceptualizing her relationship to Louis and Lestat as a sister, what does Lestat's reaction suggest about his opinion? In the following episode, when Lestat calls Claudia "sister, daughter, infant death," what is his tone?

In the context of the story, what is a "maker"? What kind of status in the household does Lestat believe a maker should have?

Does becoming vampires allow the characters to escape the social structures of the world around them, or do they remain trapped? In what ways, if any, does sociocultural context in regards to gender, race, sexuality, and family influence the characters and their relationships?

The article "Undoing Feminism: From the Preoedipal to Postfeminism in Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles" by Janice Doane and Devon Hodges argues that the novel Interview With The Vampire "depends on an oedipal paradigm" and says that "Rice sees the oedipal moment as beginning with the father's embrace of the girl child in a patriarchal order that so restricts her possibilities for development [...] that she develops murderous rages against the father. Freud calls the oedipal stage 'a haven, a refuge' for the girl; Rice shows it to be a coffin." Do you think AMC's Interview With The Vampire is engaging with this idea? Why or why not?

[emmajadepaige]

happy birthday - e.m.

i’m about to be twenty and all my scars are fading; no more reminders of childhood pets or the imprints they left behind.

i could make new scars, but it all feels childish now, like a salve that’s gone off and should’ve been thrown out already.

i’m in my third year taking first year classes, ‘no, probably not this year, but hopefully next.’ i’ll graduate eventually, but then what?

i’ll be twenty-one years old with my bachelors degree, no actual life lived, just texts and keywords forever imprinted in my mind. yes, i could explain the effects of postfeminism in the media, no, i do not know what it is like to love someone and be loved back.

i’ll spend my birthday alone and end the night crying about how i spent my birthday alone. no, i did not make plans for a party, yes, maybe i would have liked one anyway.

[haggishlyhagging]

Media critic Jennifer L. Pozner has spent thousands of hours and an immense amount of patience watching both cable news and reality television, and understands better than the average person how alike they've become. "We treat stories that we would have never treated as journalism twenty years ago like headline news," she muses. And we treat reality TV the same way. More relevant to feminism, however, is how the reality genre has harnessed the belief in a postfeminist world and, in doing so, reframed retrograde gender dynamics as expressions of freedom and empowerment. Far more than any backlash could have predicted, the feminist rhetoric of individuality, opportunity, autonomy, and choice has been co-opted by a consumer media that has very non-ulterior motives for presenting women as willingly sexualized, hyperfeminine ciphers.

In Pozner's 2010 book Reality Bites Back: The Troubling Truth About Guilty-Pleasure Television, she asserts that one of the most jarring features of reality TV is the way it urges its female participants—and often, the women and girls who watch them—toward narrower and narrower definitions of beauty, self-worth, and success, as well as a truncated sense of what kind of life is possible and desirable, all while encouraging them to see other women only in terms of competition and comparison. But "reality" functions as a magic shield against accusations of racist and sexist cliché and regressive storylines: producer and participants alike will reason that if you put twenty-five women in a room with a man they barely know, of course the evening will end with the women sobbing, yelling, yanking each other's hair extensions out, calling each other sluts, and drunkenly slurring, "We're meant to be together" to floor lamps. Reality TV is part of an ongoing narrative of postfeminism that, like Wonderbra billboards once did, assures women that feminism has granted them the power and the freedom to be whatever they want to be. And if what they want to be just so happens to conform to a smorgasbord of insecure, catty, vapid, and villainous stereotypes that even Walt Disney's frozen head would reject as too cartoonish, who's to say that's not empowering?

Let's take The Bachelor because, since it's one of the highest-rated network shows for more than a decade, we kind of have to. Since its debut in 2002, ABC's reality flagship has drawn in advertisers' favorite cash-cow demographic, women 18-34, by the millions, and has served as a barometer of how young, heterosexual, and mostly white women are encouraged to alter their ambitions, personalities, and behaviors to compete in the dating market. The show, mused media critic Susan J. Douglas when it premiered, "offers highly normative female ‘types’ into which most women allegedly fall ... urged to place themselves on a post-feminist scale of femininity to determine how far they have to go to please men without losing all shreds of their own identity and dignity. In the process, young women calibrate, for better and for worse, what kind of female traits are most likely to ensure success in a male-dominated world." For twenty seasons, the series has confirmed centuries' worth of entrenched beliefs about what women want (marriage, money, the knowledge that they've beaten out masses of other women for the a man they barely know), and what men seek (a thin, deferential woman who's only as ambitious as she needs to be to bag a husband).

-Andi Zeisler, We Were Feminists Once

[reyneofswords]

The Beauty Myth highlights part 3

"What hysteria was to the nineteenth-century fetish of the asexual woman locked in her home, anorexia is to the late twentieth-century fetish of the hungry woman." "Our culture gives a young woman only two dreams in which to imagine her body, like a coin with two faces: one pornographic, the other anorexic; the first for nighttime, the second for day - the one, supposedly for men and the other for other women. She does not have the choice to refuse to toss it - nor, yet, to demand a better dream. The anorexic body is sexually safer to inhabit than the pornorgaphic one." "Gender roles, for this generation of women, did not harmonize so much as double: Young women today are expected to act like "real men" and look like "real women." Fathers transferred to daughters the expectations of achievement once reserved for sons; but the burden to be a beauty, inherited from the mothers, was not lightened in response." "Antiabortion activists often make exceptions for rape and incest, which suggests that it is her desire for sex for which a woman must pay with her pain." "If women suddenly stopped feeling ugly, the fastest-growing medical specialty would soon be the faster-dying." ""Clitoridectomy," writes Showalter, "is the surgical enforcement of an ideology that restricts female sexuality to reproduction," just as breast surgery is of an ideology that restricts female sexuality to "beauty."" "Surgery changes one forever, the mind as well as the body. If we don't start to speak of it as serious, the millenium of the man-made woman will be upon us, and we will have had no choice." "The free market will compete to cut up women's bodies more cheaply, if more sloppily, with no-frills surgery in bargain basement clinics. In that atmosphere, it is a matter of time before they reposition the clitoris, sew up the vagina for a snugger fit, loosen the throat mucles and sever the gag reflex." "...rejecting the pernicious fib that is crippling young women - the fib called postfeminism, the pious hope that the battles have all been won. This scary word is making young women, who face many of the same old problems, once again blame themselves - since it's all been fixed, right? It strips them of the weapon of theory and makes them feel alone once again. We never speak complacently of the post-Democratic era: Democracy, we know, is a living, vulnerable thing that every generation must renew. The same goes for that aspect of democracy represented by feminism." "It would be pathetic if young women had to go back to the beginning because we were taken in by an unoriginal twenty-year campaign to portray the women's movement as "not sexy," a compagn aimed to help young women forget whose battles made sex sexy in the first place."

[fem-lit]

Young women express feelings of being scared and isolated “insiders” as opposed to angry and united outsiders, and this distinction makes backlash sense: The best way to stop a revolution is to give people something to lose. [The anti beauty myth/feminist movement] would need to politicize eating disorders, young women’s uniquely intense relationship to images, and the effect of those images on their sexuality—it would need to make the point that you don’t have much of a right over your own body if you can’t eat. It would need to analyze the antifeminist propaganda young women have inherited, and give them tools, including arguments like this one, with which to see through it. While transmitting the previous heritage of feminism intact, it would need to be, as all feminist waves are, peer-driven: No matter how wise a mother’s advice is, we listen to our peers. It would have to make joy, rowdiness, and wanton celebration as much a part of its project as hard work and bitter struggle, and it can begin all this by rejecting the pernicious fib that is crippling young women—the fib called postfeminism, the pious hope that the battles have all been won. This scary word is making young women, who face many of the same old problems, once again blame themselves—since it’s all been fixed, right? It strips them of the weapon of theory and makes them feel alone once again. We never speak complacently of the post-Democratic era: Democracy, we know, is a living, vulnerable thing that every generation must renew. The same goes for that aspect of democracy represented by feminism.

— Naomi Wolf (1990) The Beauty Myth

[apopcornkernel]

[chokes] ted that's—that's not what postfeminism means—

[ghnosis]

would like to publicly thank @slavghoul today, your translations are quite literally invaluable to my work although I did have to ask not one but two librarians how to cite you

image ID: a screenshot of the bibliography of my dissertation prospectus. four citations appear:

SAVIGNY, Heather and SLEIGHT, Sam. 2015. ‘Postfeminism and heavy metal in the United Kingdom: Sexy or sexist?’ Metal Music Studies. 1(3), 341-357. 

SHADRACK, Jasmine Hazel. 2021. Black Metal, Trauma, Subjectivity and Sound : Screaming the Abyss. Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing. 

SLAVGHOUL. 2019. ‘Tobias on being the sexy face of Satanism.’ Translated from CZARTORYSKI, Bartosz. 2019. ‘Seksowne oblicze satanizmu. Rozmawiamy z liderem zespołu Ghost.’ Available at: https://slavghoul.tumblr.com/post/189496141322/tobias-on-being-the-sexy-face-of-satanism [accessed 29 May 2024]. 

SLAVGHOUL. 2020. Into the Fog. Translated from LAGERGREN, Richard. 2010. ‘In I Dinman’. Sweden Rock Magazine. 76. Available at: https://slavghoul.tumblr.com/post/619019726477213697/heres-an-interview-with-papa-from-2010-that-i [accessed 29 May 2024]. 

[skiscratcher]

tumblr has a postfeminism problem