Edited By : Abhirami
If you are a regular user of Instagram and your recommendations page is very “straight”, you will probably have come across reels of couples (mostly heterosexual ones). Obviously, there are many kinds of reels that involve couples- funny ones where the couples make fun of each other, pranks (which often have a tendency to become extreme and problematic), and content that show couples being lovey-dovey and showing off their “ideal” relationship. Of the last kind, I have started notice a trend which I feel is harmful as it romanticises gender roles and stereotypes – reels which go, “Find someone who does (insert any act that is considered progressive and modern which also act as a subversion of gender stereotypes/roles) as well as (insert any act that aligns with stereotypical gender roles”). This kind of a trend is not just limited to content that involve heterosexual couples but also individuals and is not relegated to Instagram alone. Another aspect of this kind of content which bugs me is that the creators of these kinds of content do the same, which are not aligned with traditional gender roles and also preach things like “women empowerment”. Some even claim to be feminists. Thinking about these ideas and watching other people on the internet analyse and talk about these kinds of trends has confirmed what I, as a feminist, hates “hate”- the perpetuation of gender roles and stereotypes.
We are at a time when ideas of feminism, especially intersectional feminism has been gaining momentum and at the same time, still face opposition from large sections of society, especially men (and some women) who usually happen to cisgender and heterosexual, and usually (not all the time) have more power relative to other marginalized sections of society. While this is happening, in my opinion, we do not need the glorification of a system that can reverse any progress to equity. In other words, we should not glorify gender roles as they confine people into boxes based on their gender (on the assumption that there are only two genders, which is wrong) and in a way, is antithetical to feminism as it disadvantages women (or anyone who is not cisgender, heterosexual male). A typical counter argument regarding how gender roles can be feminist is the one about choice. There is also a term for it, choice feminism, coined by the American lawyer Linda Hirshman. However, as Michaele L. Ferguson writes in her essay Choice Feminism and the Fear of Politics, choice feminism is motivated by a fear of politics. Ferguson further goes on to criticize choice feminism by talking about how it “offers a worldview that does not challenge the status quo”. The essay also brought to my attention something that I believe is one of the core aspects of feminism – the relationship between the personal and the political. The essay argued that choice feminism enables feminists to sidestep the difficulty of making the personal political. This view of choice feminism was able to put into words what I have been feeling uncomfortable about the glorification of gender roles on social media. It may have been consensual, however, can it be called “feminist”?
Sure, it is a person’s choice whether or not to follow gender roles and whether or not make content on social media regarding that and it is also a personal choice whether or not to watch those or not watch those and to criticize or not criticize them. But I think we also need to consider other facets that surround these kinds of content, namely, privilege and expectations. When people glorify content that promotes gender roles, it is important to look at the privilege of the people taking part in that. While for some people it may look like an attractive option to be in a heterosexual relationship where the male partner earns and the female partner does the domestic labour, one must also think about the economic status of the people involved. It is easier for this kind of an arrangement to function when the parties involved have some form of generational wealth and a well paying job which can be inaccessible to many marginalized sections of society. Coming to the gender part of this kind of a relationship dynamic, the women involved in this are at a significant disadvantage. Not earning makes it difficult for them to get out of such a relationship if it gets dangerous for them as they would essentially have no way of supporting themselves. Conversations about the status, beliefs and structure of the natal family of women come into play here, especially in regions like South Asia where family is treated as sacred. Even if such problems don’t arise, the woman is still at a disadvantage as her voice and freedom can be curbed by the man due to the fact that she does not earn. The pressure of being the sole earner is on the men and it reinforces ideas of toxic masculinity.
There also exists content by individuals who portray their “perfect” lives conforming to gender roles and stereotypes. This has the potential to regress the feminist movement, especially if an impressionable audience consumes this type of content wholeheartedly and decide early on to start adhering to these kinds of lifestyles. This makes them (especially younger women) vulnerable to a lot of things such as being groomed by older people, abuse, the trauma resulting from it, and so on. Even men are not shielded from the consequences of subscribing to these ideas. The argument of choice, in this case, even though seen as valid by a section of society shows the unwillingness on their part to engage with the deeper structural and systemic issues of patriarchy and toxic masculinity.
Coming to the point about expectations, the portrayal of the people involved in the showcasing of gender roles in social media as being extremely happy makes people idealize such lifestyles, ignoring the circumstances and the bigger picture. This puts pressure on people to act a certain way and maybe even try to mold their personal relationships in ways to fit the ideal shown on social media, only to end in disappointment because it may not work for everyone. This kind of idealization can also make people insecure about their lives and in turn ruin their mental health and personal relationships.
With all this being said, is not giving a platform for content that glorifies gender roles the answer to this issue? Definitely not, as even such people have a right to make whatever content they want and post it on social media. I believe that critically engaging with such content is the way to go about it. By that, I mean not seeing what is being portrayed as an ideal and also not shy away from talking about the larger context of it, politically and socially. It also involves discussions of the problematic aspects of the particular content and not limit it to choice. Ultimately, no one wants to be in a world where people are put into boxes because of their gender and this kind of gender role glorifying content reinforces that. Let us not underestimate the power that social media has in shaping people’s mindsets and opinions.