Recently, Mamamia editor Mia Freedman wrote railing against Kim Kardashian. While by no means do I hold Kardashian up as a demonstration of feminism, I think that Freedman has this wrong, very wrong.
From the title “Are you a mother or a porn star?”, which degrades the ability of women who work in the porn industry to be effective parents, Freedman projects some extremely backward views on motherhood, sexuality and body image.
The core assumption that Freedman makes is that women must fit into a set mould of personality and behaviour to be effective parents. Freedman condemns a photo (pictured above) taken by Kardashian refusing to take into account the person that Kardashian was before becoming a mother.
I have zero doubt Kardashian would have taken the same selfie to promote herself and her brand before becoming a parent. Through the promotion of her personal brand Kardashian is now worth US$40 million dollars and her reality television show is gaining her $80,000 per episode. This business model of self-promotion including sexuality has been Kardashian’s core business since she was a teenager.
Kardashian’s business model certainly does nothing for feminism, but neither is it responsible for women’s oppression or the over- sexualisation of women. In a bizarre and far-reaching leap, Freedman tries to link Kardashian’s selfie to the overly sexualised make-over of an animated children’s character.
One thing Kardashian was not doing was giving a beloved children’s character a sexualised make-over. She was simply a woman presenting herself in a sexual fashion. The only link between Kardashian and children is the fact she happens to be a mother.
Freedman’s insistence that, somehow, motherhood should change the way Kardashian presents herself sends a powerful message to mothers like myself. The message is that not only will your behaviour be policed as a woman, but it will now also be policed as a mother.
But just because I am a mother, it does not mean when I wear a bikini I am responsible for The Little Mermaid.
Scratching the issue further, Freedman says that Kardashian should “do better” for her daughter. For most of us, the cult of motherhood dictates that we should be kind, lovely and beautiful but asexual. The idea of our own mothers having and owning sexuality, especially aggressive sexuality, is considered “revolting”.
But why should Kardashian’s sexuality change after children? It should not and it certainly should not because Mia Freedman says so.
To make this condemnation of Kardashian even more bizarre, Freedman’s Mamamia blog of another mother’s photo. This was posted on Facebook by fitness blogger Maria Kang, which featured her looking extremely fit, surrounded by her three small children.
Over the photo, text gives the age of each child and the slogan: “What’s your excuse?”
This image, and the text that accompanies it, send a very different message to mothers about body image and motherhood.
Had the picture been posted on its own, it would have simply been a picture of Kang as a physically fit mother of three. But the words “What’s your excuse?” challenge the reader. It challenges me, as a mother of two, to look at my body and “make excuses” for not having a similar body.
But I do not need excuses for not having Kang’s body. I have my own body, as every mother does. I have my own healthy beautiful body, which happens to look nothing like Kang’s.
The image tells us nothing about Kang’s health, only that she lives up to a body image that the “fitsperation” ethos deems as beautiful.
The image was not particularly shocking, even if it was offensive in its own way. But the response published on Freedman’s blog was downright horrible.
Written by Di Westaway, CEO of “Wild Women On Top — Trek Training For Adventure”, the response goes so far as to blame a lack of exercise for women suffering postnatal depression.
Westaway’s anecdote about a friend who “cured” herself of depression by walking is just ridiculous. What we know is that, for some people, exercise can relieve stress. This is great, but exercise does not cure depression.
We know that exercise can provide a pleasurable activity for someone who is depressed. This is also great, but again, this is a long way from saying exercise alone cures depression, and anecdotes do not make science.
For most people with postnatal depression, the illness will eventually pass. But this does not mean it is “cured” by an activity that a person does every day.
In fact, for some women engaging in excessive exercise can be a symptom of depression. A quick call to people from “Beyond Blue” by either Freedman or Westaway could have confirmed this.
The thing I do agree with Freedman on is that, “Kim is the canary down the mineshaft. Kim is simply a magnified reflection of society.”
What Freedman’s brand of feminism is telling me is that as a mother, a sexualised body is not acceptable. However, the presentation of Kang’s body as something to aspire to is never questioned. In fact, it is held up as desirable, as Freedman allows Westaway to link it not only to physical health but mental health too.
Kang’s image of herself as a mother who also has a “beautiful body” is ok, but Kardashian’s image of herself as a mother as well as a sexual being is deemed offensive.
In truth, Freedman’s conception of what mothers must be is just as restrictive, twisted and artificial as any other. So to Mia Freedman, I give you .
[This article first appeared at Justine Kamprad’s blog, . If you are suffering from postnatal depression, please contact or the .]
