The act of undermining patriarchal institutions. To subvert something is to take oppressive forces and turn them into something that challenges the oppressor. Institutions such as Gender can be subverted by acts such as extreme perfomance of ones assigned gender or the adoption of criteria for a gender other than one’s “own”. To engage in subversion is to use the patriarch’s “rules” against him, making his intended meaning into something completely different. One does not need to use material means such as clothing to subvert gender, one can also subvert gender through the act of recontextualization. For example, taking a heteronormative song, movie, or tradition and placing it in a queer setting.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Razlike u feminizmim… on Womanism Amelia Charles on queer 
Ways that People Cha… on Compulsory Heterosexuality 015: Effin’ Pa… on Patriarchy MEET NITA, SOCIAL JU… on Womanism -
A Feminist Theory Dictionary 
(For anyone to answer, not necessarily Emma):
Is it possible for women to subvert patriarchy using their sexuality? If it is true what Catharine MacKinnon says about patriarchy shaping women’s sexuality so that even when they have sexual agency they are still acting under patriarchy, then what does this mean for women to (who) actually enjoy their sexuality/ sexual agency? Is a woman who enjoys either having power or giving up her power in sexual contexts simply reaffirming patriarchy, or does playing with power/ hierarchy in sexual contexts count as subversion?
Just kinda rambling… đ
I think that women definately can subvert patriarchy with sexuality! While I do not agree with MacKinnon, I think that women can also be sexual in a way that is playing into patriarchy even when they are “enjoying” it. But I think that women who are aware of the power structures and engaged in making their own choices with their bodies are not passive victims. But I see the difficulty of the question you’re asking. If a woman enjoys being submissive, is she being subversive? Is she contributing to an opressive image of women? Is she brainwashed into liking this? I’m not sure if patriarchy necessarily means not enjoying sex…. hm….
In a queer context, butch/femme relationships play with traditonal gender “roles” and dominant/submissive social performances. I think this counts as subversion. I think this is possible in heterosexual contexts as well, especially in sex work. I think that women who enjoy giving up power in sexual relationships and enjoy their sexualities are awesome, powerful women but I’m not sure if I would call this subversion necessarily. For me, it would have to have another element that convinced me that the act was something other than how it appeared, something contrary to patriarchy.
….I’m not sure
[…] other words, letâs talk genderâŚsubversion and engage in a dialogue of the English court during the sixteenth […]
MacKinnon: “Women often find ways to resist male supremacy and to expand their spheres of action. But they are never free of it. Women also embrace the standards of women’s place in this regime as “our own” to varying degrees and in varying voices- as affirmation of identity and right to pleasure, in order to be loved and approved and paid, in order just to make it through another day. This, not inert passivity, is the meaning of being a victim. […]The term is descriptive: who does what to whom and gets away with it.”
does subverting pink and blue in everyday objects undermine the original intention to subvert it in the first place?