63
Journal of International Women’s Studies Vol. 16, No. 1 November 2014
feminism, these authors do not fully explain the issue of complicit women or treat them in a
consistent manner. Whilst a structural analysis of power does implicitly suggest that individual
action is less important than collective effort, an exclusion of individual female voice means that
various categories of women (powerful, sexualised, domestic) appear ambiguously in these texts,
undermining the false binary of men versus women, but not offering an alternative model.
Of course, the books discussed here have their own goals, and therefore it is
understandable that the authors’ approaches to complicity are somewhat problematic given that
they are addressing issues of their own. Regardless, it is necessary to critique this particular
aspect of their work, with the intention of setting the groundwork for further research and
discussions on this issue.
The focal point of both Power and Penny’s work is the strong link between feminism, the
situation of women, and capitalism—including the feminization of labour, prostitution as sex
work, commodified femininity, and unpaid domestic work. Their work contains a sustained and
scathing critique of late consumerist capitalism and the hierarchical class system (including sex,
race and sexual orientation) stemming from the power inequalities inherent in it. These two texts
serve my purposes of looking at the representation of women perceived to be complicit and the
treatment of the notion of complicity. Where some authors represent women perceived to be
complicit in a problematic way, (e.g. Ariel Levy and Natasha Walter), Power and Penny do so in
a less problematic and more varied way. Power and Penny directly address the idea that women
aren’t inherently pro-woman in a political and academic manner rather than a sensationalist one;
the content of these books is therefore interesting for work concerned with ideas of complicity.
Furthermore, Power and Penny’s work can be conceived of as politicised popular feminism,
which is a fairly uncommon genre, and therefore worthy of attention.
I begin by outlining my understanding and application of complicity. I then give a brief
overview of contemporary feminism to show why it is necessary to adjust current feminist
approaches in line with broad changes in feminist thought. I contextualise the political milieu
that Power and Penny are writing in and responding to, and then look at various examples of
complicit women in the texts, showing that the differing approaches used by the authors reveal
an uneven picture of female complicity.
Complicity
The definition of complicity advanced here refers to the broad notion of participation in a
practice, belief, behaviour, or understanding that can lead to oppression, discrimination, or
exploitation of your own or another group (group here is a loose term referring to identity
politics; I acknowledge that all people cross several identity groups). In its traditional legal
meaning, complicity refers to participation in wrongdoing (legal or moral) where someone
knows about a crime but does not report it. This suggests somewhat more activity or awareness
than my use of it here. Complicity here can refer to inadvertent, passive or apolitical acts (as in,
acts carried out with no express political intention, rather than acts with no political meaning), as
well as more intentional, active and political ones. An example of commonplace female
complicity is the use of cosmetics: women that wear makeup do so not because they actively
want to be beauty objects in order to maintain gender inequality, but because of habit,
preference, or because there are certain social outcomes for women who look particular ways.
Additionally, I accept that particular practices have different meanings in different contexts, and
therefore I do not suggest that cosmetics, for example, are unequivocally oppressive. There are
2
Journal of International Women's Studies, Vol. 16, Iss. 1 [2014], Art. 6
https://vc.bridgew.edu/jiws/vol16/iss1/6