Second Wave Feminism and "Post-Feminism"

The feminism movement encouraged women to understand the psychological implications of sexist stereotypes, and attempted to make women realize that they could achieve more in life then being a mother and house wife.

In "Why Have There Been No Great Women Artists?" Linda Nochlin states "while the recent upsurge of feminist activity has been a liberating one, its forces has been chiefly emotional-personal, psychological, and subjective centered.....like any other revolution the feminist one must ultimately come to grips with the intellectual and and ideological basis of the various intellectual or scholarly disciplines in the same way that it questions the ideologies of present social institutions." Noclin argues that what is important is that women face up to the reality of their history and present situation and rather than making excuses based on our "disadvantages", women should reveal institutional and intellectual weakness, simultaneously destroying false consciousness. Nochlin suggests that when asked, Why have there been no great artists, that we do not fall into the trap of drugging up women artists from the pasts who have left their mark, but rather question the institution and our education.

When asking, "why have there been no great women artists?, Nochlin points out the failure of the institution to expand its definition of great. Throughout art history the great artist has been conceived as one who is "genius." The term genius has historically always been associated with the male, one who is godlike. It is not until the institution expands its definition of genius as one that is dynamic rather than static, that the institution can open true greatness to anyone, man or woman. In the end Nochlin suggests, "it is indeed institutionally made impossible for women to achieve artistic excellence or success, on the same footing as men no matter what the potency of their so-called talent or genius."

Post-feminism

Amelia Jones states that post feminism follows the Mulveyan way of thought. If we recall in "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema", Laura Mulvey notes that Freud had referred to (infantile) scopophilia - the pleasure involved in looking at other people’s bodies as (particularly, erotic) objects. In the darkness of the cinema auditorium it is notable that one may look without being seen either by those on screen by other members of the audience. Mulvey argues that various features of cinema viewing conditions facilitate for the viewer both the voyeuristic process of objectification of female characters and also the narcissistic process of identification with an ‘ideal ego’ seen on the screen. She declares that in patriarchal society ‘pleasure in looking has been split between active/male and passive/female. Jone's states that the Mulveyan "feminist anti-fetishism", where visual seduction is seen to be necessarily complicitous with male fetishism, female pleasure is simply ignored. "Ironicallly, in overlooking the question of female pleasure, critical texts that privilege feminist appropriation art for its refusal of the desiring "male gaze" have maintained the boundaries of masculinist critical and viewing authority even as they worked to celebrate practices that critique it." In stating such, Jone's suggests that the fault within the post feminist program,with its Mulveyan focus on male pleasure, is that it prohibits the possibility of a desiring female spectator.