17 thoughts on “Nadia Kamil’s Feminist Burlesque Routine”

  6. First comment got stuck in moderation:

    I’m really uncomfortable with this. Lots of elements of her routine (both before and, more subtly, during her actual performance) seemed genuinely mean spirited and it seems like her ire is directed at feminist burlesque performers. Also, as a feminist who has performed some burlesque and who co-produces a regular burlesque show in NYC, I’m pretty insulted by her glib dismissal of the possibility of feminist burlesque. A huge amount of burlesque is feminist, and the burlesque scene is one of the few overwhelmingly women owned and operated entertainment scenes in the world.

  7. Not quite sure what to say in response to that. I didn’t read her as having a dig at burlesque performers – I took her to adopt some standard burlesque gestures because she is performing a burlesque routine. So I didn’t read her as having a dig at feminist burlesque performers in particular.

    She is clearly sceptical that there can be such a thing as feminist burlesque, but that’s, you know, one opinion amongst others. I’m not sure that it’s insulting to express it, even if one disagrees with it.

    And one wouldn’t expect a lengthy argument in favour of her views in a comedy routine.

  8. (And the mere fact that the burlesque scene is run mainly by women isn’t enough to show that it is a feminist or feminist-friendly enterprise. The same is true of women’s mags, and they’re pretty toxic.)

  9. Zee said it’s feminist and that it’s mainly run by women, not that it’s feminist purely because it’s mainly run by women.

    From what I’ve seen, the burlesque scene seems to be a pretty body positive and sex positive one, and one that engages a lot with feminism. So to say that burlesque can’t be feminist in such a glib way seems a bit uncool, even if you’re a sex negative feminist who is of that opinion.

  10. “She is clearly sceptical that there can be such a thing as feminist burlesque, but that’s, you know, one opinion amongst others… … And one wouldn’t expect a lengthy argument in favour of her views in a comedy routine.”

    I feel like you’re not getting my issue with this. I wasn’t taking issue with the video (though I do think it has some serious issues and I’m not especially impressed by her comedy or burlesque here), I was taking issue with the fact that this video was posted on FP uncritically and without comment. Generally this sort of treatment is reserved for cat videos and things that are generally accepted as uncontroversially feminist. Given *that* context, the content of the video seems unreasonably mean spirited, and the fact that she rolls her eyes at the possibility of feminist burlesque *is* an issue. I’m uncomfortable with the idea that this position is tacitly accepted by the FP community.

    I wouldn’t have objected if there had been just a comment or caption like “Posting this video for the performance at 1:35. The comedy bit beforehand is also pretty funny, though in it she expresses some strong skepticism about the possibility of feminist burlesque which you might disagree with. Thoughts?”.

    Regarding the performance itself, I felt like the gag was supposed to be something along the lines of “this is the only way burlesque could be feminist, but this isn’t what burlesque performers do!”. This is weird, because her performance seemed to me to be a pretty standard feminist burlesque act. It definitely wouldn’t be treated as mind-blowing or unexpected or as “missing” anything (though she would probably be encouraged to use sturdier paper for her signs) if she performed it at a genuine burlesque show. Indeed, there’s very little in her performance I haven’t seen in one or another burlesque act with similar themes. The exception is her putting pasties on her degree, which is admittedly pretty clever. However, I think the reason I haven’t seen *that* in any “feminist” burlesque acts is that the burlesque performers I know would have realized that holding up your university degree as a signal of feminist cred is actually really skeevy and classist.

    Also, the fact that burlesque is woman owned and operated (which is much more significant than “run mainly by women”. women’s mags are run mainly by women but corporations mainly run by men are making most of the profits) as well as being an almost entirely creator owned artform is a big deal, but I wasn’t saying it was enough to “show” burlesque is feminist. However, I do think its reason to be less quick to uncritically post glib dismissals of it (but I see now that we interpreted the video somewhat differently in this regard).

  11. I don’t think we should interpret posts here without critical comment as endorsement. For example, I was the blogger who posted this: https://feministphilosophers.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/duke-freshman-and-porn-star-speaks-out/ and my only comment was “This is well worth a read” but as it happens, I’m personally quite opposed to pornography. Also, I’m not sure why something can’t be uncontroversially feminist while also being in opposition to some other position which is also feminist (perhaps even uncontroversially so). It seems to me that feminism need not be monolithic.

  12. I’m not really up on this sort of topic, but I did take the target of the jokes to be the expectations we often take men to have. They’re the ones she repeatedly disappoints. We’re not required, surely, to take her to be generalizing about all burlesque. I admit, though, that just what is the scope of a critique is very tricky.

  13. Ok – I guess I take something like this: “Posting this video for the performance at 1:35. The comedy bit beforehand is also pretty funny, though in it she expresses some strong skepticism about the possibility of feminist burlesque which you might disagree with. Thoughts?” – to be implicitly attached to all the posts here.

    And I certainly didn’t mean to give the impression that all the FP bloggers tacitly accepted the view expressed through the routine. I know it probably doesn’t come across on the blog so much, but we do disagree about stuff.

    FWIW, I endorsed the video as funny (I thought it was hilarious, in fact), but I’m completely unsure what to think about burlesque in general and would love to hear more views about it.

  14. 1) Reception of the routine’s comedic uptake depends in part upon endorsing or to some extent sharing the performer’s skeptical attitude about burlesque’s capacity to be a genuinely feminist enterprise (or at least otherwise finding it unproblematic to suppose it implausible as such contrary to the attitudes, aims, motivations, and beliefs expressly held by many of those engaged in its practice).

    2) The video wasn’t merely posted uncritically and without comment but also filed under (and only under) the category Funny Business, and in doing so FP prima facie invites its readership to experience the hilarity that ensues when a self-professed feminist baselessly derides the feminist credentials of the Burlesque movement (along with its vocally feminist but ultimately deluded performers).

    3) FP should’ve qualified the post.

    That FP did not suggests either an ignorance of modern burlesque or a sense of humor tending toward the sinister. Either way not the sort of Funny Business in which we should be investing.

  15. No. We really don’t need to post caveats. We really don’t need yet another category. When a blogger wants to endorse something, they *endorse* it. Explicitly. When we stick something up here, we’re just sticking it up there. You want a blog run differently from that, you go find one. This is what we do.

  17. Loved it! But then I don’t feel burlesque has anything to offer feminism. Oh, we’re objectifying different types of bodies… So what? How is THAT getting us any closer to gender equality? The fact that women are the main participators in every aspect of it just makes it that much more disheartening. Those of us who realize that could use a good laugh now and then!

Comments are closed.