Advertisement

This Girl Can? The Limitations of Digital Do-It-Yourself Empowerment in Women’s Active Embodiment Campaigns

  • Annaleise Depper
  • Simone Fullagar
  • Jessica Francombe-Webb
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter critically examines the gendered assumptions that inform This Girl Can, a recent digital campaign that has been produced by Sport England to inspire women and girls to be more active. In seeking to represent ‘real’ bodies the campaign has generated an intense affective response from a range of women via social media. However, within the biopolitical project of active leisure and sport promotion for health, we ask, are women’s bodies digitally enacted and gendered in particular ways that may indeed undermine the empowering intent of the campaign? Our material-discursive analysis of the images and texts that produce This Girl Can identifies how affective relations (pleasure, shame, etc.) work to complicate individualized messages of empowerment in the post-feminist era.

References

  1. Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amy-Chinn, D. (2006). This is just for me(n): How the regulation of post-feminist lingerie advertising perpetuates woman as object. Journal of Consumer Culture, 6(2), 155–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baer, H. (2016). Redoing feminism: Digital activism, body politics, and neoliberalism. Feminist Media Studies, 16(1), 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dobson, A. S. (2015). Postfeminist digital cultures: Femininity, social media, and self-representation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Douglas, S. J. (2010). Epilogue: The f-word. Enlightened sexism: The seductive message that feminism’s work is done. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
  8. Evans, A., & Riley, S. (2014). Technologies of sexiness: Sex, identity and consumer culture. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Evans, R., Riley, S., & Shankar, A. (2010). Technologies of sexiness: Theorizing women’s engagement in the sexualization of culture. Feminism & Psychology, 20(1), 114–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ferris, J. E. (2003). Parallel discourses and “appropriate” bodies: Media constructions of anorexia and obesity in the cases of Tracey Gold and Carnie Wilson. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 27(3), 256–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Francis, B. (2006). The nature of gender. In C. Skelton, B. Francis, & L. Smulyan (Eds.), The Sage handbook of gender and education (pp. 7–17). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Francombe, J. (2010). I cheer, you cheer, we cheer’: Physical technologies and the normalized body. Television & New Media, 11(5), 350–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Francombe, J. (2014). Learning to leisure: Femininity and practices of the body. Leisure Studies, 33(6), 580–597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Francombe-Webb, J. (2015). Body image & female identity: A multi-method approach to media analysis. In Sage research methods cases. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Francombe-Webb, J., & Toffoletti, K. (2017). Sporting females: Power, diversity and the body [forthcoming]. In B. Wheaton et al. (Eds.), Handbook of feminism in sport, leisure and physical education. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  16. Francombe-Webb, J., Depper, A., & Rich, E. (2016). Why young women need to be given a louder voice in the obesity debate. The Conversation. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from https://theconversation.com/why-young-women-need-to-be-given-a-louder-voice-in-the-obesity-debate-68861
  17. Fullagar, S. (2009). Governing healthy family lifestyles through discourses of risk and responsibility. In J. Wright & V. Harwood (Eds.), Biopolitics and the “obesity epidemic”: Governing bodies (pp. 108–126). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Fullagar, S. (2017). Post-qualitative inquiry and the new materialist turn: Implications for sport, health and physical culture research. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 9(2), 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fullagar, S., & Francombe-Webb, J. (2015). This girl can campaign is all about sex not sport. The Guardian. Retrieved December 17, 2015, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/16/this-girl-can-campaign-sex-sport-real-women-bodies-objectifying-female-flesh
  20. Fullagar, S., & Pavlidis, A. (2018). Feminist theories of emotion and affect in sport. In B. Wheaton et al. (Eds.), Handbook of feminism in sport, leisure and physical education (pp. 447–462). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fullagar, S., Pavlidis, A., & Francombe-Webb, J. (2018). Feminist theories after the post-structuralist turn [forthcoming]. In D. Parry, C. Johnson, & F. A. Warner (Eds.), Fourth wave feminism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Fusco, C. (2006). Inscribing healthification: Governance, risk, surveillance and the subjects and spaces of fitness and health. Health & Place, 12(1), 65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gill, R. (2007a). Postfeminist media culture: Elements of a sensibility. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(2), 147–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gill, R. (2007b). Critical respect: The difficulties and dilemmas of agency and “choice” for feminism: A reply to Duits and van Zoonen. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 14(1), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gill, R. (2009). Beyond the ‘sexualization of culture’ thesis: An intersectional analysis of ‘sixpacks’, ‘midriffs’ and ‘hot lesbians’ in advertising. Sexualities, 12(2), 137–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gill, R. (2016). Post-postfeminism? New feminist visibilities in postfeminist times. Feminist Media Studies, 16(4), 610–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gill, R., & Scharff, C. (2011). Introduction. In R. Gill & C. Scharff (Eds.), New femininities: Postfeminism, neoliberalism, and subjectivity (pp. 1–20). London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gillis, S., & Munford, R. (2004). Genealogies and generations: The politics and praxis of third wave feminism. Women’s. History Review, 13(2), 165–182.Google Scholar
  29. Girl Guiding UK. (2016). Girls’ attitudes survey. London: Girl Guiding UK.Google Scholar
  30. Harris, A. (2004). Future girl. Young women in the twenty-first century. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Harris, A., & Dobson, A. S. (2015). Theorizing agency in post-girlpower times. Continuum, 29(2), 145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Heywood, L. (2007). Producing girls: Empire, sport, and the neoliberal body. In J. Hargreaves & P. Vertinsky (Eds.), Physical culture, power and the body (pp. 101–120). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Long, J., Hylton, K., Lewis, H., Ratna, A., & Spracklen, K. (2011). Space for inclusion? The construction of sport and leisure spaces as places for migrant communities. In A. Ratna & B. Lashua (Eds.), Community and inclusion in leisure research and sport development (pp. 33–53). Eastbourne: Leisure Studies Association.Google Scholar
  34. McMurria, J. (2008). Desperate citizens and good Samaritans. Neoliberalism and makeover reality TV. Television and New Media, 9, 305–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McRobbie, A. (2004a). Notes on postfeminism and popular culture: Bridget Jones and the new gender regime. In A. Harris (Ed.), All about the girl: culture, power and identity (pp. 3–14). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. McRobbie, A. (2004b). Notes on ‘what not to wear’ and post-feminist symbolic violence. The Sociological Review, 52(2), 97–109.Google Scholar
  37. McRobbie, A. (2004c). Post-feminism and popular culture. Feminist Media Studies, 4(3), 255–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. McRobbie, A. (2008). Young women and consumer culture. Cultural Studies, 22(5), 531–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Probyn, E. (2005). Blush: Faces of shame. Sydney, NSW: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
  40. Salter, M. (2015). Privates in the online public: Sex(ting) and reputation on social media. New Media and Society, 18(11), 2723–2739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Silas, S. (2017). #thisgirlcan? I much prefer #thiswomandoes. The Guardian. Retrieved April 6, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/06/thisgirlcan-i-prefer-thiswomandoes-branding-infantilises
  42. Skeggs, B. (2004). Class, self, culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Sport England. (2015). Go where women are: Insight on engaging women and girls in sport and exercise. London: Sport England.Google Scholar
  44. Sport England. (2016a). Sport England 2015–16 annual report. London: Sport England.Google Scholar
  45. Sport England. (2016b). This Girl Can delivers results one year on. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from https://www.sportengland.org/news-and-features/news/2016/january/12/thisgirlcanbirthday/
  46. Sport England. (2016c). Record number of women get active. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from https://www.sportengland.org/news-and-features/news/2016/december/8/record-numbers-of-women-getting-active/
  47. Sport England. (2016d). Youth insight under the skin. London: Sport England.Google Scholar
  48. Sport England. (2016e). This Girl Can is our nationwide campaign to get women and girls moving, regardless of shape, size and ability. Retrieved July 7, 2017, from https://www.sportengland.org/our-work/women/this-girl-can/
  49. Sport England. (2017). This Girl Can returns to our screens. Retrieved April 3, 2017, from https://www.sportengland.org/news-and-features/news/2017/february/24/this-girl-can-returns-to-our-screens/
  50. Stewart, C., & Caudwell, J. (2017). Vicious cycle: The “troublemakers” tackling sexism in elite sport. The Conversation. Retrieved 7 July, 2017, from http://theconversation.com/vicious-cycle-the-troublemakers-tackling-sexism-in-elite-sport-75687
  51. This Girl Can. (2017). Stories archive – This Girl Can. Retrieved April 4, 2017, from http://www.thisgirlcan.co.uk/stories/
  52. Toffoletti, K. (2016). Analyzing media representations of sportswomen—expanding the conceptual boundaries using a postfeminist sensibility. Sociology of Sport Journal, 2(33), 199–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. van Ingen, C. (2016). Getting lost as a way of knowing: The art of boxing within shape your life. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 8(5), 472–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Watson, B., & Ratna, A. (2011). Bollywood in the park: Thinking intersectionally about public leisure space. Leisure/Loisir, 35(1), 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Watson, B., & Scraton, S. J. (2012). Leisure studies and intersectionality. Leisure Studies, 32(1), 35–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wetherell, M. (2012). Affect and emotion. A new social science understanding. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wolfe, M. J. (2017). Puberty blues—then and now: Diffracting semblances of being girl in Australia. Feminist Media Studies, 17(3), 489–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wright, J. (2014). Beyond body fascism: The place for health education. In K. Fitzpatrick & R. Tinning (Eds.), Health education: Critical perspectives (pp. 233–248). Oxon/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Annaleise Depper
    • 1
  • Simone Fullagar
    • 1
  • Jessica Francombe-Webb
    • 1
  1. 1.Department for HealthUniversity of BathBathUK

Personalised recommendations