But none of this would surprise those troubled by the rise of what “We Were Feminists Once” author Andi Ziesler has called “marketplace feminism”—the belief that female choice and individual self-actualization prove the primary means of achieving equality. “Consumer empowerment dovetailed nicely with third-wave feminism . . .,” Zeisler explains, “and this empowerment was certainly of a piece with the neoliberal ideal in which individuals operate independent of culture and economic influence.”

But in a blown-out, “Lean-in” world where self-branding is the status quo, a woman’s ability to even achieve financial solvency is ever more predicated upon not only what she consumes to fulfill aesthetic expectations, but by how she herself is consumed in both the real and digital spheres. So as much as it may feel “empowering” to Instagram pics of a svelte post-baby body, or upload a luminous headshot to a LinkedIn account, danger lurks when one’s power is based less on the capacity to produce something than project an image of ineffable confidence and economic well-being. In other words, when we privilege capital—or the illusion of such—above all, a woman’s gains are measurable only insofar as her body and labor retain market value.

15 thoughts on “Eh?”

  1. in an x metaphor world a y metaphore world is the result, and when we allow alpha we make a quantum leap to gamma.

  2. “when we privilege capital—or the illusion of such—above all, a woman’s gains are measurable only insofar as her body and labor retain market value.”
    So, exactly like men.
    I think the author is going on about social media celebrities. So the article was nearly pointless when she started to write it, wholly pointless once she had finished.

  3. The stupid leftist bitch starts her cockrot by whinging about Chinese woman learning to pronounce Dolce and Grabhammer.

    Would the vile cunt prefer that they were back chanting the thoughts of Chairman Mao and beating the shit out of each other at “self-criticism” session that were anything but?

  4. “exuberance of his own verbosity” indeed,,,it’s quite common sadly, but what was fun about the original was that it was a prime example of the pot calling the kettle grimy arse.

  5. ‘“I noticed that no matter what people had, they still wanted more,” says Greenfield’s contemplative voiceover early in the film.’

    So we can take everything they have, and they’ll be just as happy.

    ‘In an age of excess, it’s women who lose’

    We’ll make women winners by taking all their stuff.

    Standard CM bloviating.

    So many times when I’m in a store, I see people staring in bewilderment at the vast product selection available to them, and think, “They’d be so much better off if there was just one, generic product.”

  6. I wondered how Tim has the time to find this stuff.

    Then I realised you just entered ‘pretentious feminist shyte” into Google and you get a million hits.

  7. You’ve snarked at a couple of Salon articles recently. I don’t read it but it sounds like a low-rent long-winded version of Pseuds Corner. Why do you poison your mind with this stuff? I’m sure it’ll eat away your reasoning capabilities. Hope you don’t get DTs coming off it.

  8. Bloke in Costa Rica

    “I Am Woman, Hear Me Whine”.

    If you take the time to parse that last paragraph (a few sheets of scrap paper and coloured pens will help) then you find it contains three mutually-contradictory statements. It is a congeries of nonsense.

  9. They think writing in this way makes them intellectual. Derrida and others have much to answer for.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *