Beyonce, Miley and Kim: New Hypersexualised “Feminisms” in Popular Media

Beyonce, Miley and Kim:

New Hypersexualised “Feminisms” in

Popular Media

Hello everyone! My name is Siri Lindholm and I'm a PhD candidate and associate lecturer

at London College of Fashion. My research has focused on sexualisation of girl-children

and especially on how the media discusses harms that come to girls from this

phenomenon called sexualisation. In this paper I want to focus on the relationship between

feminism and sexualisation. Sexualised representations of women in the media are being

seen as harmful to themselves and to women everywhere ergo a sexualised woman

cannot be a feminist. In recent years a distinct trend has however arisen within popular

culture where young female artists openly promote themselves as feminists. What is new

about this feminism is that even though its ethos correlates with more traditional forms of

feminisms, it is marked by neo-liberal consumption, self obsession and hyper-sexualised

display.

In this paper I will focus on three women who all present different types of hyper-

sexualised feminisms: Beyonce, Miley Cyrus and Kim Kardashian (and her sisters).

Beyonce is an example of a self-proclaimed feminist, who is widely regarded by teenagers

as a great role model and all round strong woman who effortlessly combines motherhood,

christianity and empowering sexual display.

Miley Cyrus, an other self-proclaimed feminist, however is widely discussed as a

bad influence in her hyper-sexualised display. She is positioned dichotomously, as, on one

hand corrupted by the music industry to sexualise herself for the pleasure of the male

gaze, but on the other being held responsible for negatively influencing her young fans.

I would like to contrast both feminisms with the Kardashian sisterhood's 'feminism',

which, however has never been defined as such. They combine their hyper-sexualised

appearances with graphic and frank discussions of women's issues which, I would like to

argue, should not be ignored by the feminist community. And finally zoom into the

sexualisation phenomenon.

Slide 2

I would like to start by looking at Beyonce Knowles. She is a former member of the all girl

group Destiny's Child who brought us hits like “Independent Women”, she's married to

rapper Jay Z, who brought us hits like “99 Problems (but the bitch aint one)”, and she's a

mother to a little girl. What qualifies Beyonce as a feminist nowadays are further hits such

as “We Run the World (Girls)”, the fact that she describes herself as a feminist and that

her followers see her as such. I have to admit that I'm not a fan, nor convinced of her

feminist credentials, however what I found striking was how she is perceived by young

people. Feminism was one of the most hotly debated topics while teaching cultural studies

to first year fashion students, and if there was one thing they agreed on, it was that

Beyonce was a feminist and a great role model for girls worldwide. She was seen as

strong, independent and “doing it for her self”. Her sexualised display was seen as an

admirable extension of her uninfluenced sexuality. She was sexy, because she felt sexy,

not to please men. Her accumulated wealth was seen as the result of feminism, in the

sense that her strength, independence and sternness in the face of the male-dominated

music business had awarded her wealth, rather than the capitalist system within which the

music industry operates.

And this brings us to a very interesting point: feminism and neoliberalism. Feminism

and neoliberalism have long been reluctant bedfellows. I would think that this is because of

second wave feminism's strong links to socialism, and capitalisms failure to include women

as equal players on the free market. What this has led to in the older feminist ranks, has

been a strong critique of the younger, shopping, generation of feminists. A consumerist

feminist is a postfeminist. In Beyonce's case, however, neoliberal feminism takes on a

slightly different form: The financially successful woman is not a capitalist, she, by the

virtue of her gender, becomes a feminist.

Slide 3

Self-proclamation also becomes the word of the day when we look at Beyonce's

sexualised representations. Her wardrobe and dance moves look no different than any

other pop princess', and are marked by their sexualised nature. Beyonce is known for

being a devout christian. However I would like to point out the irony of a self proclaimed

feminist in subscribing to an establishment known for its institutional sexism. Conveniently

the image of “having good values” and “respecting yourself as a woman” come as part of

the package deal for the regular church goer. This convention of superficial religion in

American culture, evident also in politics, seems to provide people with free licence, as

long as you present yourself as a good christian in public. In a way this means that she

doesn't have to dress modestly. Self respect here is achieved through devotion, not dress.

What is interesting, is that Beyonce is seen as in control of her image and dressing to

show authentic, strong, independent sexuality, while Miley Cyrus, is seen as being out of

control.

Slide 4

Miley Cyrus is an ex Disney star known for her portrayal of the wholesome teen character

Hannah Montana. However more recently she has become famous for her hyper-

sexualised performances and representation. Her CV includes, among many, dancing with

a giant blow up penis during her performance at London's G-A-Y, and most impressively

bringing 'twerking' from African American culture into the world wide white middle class

consciousness. It was specifically her transition, from a squeaky clean teen star to a raging

sex pot that sent media into a frenzy. Telling about the media response, however, was that

it could never quite decide whether she was the victim of a seedy, over sexed and

institutionally sexist music industry or the culprit herself. She was, after all, the young

woman who would single handedly destroy the aspirations of a whole generation of white

middle class girls, by inspiring them to twerk.

As a response to the most famous of them all twerking incidents, the VMA

performance with sleaze bag extraordinaire Robin Thicke, Miley received an open letter

from the well respected and reassuringly unfeminine Sinead O'connor. In the letter

O'connor advised her to 'respect herself', a sentence exasperatingly often applied to young

women in the context of their sex lives, and to stop dressing in a way that will make her

pray for sexual violence. Not to mention her implication that Miley's performances were not

authentically her handwriting, but orchestrated by calculating music executives. While

O'connors feminism might just about have flown during the second wave era, a generation

of young feminist now, would be deeply offended at her prescribed solution to combat

sexism and sexual violence by restricting women's freedom of representation.

Slide 5

Miley Cyrus calls herself a feminist and what I would like to argue awards her with some

feminist credentials is, amongst many things her self representation. She also openly

speaks out in favour of gay rights and rejection of the purity movement, but the most visual

impact is made through her performances. What is striking about her outfits are the

grotesque exaggerations. It is very easy to compare them, for example, to the 70's punk

aesthetic. Her trade mark cropped hair and sticking her tongue out add to a subcultural

aesthetic of resistance. What is ironic here is how with the older generation of resistant

ladies, such as Susie Sioux or Courtney Love there would never have been talk of them

being exploited by the music industry, but with Miley there is the ever lasting push and pull

of exploitation vs empowerment. I would like to argue that by rejecting seductive femininity

Miley Cyrus has created a resistance to normative patriarchal ideals of beauty and

sexualisation and created a look that does not scream “fuck me”, but rather “fuck you”.

Slide 6

Kim Kardashian is one of the 5 Kardashian/Jenner sisters who are famously famous for

being famous and Kim K and feminism are not two concepts that usually make it into the

same sentence. Keeping up with the Kardashians, the reality TV show following the lives

of the extensive Kardashian clan, has over its 10 seasons, chronicled every detail of the

private lives of the five sisters. Over the years Kim has steadily worked on a hyper-

sexualised image. In fact, so successful has she been in her endeavours, that nowadays it

is almost harder to find a picture of her dressed and last year her derriere was famously

awarded with the power of being able to break the internet.

Slide 7

Well known for their materialistic exploits, shopping sprees, cars, houses; we run into the

same problem as with Beyonce: neoliberal capitalism very poorly lends itself to being a

buddy with feminism. Kim K has certainly never described herself as a feminist, but what

the show has achieved, probably unintentionally, has been a lot of awareness and

openness about women's issues. And most recently, transgender issues have gained the

spotlight with the transition of their step father Bruce Jenner into a woman. But if we focus

on the Kardashians credentials as spokes people on women's issues, many a franc

discussion come to mind. At the light hearted end we have the “what happens when a

bikini wax goes wrong” episode. But at the other end we begin by following Khourtney

Kardashian through a pregnancy scare, through an unplanned pregnancy and child birth.

Child birth has nowadays become a popular subject of reality tv shows, and there are

award winning shows like One Born Every Minute that depict the subject from a working or

middle class perspective. But these shows are not directed at younger women or girls.

Slide 8

While Kim was pregnant with her first child the show centred around the problems she had

in her pregnancy. She suffered from excessive water retention and eventually became pre

eclamptic and had to be induced early. Her birth was not straight forward, the placenta got

stuck which resulted in infertility and corrective surgery. All of these matters were openly

discussed without the usual stigma that women's bodily functions receive in the media.

While Kim was just in her thirties, when she welcomed her first child, the episodes

surrounding her pregnancy were clearly geared towards a 20's demographic. Western

women in their 20's have been discouraged from having children. They somehow fall into

the gap of being old enough to know better, but too young to be able to handle it. Keeping

up with the Kardashians featured many conversations normalising the desire to have

children and to nurture, which second wave feminism and neoliberal capitalism do not

exactly encourage in women. Kim and her sister shared their experiences of child birth,

sex after child birth, and breast feeding, which among younger mothers, especially teen

mothers in UK has been a continuos problem. The pressure by the health authorities vs

the social stigma have left many young women choosing the bottle or staying at home. I

therefore think, that the featuring and mild glamorisation of breastfeeding featured in

Keeping up with the Kardashians is in fact owed a great dept by the NSH. Because you

can give the girl a pamphlet and lecture her on her baby's vitamin deficiency, but it's never

gonna be as effective as showing Khourtney Kardashian pumping milk in designer jeans.

Slide 9

So what I have tried to illustrate here is the power and stigma of sexualisation. What these

different forms of feminism have all in common, is a highly sexualised visual

representation. The common conception continues, however, that when the clothes come

off, feminism goes home. Sexual representation, or sexualisation, as it has been dubbed,

is a topic that has gotten increasing media coverage over the last decade and boasts an

impressive list of ills that it is blamed for. In fact so potent is the power of sexualisation that

it is credited with leading to everything from sexting to human trafficking.

Pamela Church Gibson notes that a critique of pornography within the “harms

debate”, has now become a critique of sexualised dress. “The writings, of Levy and Walter

and the academic work of Dines and Lynch, indicate the nature of a new and highly

contentious conflict within contemporary feminism” (Church Gibson, 2014: 202). Church

Gibson discusses how the wish to protect young women seems to feed intergenerational

feminist conflict and to create tension. Empowerment through dress and sexual expression

has become a clearly divisive topic in feminism with many feminists, such as Walter

changing ranks themselves over the last decade as her empowered “New Feminism” has

turned into a protectionist critique over how young women “...are being socialized as

“Living Dolls” (Church Gibson, 2014: 203).

Slide 10

The main problem that seems to emerge within anti-sexualisation literature is the

Madonna/Whore dichotomy where young women are on one side seen as the virginal

victims of the adult male gaze and desire, but on the other the alluring, seductive whores.

This contradiction was already present in social hygiene literature according to which girls

naturally desired affection and not sex, but left to their own devises and untrained would

become promiscuous.

Slide 11

I tend to call the phenomenon that this creates, for want of a better term 'double pressure'.

Most anti-sexualisation discourses rely on the idea that young women experience

an extreme pressure to dress in a sexually provocative manner by influence of the media.

This could, however not be further from my own experience nor research done by

Ringrose or Buckingham et al. They report that girls are very aware of the sexual

sanctioning by society that will befall them if they dress in a sexualised way.

What I refer to as 'double pressure' is the idea, that on one hand the media

promotes a sexualised appearance for young women, but on the other hand they are

being pressured by society and fellow feminists not to adhere to it. This creates a double

pressure where young women are being pressured to simultaneously appear sexualised

and modest. In effect, a lose lose situation.

Slide 12

What happens next in the sexualisation practice is even more manipulative. Seeing

expressions of female sexuality as shameful has long roots in western society and we are

all familiar with the 'men are players – women are sluts' paradigm, however what happens

here is that society seems to deliberately encourage a behaviour in girls that it has first

established as reprehensible. In this bizarre twist media, or indeed society inspires

sexualised behaviour in young women, knowing that it harms their social standing, or

maybe exactly because of that. So in a way society deliberately encourages girls to harm

their own position and is so able to keep them in check with the power of their own

behaviour.

Slide 13

The logic behind anti-sexualisation discourses has been that sexualisation is seen to be

the objective and sexism or oppression of women the byproduct. With this logic, if you

remove the sexualisation, sexism and maltreatment of girls will ease up. What I would like

to suggest, however, is to turn this argument on its head. I would like to argue that sexism

is in fact the objective or the end and sexualisation is simply the means with which to

achieve it. This theory suggests that first female sexuality is established as shameful. Then

sexual display in young women is encouraged by the media and society. But finally girls

are again shamed over fulfilling the trend that the media encouraged for them in the first

place.

Slide 14

The final conclusion I would like to draw today departs from both protectionist feminist anti-

sexualisation discourses, and, third wave feminist, liberal discourses. I could argue that

because of sexualisation young women are oppressed, but what I would like to argue is

the opposite. Because women have an oppressed social status, their representation is

only ever going to be seen as symbolic of their oppression. This works for examples of

racism, as well as sexism. For example: It is not that black people were oppressed

because the n-word was applied to them, the n-word became a discriminatory swear word

because it was linked to people in an inferior societal standing. The same goes for earlier

feminist movements: sexualised representations never ontologically oppressed women.

They did however become the irremovable symbol of women's oppression. Sexualised

attire has become so firmly connected to women, and women are knowingly in a

disadvantaged social position, that hence sexualisation has become symbolic of

oppression.

However this is not entirely true either, as sexualisation is not intrinsically oppressive.

When we see images of sexualised men, we do not link it to exploitation. In fact often quite

the opposite. We think of their sexual display as empowered, (or funny).

If we remove sexualised representation from women, we simply remove the means

to the end that is sexism, and something else will come along instantly to take its place. I

would hence like to argue, that the continuous media focus, on the concept of sexualised

representation not only greatly distracts from the feminisms that young women are

performing, but most importantly, ironically, is exactly, what creates the debilitating

problem called sexualisation.