Lately, I've seen a flurry of posts about the changing attitude of collegiate women towards feminism and sexuality. Feminism is a tricky thing. How to define equality when the value of a human being is constantly being re-evaluated? Born on the cusp of two generations (not to mention two zodiacs), I'm never quite sure whether I'm supposed to be a sexually uninhibited neo-feminist or an anti-feminist of the type recently paraded around the New York Times: a brilliant star at Harvard Law/Med who is willing to give it all up to make flaxseed and carob cupcakes for their children's lacrosse practice. That I am a female scientist/engineer in a post-Summersgate Era who regularly reads the NYT Fashion & Style section only adds to the confusion. While the current focus on sexual empowerment and individual academic/career achievement might be representative of our fascination with Paris Hilton and the seemingly pervasive Ivy dreams of upper-middle class White and Asian media darlings, I think it oversimplifies the basic exploration of male/female power dynamics. Why all this concern that young women are shunning sex and miniskirts (two things which I doubt are highly correlated)? I mean, is there really a dramatic shift in sexual mores? I doubt it. And I can't help but wonder if this recent shift of focus is indicative of a perceived inability to address more longstanding and basic problems such as the glass ceiling. So long live sexual freedom for all (certainly an important aspect of feminism), but why should the sexual habits of a few vocal individuals concern me any more than their toilet habits?
*Of Montreal, "Disconnect the Dots"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment