Bad Feminist

Gay conveys the role that feminists’ experiences and perspectives play in their theory and practice of feminism. This is one reason why she interweaves her personal experiences and biases throughout the text. The overall point that Gay makes is that an “essential” feminism does not exist; all feminists are bad feminists to one extent or another by virtue of being human.

In Essay 36, Gay draws on Judith Butler’s theory of gender performativity to argue that the idea of essentialism applies to feminism as well. She lists the characteristics of the “essential feminist,” noting things like a prescribed emotional disposition (anger and humorlessness), hatred of men and sex, and a focus on career. By that definition, notable feminists who are held up as exemplars would be “bad feminists.” Dunham depicts her Girls character’s active sex life and attraction to men while striking a comedic tone in the show. Slaughter encourages elite career women to leave their jobs and focus on childrearing. Margaret Atwood uses dark humor to expose “the glossy treatment of rape” (134).

Considered alongside Gay’s discussion of the responsibility placed on marginalized people, it becomes clear that Gay’s critiques of her feminist contemporaries is not that they’re doing feminism wrong. Instead, Gay means to point out the particular experiences and perspectives that they bring. For example, Gay points out the narrow viewpoint and limited demographic of Sandberg’s Lean In, advising against reading the work “as a definitive text, or a book offering universally applicable advice to all women, everywhere” (313). However, she also notes that if Sandberg had tried to offer career advice to women outside of her target demographic, “she would have been just as harshly criticized for overstepping her bounds” (313).

Gay ultimately suggests that every feminist arrives at the table with their particular experience, so feminism is essentially plural. This does not mean overlooking the unique issues that less privileged women and feminists face; Gay acknowledges mainstream feminism’s dismissiveness towards the unique issues that women of color face (307-08). This insensitivity ultimately impedes solidarity. Thus, while more privileged feminists should not be expected to be flawless in their feminist practice and theory, it is important that such feminists recognize their privilege and perhaps consider the ways that they could use their privilege to lift up marginalized women. Gay’s embrace of bad feminism is an acknowledgment of feminism’s plurality and an attention to the complex sets of identities and human flaws that individual feminists have.

Much of the text points to the spectrum of patriarchy—namely, its constitutive elements of legislation/politics, pop culture, and everyday interaction, and the ways those elements reinforce each other. Gay links these various elements together to illustrate that what could be considered frivolous discussions are anything but frivolous. For example, Gay observes the idea that women must sacrifice themselves for the attention of men at play in reality TV shows as well as in book series like Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey. These media representations have real life implications, as evidenced by the young women who would be willing to allow Chris Brown to abuse them in exchange for his attention (185).

In Essay 13, Gay points out how the media inundates people with images of rape and sexual violence in shows like Beverly Hills 90210, Private Practice, General Hospital, and Law & Order: SVU (130-31), numbing society to the impact of rape. Consequently, a major piece of journalism treats an 11-year-old victim of gang rape callously (128-29). In the essay on gender bias in book publishing, Gay explicitly links the problem to legislation and the political apparatus:

When we look beyond publishing and consider that the United States is a country where we’re still having an incomprehensible debate about contraception and reproductive freedom, it becomes clear women are dealing with trickle-down misogyny. What starts with the legislature reaches everywhere (170-71).

Gay’s overall point is that patriarchal oppression is so widespread and insidious that there is no realm to which a critical feminist lens cannot be applied. Thus, the way that Gay articulates patriarchy’s presence throughout the text supports her advocacy of bad feminism. In the final essay, she posits that “feminism and advocacy also applies to seemingly less serious issues” because of the trickle-down effect that makes misogynistic pop culture artifacts possible (317).

Another important theme that Gay emphasizes is the representation of marginalized identities in pop culture and media. Her aim is to illustrate that media representations impact not only how the world sees marginalized people, but also how marginalized people themselves. Furthermore, all marginalized people deserve to see themselves reflected accurately, which means with regard for their humanity and the complexities that define it.

For example, the three essays in which Gay discusses Martin, Tsarnaev, and Breivik demonstrate how media associations of Blackness with criminality precluded public empathy for Martin even though he was the victim. When talking about Hollywood’s obsession with the struggle narrative, Gay argues that portrayals of Black people in positions of servitude or subjugation suggest a one-dimensional understanding of Black experience and perhaps a belief that Black people should occupy an inferior status. Given that humanity is more complex than a single story can encapsulate, there is a need for more complex and rounded narratives—for example, the work of Thornton Dial, who conveys both struggle and happiness in his art.

A similar one-dimensional depiction exists regarding women. Gay points out myths regarding female friendships, reality TV show formulas that reduce women to harmful stereotypes, and persistent messaging in music, film, and literature that women exist merely to satisfy the whims of men. In addition, there are degrees of privilege whereby some women are depicted in more accurate and complex ways, while others are depicted simplistically and stereotypically, if not altogether ignored; Girls and Orange Is the New Black exemplify this phenomenon. Gay lauds more complex and accurate representations when she notes that unlikable women characters are what make stories worth reading: Such characters explode gender performativity and instead opt to show up as their whole, human selves.

These media representations impact not only how society views marginalized people but how such people see themselves. In Essay 1, Gay juxtaposes representations of Black success on BET and her experiences with her Black students, suggesting that narrow depictions of Black success prompt her students to feel embarrassed and secretive about coming to her for help. Similarly, media depictions of girlhood and womanhood impact how girls/women see themselves—hence, Gay’s apology to young women in Essay 20 about the persistent cultural messaging that women are so inferior that they should tolerate abuse.

Gay’s attention to representation is in part about how it reflects the social, cultural, and political milieu from which representation emerges, and it is in part about the human need for recognition, belonging, and space for complexity and multidimensionality. The theme is related to bad feminism in that representation, like essential feminism, often “doesn’t allow for the complexities of human experience or individuality” (305). Therefore, Gay sees representations and misrepresentations as a social justice issue.