Television, Generation X, and Third Wave feminism: a contextual analysis of the Brady Bunch.(Critical Essay)

THERE IS AN OBVIOUS CHRONOLOGICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN Generation X and Third Wave feminism. Neil Howe and Bill Strauss define Generation X as the generation born between 1961 and 1981, while Rob Owen includes only those born between 1965 and 1975. Similarly, Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards describe Third Wave feminism as the feminism of women and, in some cases, men who were raised in the seventies--hence, during the women's liberation movement. Although these chronological definitions are useful, they do not capture what people seem to have in mind when these labels are applied. The labels "Gen X" and "Third Wave" are also used to characterize distinctive attitudes associated with this generation. Rob Owen captures the Gen X attitude when he claims that "Generation X loves irony, postmodernism and, basically, goofing on things that are presented seriously" (10). Helene Shugart refers to a Gen X "aesthetic" that is characterized by "camp, satire, cynicism, irony, and outrageousness" (136). In addition, Gen X exhibits a "fascination with retro, especially 1970s, pop culture" (136). The Brady Bunch stands out as a pop culture icon with which this generation is especially obsessed. Drawing on both the content and context of The Brady Bunch, I explore the connection between Third Wave feminist attitudes and the so-called Generation X attitude.

I am not the first to acknowledge a connection between Generation X and Third Wave feminism. For example, Helene Shugart suggests that Third Wave feminism is best characterized "as a subculture of the larger rhetorical phenomenon of Generation X rather than a phase or contemporary incarnation of feminism" (134). Like Shugart, I believe that there is a meaningful connection, and not just a trivial chronological concurrence, between Gen X attitudes and the attitudes associated with Third Wave feminism. Unlike Shugart, I suggest that profeminist attitudes and antifeminist attitudes among members of this generation can both be understood in terms of the larger Gen X attitude. In other words, the same attitudes that contribute to the dismissal of feminism by so many Gen X women also account for the particular brand of feminism adopted by the Third Wave. One of the earliest uses of the term "Third Wave" was in Rebecca Walker's 1992 response to a declaration by The New York Times that we had entered an era of postfeminism. Walker commented in Ms. magazine, "I am not a postfeminism feminist. I am the Third Wave" (qtd. in Baumgardner and Richards 77). This exchange is symptomatic of an ongoing struggle to define the values of a generation that is widely perceived, or perhaps misperceived, as aimless and apathetic.

As a member of this generation, I have an obvious stake in correcting false media stereotypes about who we are and what we care about. As suggested by the term "slacker," the apathy with which we have been charged extends beyond the realm of feminism. For example, when Beck--who is neither a loser nor a slacker, but rather an innovative and prolific artist--sang "I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me," his words were promptly misconstrued as something of a Gen X anthem. It seems to me, however, that cynicism, not apathy, is the overriding characteristic that best describes the attitude of my generation. To the extent that some members of my generation are apathetic, this apathy is derivative of our collective cynicism. For many of us, however, that same cynicism gives us a critical perspective on various aspects of mainstream culture that deserve scrutiny.

My generation grew up in front of the TV, and we grew up knowing that we should not trust the media (Hornblower). Unfortunately, knowing that we should not trust the media did not always shield us from the media's influence. We were savvy enough to recognize, for instance, that the antidrug "get high on life" movies shown in elementary and junior high schools were part of a parental conspiracy to prevent us from having fun, but we were not savvy enough to recognize that we actually could have lived without the dolls, action figures, and breakfast cereals advertised during our favorite shows. Now that we are older, many of us still are not quite savvy enough to realize that our preference for Coke over Pepsi, or vice versa, says absolutely nothing of real consequence about our underlying character. In other words, Gen X cynicism does not always yield a principled critical response to consumer culture. Often enough, it yields only a generalized sense that things should not be taken too seriously, and this sentiment is punctuated with a sarcastic roll of the eyes.

This is the same sarcastic roll of the eyes that accompanies the familiar "I'm not a feminist, but ..." through which many women downplay their commitment to basic feminist principles (see Griffin; Kamen; Misciagno). In at least some cases, the rolling eyes are saying, "Of course equality of opportunity is important, but we have that already. If you're still complaining about sexism, you must be taking things too seriously." "Duh!" The Gen X stricture against taking things too seriously applies, not just to others, but to ourselves as well. It is evident in the lighthearted cooptation by Third Wave feminists of various labels that were seen by many Second Wave feminists as symbolic of women's oppression. Terms such as girl, bitch, slut, cunt, and queer have entered the standard lexicon of the Third Wave. In the case of girl, for example, this is because many of us no longer take the label very seriously:

 
  Calling an adult woman "girl" was once insulting, like calling an 
  adult black man "boy." But now that we can choose the word ourselves 
  and not have it forced on us, "girl" is increasingly rehabilitated as 
  a term of relaxed familiarity, comfy confidence, the female analogue 
  to "guy"--and not a way of belittling adult women. (Baumgardner and 
  Richards 52) 

In other cases, the use of formerly oppressive terminology reflects the underlying belief that powerful words can be reclaimed and enlisted in service of a feminist agenda. According to Inga Muscio, "Even if 'cunt' were simply four spontaneous letters someone strung together one day 'cause his wife didn't have dinner on the table when he got home from a hard day's labor offing witches or indigenous peoples, it is still our word" (22-23). And for this reason, she uses the word on her own terms for her own ends. Similarly, when a sexually uninhibited feminist proudly chooses to label herself a slut, her willingness to engage in a bit of lighthearted self-mockery is a small but important step toward eliminating the sexual double standard.