Ask the Author: Andi Zeisler
Answered Questions (6)
Andi Zeisler
The truth is that all of my original titles were rejected for being too boring and academic-sounding! But I think the title speaks to the question of: What happens when everything becomes feminist? Well, what happens when everything is feminist is that nothing is feminist. I guess there's something a little wary and almost dystopian about it. Let's check ourselves before we wreck ourselves.
Andi Zeisler
Thanks, Sophia! I hope you enjoy it. I think the downsides of feminism becoming trendy mainly have to do with the fact that we often end up focusing exclusively on individuals and products, rather than the systems that create them and sell them to us. One example is the way we have come to argue endlessly back and forth about which celebrities "deserve" to call themselves feminist, or which movies or TV shows are "legitimately" feminist. Focusing on products or individuals puts the onus on them, rather than on the systems.
So, for instance, arguing about whether a movie like Mad Max: Fury Road or Trainwreck is "really" feminist ends up shifting focus away from the deeply entrenched inequality re: whose stories are developed and financed and told by Hollywood. The battles need to go beyond individual people and products and really hit at the bedrock of inequality.
Likewise, looking only at what's "empowering" to women and celebrating "choice" effectively obscures the reality that many, many people are shut out of the marketplace that glorify empowerment and choice. Focusing less on choice and more on rights is a daunting task, but it's necessary if we want equality for all people, not just the ones who can afford it.
In terms of what activists and writers can do to help these conversations happen and progress beyond the surface: Critical thinking (and encouraging it in everyone you know who cares about these issues) is a crucial ongoing project. The more we're aware of how media works—who owns it, who benefits from the messages it sells us, who is invisible within it—the more power we have to push back and demand more from it.
So, for instance, arguing about whether a movie like Mad Max: Fury Road or Trainwreck is "really" feminist ends up shifting focus away from the deeply entrenched inequality re: whose stories are developed and financed and told by Hollywood. The battles need to go beyond individual people and products and really hit at the bedrock of inequality.
Likewise, looking only at what's "empowering" to women and celebrating "choice" effectively obscures the reality that many, many people are shut out of the marketplace that glorify empowerment and choice. Focusing less on choice and more on rights is a daunting task, but it's necessary if we want equality for all people, not just the ones who can afford it.
In terms of what activists and writers can do to help these conversations happen and progress beyond the surface: Critical thinking (and encouraging it in everyone you know who cares about these issues) is a crucial ongoing project. The more we're aware of how media works—who owns it, who benefits from the messages it sells us, who is invisible within it—the more power we have to push back and demand more from it.
Andi Zeisler
This is a really great question. It's one that I'd love to see posed more often to such women themselves. From my own experience with such women, my sense is that the simple answer has to do with internalized misogyny and the belief that patriarchy is a foregone conclusion.
Women are so often socialized to see each other as competition, but even more important is that we (and note that I believe this is true for all genders, in varying ways) are encouraged to see sexism as an individual matter rather than as a systemic one, particularly within institutions—schools, corporations, entire industries—where power has traditionally been defined by and concentrated in male spheres.
Ariel Levy, in her book Female Chauvinist Pigs, wrote about "loophole women"—women in historically male industries who pride themselves on overcoming sexism but then recast their experiences as singular, rather than shared. Like you say, they see having gained inclusion into a boys' club as a personal achievement that's a testament to their exceptionalism and grit. To work toward actually dismantling the system becomes too risky to their hard-won success.
Women are so often socialized to see each other as competition, but even more important is that we (and note that I believe this is true for all genders, in varying ways) are encouraged to see sexism as an individual matter rather than as a systemic one, particularly within institutions—schools, corporations, entire industries—where power has traditionally been defined by and concentrated in male spheres.
Ariel Levy, in her book Female Chauvinist Pigs, wrote about "loophole women"—women in historically male industries who pride themselves on overcoming sexism but then recast their experiences as singular, rather than shared. Like you say, they see having gained inclusion into a boys' club as a personal achievement that's a testament to their exceptionalism and grit. To work toward actually dismantling the system becomes too risky to their hard-won success.
Andi Zeisler
Oh my gosh, there are so many good (terrible) examples. There's an ad from the 1970s for Massengill douche that's definitely extra-special (I can't figure out how to post a photo, or I would). But suffice it to say that Massengill branded its douche as "Freedom Spray" and included a sort of campaign-style button in the ad.
Andi Zeisler
It's hard to say whether it's a necessary evil, because for as long as there have been feminist movements, there have been industries trying, with varying amounts of cycnicism, to cash in on them. It's almost impossible to think of feminist movements without also thinking of the mediated, consumer images that have always gone along with them—I'm thinking about Virginia Slims ads, or the Spice Girls, or any of the number of products and celebrities that have aligned themselves with the words "feminist" or "empowering."
I certainly think that marketplace feminism has a role to play in raising the profile of feminist movements and amplifying concerns. The trick is to make sure marketplace feminism can also be harnessed to draw attention to feminist issues that don't get much play in the marketplace or the mainstream media. The endgame of, say, something like the Bechdel Test isn't to just have more movies squeak over a very low baseline—it's to foment systemic change wherein we value, and fund, and amplify women as creators in places like Hollywood where the institutions tend to be very gendered and very entrenched.
I certainly think that marketplace feminism has a role to play in raising the profile of feminist movements and amplifying concerns. The trick is to make sure marketplace feminism can also be harnessed to draw attention to feminist issues that don't get much play in the marketplace or the mainstream media. The endgame of, say, something like the Bechdel Test isn't to just have more movies squeak over a very low baseline—it's to foment systemic change wherein we value, and fund, and amplify women as creators in places like Hollywood where the institutions tend to be very gendered and very entrenched.
Andi Zeisler
This is a good question. I've definitely considered that writing and marketing and book about commodified feminism invites a critique about doing the very thing that I'm critiquing. I do think there's a significant difference between a book like WWFO and, say, a brand like Dove that makes money for its parent company by using "empowerment" to market products to women. I'm not attempting to sell women on their consumer empowerment through products or identities, but rather asking us all to think critically about why it's so much easier to commodify an attractive, depoliticized feminism than to address it at a systemic level.
(And to your question about profits, some of them will go toward Bitch Media, the nonprofit media organization I cofounded and continue to work for. Bitch has existed for more than 20 years independent of media revenue streams of advertising and venture capital—it's a reader-supported organization.)
(And to your question about profits, some of them will go toward Bitch Media, the nonprofit media organization I cofounded and continue to work for. Bitch has existed for more than 20 years independent of media revenue streams of advertising and venture capital—it's a reader-supported organization.)
About Goodreads Q&A
Ask and answer questions about books!
You can pose questions to the Goodreads community with Reader Q&A, or ask your favorite author a question with Ask the Author.
See Featured Authors Answering Questions
Learn more