Not quite. For feminist critics, the sex not only has to be ugly, it should be fat, too:
“While Dunham’s graphic nudity and sex scenes may provoke disgust or discomfort for some viewers, watching Girls can feel subversively empowering… It is a rare thrill to see an honest erotic depiction of a television actress who not only doesn’t look like a Victoria’s Secret model, but doesn’t want to look like a Victoria’s Secret model. You might even say that it’s aspirational.”
Girls began as the story of four young women facing the challenges of entering adulthood in New York City. Feminist critics have managed to praise this potentially complex story line as being the story of a chubby chick having bad sex.
At least with the male gaze we were pretty and the sex was good.
The Bible doesn’t detail the sex lives of its female characters which, considering the fact that Biblical authors and scribes were male, flies in the face of Mulvey’s theory regarding male-dominated media. What the Bible does detail of its females are the character traits that made them worth writing about. Compassion, insight, modesty, kindness, and selflessness are only a few of the traits illustrated in the stories of the matriarchs, the prophetess Deborah, the heroines Esther and Ruth. The Proverbial Woman of Valor is prized for, among other things, “considering a field and buying it, and from her earnings planting a vineyard.” Second wave feminism fought for this kind of economic equality. Today’s female gaze sees fat, bad sex as real liberation.
Until contemporary feminism escapes the goddess mentality of valuing women for their physical worth, they will never know equality much less freedom. As for the bad sex and fat bodies, if that is the best argument for goddess feminism this movement stands to go the way of the Greek pantheon.