Since investigating my piece, the King of Beauty, a lot of notions have come to me both through feedback and through investigating the notions and connotations of this word. The biggest surprise is when, whilst wearing make up, I performed a scratch performance of it that lasted about ten minutes and someone described it as 'misogynistic'.
I found this intriguing. The references I made in this short piece were feminine, for example at one point I talk about getting the wrong Barbie for Christmas, or being called a slut, and then it struck me that these people associated these things as gender specific. In my mind, I had found them equally applicable, laudable and laughable about both men and women.
In a way, that has challenged my own beliefs and preconceptions of 'femininity' and 'adrogyny'. Unfortunately, femininity is placed in the line of 'that which is not masculine'. Androgyny is something that escapes the general concensus- for example, that which is not masculine is feminine, that which is not feminine is an imitation of masculinity. Masculinity seems to have defined terms and rigorous structure, making it difficult to achieve any sort of masculine 'ideal'.
It then gave me a slight insight into the objetification of women. I've been listening to a lot of Karen Finley of late, which could explain my change in performance style and focus.
Of course, I am hesitant to make blanket statements. I think for someone as liberal as me, to be confronted with such a gender defined term that I feel is something I am a million miles away from has been an experience, and something to delve into and explore.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm starting to be of the opinion that as long as a significant number of people (or just one in the media) insist on things being gender specific, then that will be projected onto someone and it will be relevant. Self-fulfilling prophecy, in a sense.
There was a women on GMTV this morning plugging a book that suggests that women should do everything for their men in order for them to be successful. This makes a lot of assumptions I could argue with but ignoring most of those, she probably would have a point had she said that one partner is more likely to be successful if the other does everything for them because they have the time to dedicate purely to that end, but why it should be the woman that subjugates herself, I don't know. And yes, many other arguments against the concept.
Post a Comment