[...] In this light, the selfie isn’t about empowerment. But it also isn’t not about
empowerment. Empowerment, or lack thereof, is not part of the picture.
Neither is narcissism, as either a personal or a cultural moral failure.
And the selfie isn’t about the male gaze. The selfie, in the end is
about the gendered labour of young girls under capitalism. Do we honestly think that by ceasing to take and post selfies, the bodies of young women would cease to be spectacles? Teenage girls are Young-Girls,
are spectacles, are narcissists, are consumers
because those are the very criterion which must be met to be a young
woman and also a part of society. That their bodies are commodities
enters them into economies of attention, and that is where the disgust
with selfies comes from. In an economy of attention, it is a disaster
for men that girls take up physical space and document it, and that this
documentation takes up page hits and retweets that could go to ‘more
important’ things. And so the Young-Girl must be punished, with a
disgust reserved for the purely trivial. To paraphrase that beloved of
Young-Girl films, Ever After — itself paraphrasing Thomas More’s Utopia — what are we to make of the selfie but that we first create teenage girls and then punish them?
(Thanx Ken!)
Saturday, 6 July 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment