How do teenage girls articulate sexism in an era where gender injustice has been constructed as a thing of the past? Our article addresses this question by qualitatively exploring Canadian girls’ experiences of being caught between the postfeminist belief that gender equality has been achieved and the realities of their lives in school, which include incidents of sexism in their classrooms, their social worlds, and their projected futures. This analysis takes place in relation to two celebratory postfeminist narratives: Girl Power, where girls are told they can do, be, and have anything they want, and Successful Girls, where girls are told they are surpassing boys in schools and workplaces. We argue that these postfeminist narratives have made naming sexism in schools difficult for girls because they are now seen to “have it all.” Utilizing Foucault’s (1978) law of the tactical polyvalence of discourse, this article analyzes girls’ contradictory engagement with postfeminism in order to both show its importance in girls’ lives, and its instability as a narrative that can adequately explain gender injustice.
AAUW (American Association of University Women). 2008. Where the girls are: The facts about gender equity in education. Washington, DC: AAUW Educational Foundation; National Education Association.
2.
AdamsNatalieBettisPamela. 2003. Commanding the room in short skirts: Cheering as the embodiment of ideal girlhood. Gender & Society17 (1): 73-91.
3.
BakerJoanne. 2008. The ideology of choice: Overstating progress and hiding injustice in the lives of young women: Findings from a study in North Queensland, Australia. Women’s Studies International Forum31:53-64.
4.
BakerJoanne. 2010a. Claiming volition and evading victimhood: Post-feminist obligations for young women. Feminism and Psychology20 (2): 186-204.
5.
BakerJoanne. 2010b. Great expectations and post-feminist accountability: Young women living up to the “successful girls” discourse. Gender & Education22 (1): 1-15.
6.
BettieJulie. 2003. Women without class: Girls, race, and identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
BritzmanDeborah P.2000. “The question of belief”: Writing poststructural ethnography. In Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education, edited by St. PierreE. A.PillowW. S.New York: Routledge.
8.
BrownLyn Mikel. 1999. Raising their voices: The politics of girls’ anger. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
9.
BudgeonShelley. 2001. Emergent feminist (?) identities: Young women and the practice of micropolitics. European Journal of Women’s Studies8 (1): 7-28.
10.
CurrieDawn H.KellyDeirdre M.PomerantzShauna. 2009. “Girl power”: Girls reinventing girlhoods. New York: Peter Lang.
11.
DaviesBronwyn. 1997. The subject of post-structuralism: A reply to Alison Jones. Gender & Education9 (3): 271-84.
12.
EpsteinDebbieElwoodJ.HeyValerieMawJ.1998. Failing boys? Issues in gender and achievement. Buckingham: Open University Press.
13.
FoucaultMichel. 1978. The history of sexuality: An introduction. New York: Vintage Books.
KearneyMary Celeste. 1997. The missing links: Riot Grrrl-feminism-lesbian culture. In Sexing the groove: Popular music and gender, edited by WhiteleyS.London: Routledge.
25.
KindlonDaniel J.2006. Alpha girls: Understanding the new American girl and how she is changing the world. New York: Holtzbrinck.
26.
McRobbieAngela. 2004. Notes on postfeminism and popular culture: Bridget Jones and the new gender regime. In All about the girl: Culture, power, and identity, edited by HarrisA.New York: Routledge.
27.
McRobbieAngela. 2007. Top Girls? Young women and the post-feminist sexual contract. Cultural Studies21 (4): 718-37.
28.
McRobbieAngela. 2008. Young women and consumer culture: An intervention. Cultural Studies22 (5): 531-50.
29.
McRobbieAngela. 2009. The aftermath of feminism: Gender, culture and social change. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
30.
PollackWilliam S.1998. Real boys: Rescuing our sons from the myths of boyhood. New York: Random House.
31.
PomerantzShauna. 2008. Girls, style, and school identities: Dressing the part. New York: Palgrave.
32.
PomerantzShaunaRabyRebecca. 2011. “Oh, she’s so smart”: Girls complex engagements with post/feminist narratives of academic success. Gender & Education23 (5): 549-64.
33.
RabyRebcca. 2004. “There’s no racism at my school, it’s just joking around”: Ramifications for anti-racist education. Race, Ethnicity and Education7 (4) 367-83.
34.
ReinharzShulamit. 1992. Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.
35.
RenoldEmmaAllanAlexandra. 2006. Bright and beautiful: High achieving girls, ambivalent femininities, and the feminization of success in the primary school. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education27 (4): 457-73.
RingroseJessica. 2007. Successful girls? Complicating post-feminist, neoliberal discourses of educational achievement and gender equality. Gender & Education19 (4): 471-89.
38.
RingroseJessicaWalkerdineValerie. 2008. What does it mean to be a girl in the twenty-first century? Exploring some contemporary dilemmas of femininity and girlhood in the West. In Girl culture: An encyclopedia, edited by MitchellC. A.Reid-WalshJ.Westport, CT: Greenwood.
39.
SkeltonChristine. 2010. Gender and achievement: Are girls the “success stories” of restructured education systems?Educational Review62 (10): 131-42.
40.
SommersChristina Hoff. 2000. The war against boys: How misguided feminism is harming our young men. New York: Simon & Schuster.
41.
StaceyJudith. 1990. Sexism by a subtler name? Poststructural conditions and postfeminist consciousness in Silicon Valley. In Women, class, and the feminist imagination: A socialist feminist reader, edited by HansenK. V.PhilipsonI. J.Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
42.
TaftJessica K.2004. Girl power politics: Pop-culture barriers and organizational resistance. In All about the girl: Culture, power, and identity, edited by HarrisA.New York: Routledge.
43.
TolmanDeborah. 2002. Dilemmas of desire: Teenage girls talk about sexuality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
