In response to 11th August article by Sarah Manavis: Are you a brat girl or a trad wife? Why female microtrends are piling up fast
Characterising the recent stream of female microtrends as "anti-feminist" and "reductionist" falls into the trap of taking the whole thing too seriously.
The failure to acknowledge that women can simply enjoy partaking in an ephemeral aesthetic, and at the same time experience a rich, fertile – and political! – life counters some of feminism’s founding principles, namely: the expansion of human choice, sexual freedom and self-empowerment. Must the idea that women are, and can be, more complex than the trends to which they superficially subscribe be underlined?
Manavis, rather masochistically, does less than criticise the male equivalent of microtrends – she denies their existence altogether. Do the male-faced fads of hipster, utilitarian, baggy-fashion, or athleisure, simplify what it means to be a man? We don’t say so; we just let the boys play. I’ll pre-empt the counterargument that male-dominated trends (punk would be a good example) are longer-lasting and imbued with ‘philosophy’, by noting that the Brat movement may wield serious political leverage – thus disproving the charge of “frailty”.
Already, the Brat brand has been adopted by Kamala Harris’ campaign; the eponymous album’s neon green became her backdrop on X within hours of Charli XCX’s endorsement. Perhaps the Brat microtrend will go on to be macro yet – and help swing popular opinion in favour of a Democrat win. After all, this election has been dubbed the battle of the vibes.
With power like that – especially in an election pitting democracy against demagoguery – is Brat not a movement worth celebrating?
Comments