Feminist women wanted for PhD research.

Hey annalytica - I looked at some of the videos which is why I'm wondering why you choose the moniker burlesque when, to my mind, satire is a lot more gender neutral.

It is difficult to have precise info on the origins of burlesque because it was a long time ago.

I have read before that dancing women in feminine worship were part of Ancient Greek burlesque. IIRC penis jokes featured too. I'm no expert on the subject but it does seem that the 'bawdy' element of burlesque has always been patriarchal, thereby to my mind, it has got 'owt to do with radical feminism.

Still, good for you young women to be thinking about things and poking fun.

I'm afraid I do agree with Dittany however that radical feminism is a definite and historical concept within which either one's actions fall or they do not. Having said that it is really hard to shake off patriarchal internalisation all the time.

As soon as I am can get to my laptop, I will have a look (iPhone crap for these sorts of things).

However, it is a cop out to come onto this thread, accuse some of us for not understanding your pov and then placing the onus on us to figure it out. It is because you are unable to articulate it? (Which is fine btw, there are many things I feel but am unable to express adequately) or is it because it really doesn't have much to do with feminism?

It is perfectly possible to be a feminist and like burlesque (IMO, I know some will disagree) just as it is perfectly possible to be a feminist and shave your legs/knit/enjoy baking/put highlights in your hair. But the fact that I like perfume does not make perfumery a feminist art.

"Please could you take the time to explain how the objectification of women for the titillation of men has anything to do with feminism (never mind radical feminism)?"

I'm afraid I don't have the time to explain at the length that would clearly be required to overcome the determination of people on this forum to disagree. Perhaps you could take the time to look at some of our videos before deciding that our show is just about dressing up and dancing.

Dittany: I know what radical means and I will choose the terms with which to describe my own approach to feminism, because I know myself rather better than you do. Please do not make assumptions like that.

I am not trying to argue that anyone "should" be fun in a way that feels inappropriate for them, or that feminists should laugh at oppression. It's entirely up to you how you approach feminism, I'm just saying that we don't think radical feminism is in contradiction with fun.

Yes, we are (mostly) young and middle class. We're not as diverse as we would like to be. We're working on it. That doesn't stop us from being feminists.

A lot of the "humourless feminist" gibes come (IMO) from men who don't like it if we don't laugh at their crap or put out for them, or respond sweetly to their overtures.

I do think there is a difference in women attempting to create fun and challenge notions of sexuality away from the heteronormative context. IF that's what they are doing with burlesque etc .

Yes, I see what you mean Fennel.

I'm just always a bit confused by the idea (not that this is what you are saying, I'm just musing out loud) that feminism should be fun.

You don't see people complaining that the civil rights movement are a right humourless bunch.

I'm really suspicious of the fun notion because it veers close to the 'only having a laugh', 'can't you take a joke' crap that women hear all the time. I'm all for holding the patriarchy up for ridicule in a blaming/shaming sort of way however. I think we have to be really really careful not to laugh at our oppression though. 'Tis a slippery slope.

Liberating, perhaps, rather than fun. But to me it's a whole lot more fun being liberated than living in thrall to the patriarchy.

Oh and since the OP has not come back to the thread, to prevent it from being derailed, I somewhat resent being told to take an already established conversation elsewhere

I hear you Fennel. I'm not saying that feminism is a no fun zone. I laugh a lot at a couple of feminist blogs and I laugh sometimes on here too.

I'm just being reminded of the notion of 'humourless' feminists to which I always tend to think that I can't think of a single funny thing about the various manifestations of oppression cited above.

Hmmm... I don't know analytica ' A lot of what we do is about challenging stereotypes through subverting people's expectations, so puzzling juxtapositions are intentional '. Sounds a lot like academic gobbledegook to me. Please could you take the time to explain how the objectification of women for the titillation of men has anything to do with feminism (never mind radical feminism)?

Don't yet me wrong, if you guys are into dressing up and dancing, that's great but don't pretend it has anything to do with equality

Oh yes Fennel I definitely agree that being a feminist is fun for all te reasons you quote and many more!

I just find the term "being fun" / "being bubbly" is so often a synonym for "being nice quiet thick sexually compliant", that sort of thing.

Not saying that feminism itself is all dour depressing stuff, oh no sirree bob!

I think it can be fun being a feminist. Not in the "postmodern enjoyment of pole dancing as liberation" way, but it's quite fun not being hung up about sex and virginity and monogamy. Not having to spend half one's life grooming and worrying about appearance.

Also it's generally enjoyable having a partner who does half the childcare and housework.

Also quite fun being able to spend time at paid work yakking about feminism and writing about it.

not to discount the problems feminists face, but I do not personally experience feminism as non-fun.

Annalytica why burlesque and not just plain old satire?

From what I know of it, burlesque was male dominated satire until the time (sorry don't know the date) when a bit of titillation in the form of stripping women was brought in to jazz things up a bit.

I can see that you are not just about pasties and empowerfulment however.

Perhaps I'm just too old and grumpy to think that radical feminism is fun. I do think it can be funny/witty but most of the time I find it bloody heartbreaking (rape, DV, porn, etc).

Carly, I would like to hear more about your project, I'm in the age group.

Definitely NOT interested in getting my tits out though. Soz.

"don't have to choose between being radical and being fun"

Bleeeurgh. Who the fuck wants to be "fun"?!?! Sounds suspiciously like being "bubbly" to me.

But yes, if you could just reassure me that this is NOT the general slant of your research, that would be v helpful.

I notice that there is already a more appropriate thread on this very website, in fact, if people are interested in discussing the issue further:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/1188571-Burlesque-Feminism

Thank you for taking the time to have a look at our website, Beachcomber. A lot of what we do is about challenging stereotypes through subverting people's expectations, so puzzling juxtapositions are intentional. We aim to challenge and expand ideas about acceptable ways of being. We don't have to choose between being radical and being fun - we are both. I don't want to derail this thread too much by getting into a discussion of burlesque here though.

(let me just be clear, I am not necessarily saying that Carly's research is important and relevant, but so far from what she's posted on this thread I don't think it deserves the trashing it's getting):

In a sense, the way that the predominantly over-35 women on this thread do not see the importance and relevance of images to feminism, and do not see the relevance of an under-35 study, are related. Maybe those of us over 35 primarily view feminism as to do with words and language (I certainly do, language, words, communication are core interests of mine). And perhaps those under 35 do experience the world and feminism in a more visual or multi-media way. Maybe images are more relevant to them than they are to the older generation.

As for what is happening with feminism in academia. There are various quite distinct strands of feminism in different academic disciplines. The Birkbeck gender and sexuality/queer theory strand is in line with one field of feminist work. You get different approaches, key theories, methodologies and ways of talking and resarching in sociology, psychology, health and medical research fields, law, geography, philosophy etc. All of those areas have lots of active feminist activity going on, and they have different influences and interests. There is no one "academic feminist" approach. The sort of "academic feminism" that is sometimes criticised on mumsnet bears little relation to the sorts of academic feminism I'm used to. My feminist colleagues are often very motivated by changing the law, policy, government initiatives, educational systems, health practices, etc. That is rather different from the queer theory area, say, though there are some overlaps.

Oh Lordy, have checked out the website, thank you annalytica.

I'm mighty puzzled by the juxtaposition of 'radical feminists' with 'thigh-high fetish-boots' and 'titillation for the brain'.

Shouldn't that read 'fun feminists'?

Ahem. I'm too old for the research too and agree that images are not nearly as relevant as words to the feminist movement.

I'm also too old and cynical radical a feminist to find anything pleasant about burlesque...

To clarify, I posted an advert for Carly's research on the Lashings of Ginger Beer (feminist burlesque) blog because we often advertise events, jobs and research relevant to feminists. She has no direct connection with us. I apologise if this was inappropriate and has given a misleading impression of the nature of Carly's work.

For those assuming that burlesque is all about stripping, pole dancing and tassles, I suggest you look it up on wikipedia and then take a look at our website at lashings.org. You may be pleasantly surprised.

YY PA. I am an educated (and I think) intelligent woman and I can see bollock for what it is, and that certainly is a load of shit!

MBJ, I agree

I am not an academic, although I am highly educated

That bollocks you quoted just does not make sense

words, words, words and fuck-all substance, IMO

Just had a look at that FB page. My problem with most of academia is that it is just so far removed from reality, I mean '^This panel aims to consider some of the complex intersections between feminism
and radicality/radicalism, asking: How can we understand the deployment of the
terms 'radical' and radicalism' and what might feminist politics contribute to
considerations of radically?^'. WTF?!? How does this attempt to understand any real aspect of feminism as a relevant movement?

I'm all for intelligent discussion and in debt debate but discussions such as the above have as much use as obscuring the real issues of (for example) DV through the discussion of the fragility of the male psyche.

I though that too. Carly, why was that?

I also thought that it sounded like a prelude to finally chucking radical feminism out the door of the university and would have been interesting to me on that basis. As in trying to understand wtf is going on in universities.