There is a concept that really interests me that Gill briefly discussed in this section that I believe needs to be explained more and it is the both/and theory. In Gill’s case, she explains it in terms of representations of women in the media.
I honestly believe that Sex and the City is an interesting program that definitely takes the both/and concept into question.
Does Sex and the City represent and even empower women? Do Carrie Bradshaw and her girlfriends represent positive media representations of women? Is Sex and the City feminist? All of this can be answered with the and/both concept that Gill uses in the last few paragraphs of this section.
The Second wavers brought up this question in terms of media representations of women because it is difficult to understand that a woman who is conventionally beautiful or falls into the beauty ideal can actually have feminist ideals. Radical feminists believe(d) that in order for one to be a feminist then they needed to separate themselves from the beauty ideal, an ideal that is based on the male gaze and inherently sexist. But later, the third wavers put the idea of an either/or into question. Why can’t a woman be feminist and beautiful?
I have some reservations myself to answer this question with a yes but if the underlying message is extracted, then Sex and the City could be understood as a feminist representation. Yes, the show displays mostly heteronormative images of sex and relationships, and yes, the show consists of mostly white characters but the underlying message that women are our main allies and are the most important relationships in our life allows for a feminist undertone.
Do you think that Sex and the City is feminist? How does one define a feminist? I do not believe that there is a succinct definition but understanding feminism in terms of the both/and concept allows for a wider range of people who can consider themselves feminist.