Search

It is a decade and a half since Nigel Edley and Margaret Wetherell's (2001) “Jekyll and Hyde: Men's constructions of feminism and feminists” called scholarly attention to men's discursive splitting of feminism and feminists into good and monstrous variants. In this article, we ask whether this double vision persists and how it operates in a cultural moment when feminism and feminist issues are (re)entering the mainstream. We draw from data collected in the course of a New Zealand study exploring how young people were making sense of sexism, feminism and gender (in)equality. Our analysis of participants' accounts suggests a binary discursive formulation of feminism is alive and well: “unreasonable feminism” damns and dismisses feminism, while “fair feminism” affirms it, aligning it with equality. Where previous research has shown how such pejorative and affirming accounts are worked together in ways that dilute or depoliticise feminism, we explore how teenagers who explicitly adopted a feminist identity drew on these discourses to justify a more politicised feminist position. Many participants adopted a practice of “reasonable feminism”, embodying and evidencing feminist reasonableness through their rhetorical and performative devices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a cooperative enquiry on how feminism looks like in daily practice in an educational setting in Aotearoa, New Zealand and how the application of feminism differ across academic disciplines. The enquiry led researchers through four phases that address propositional knowledge, recording and observing practical knowledge and highlighting experiential knowledge. It refers to feminism today as more about raising awareness about sexism and barriers to women's choices.