top of page
This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.Start Now
Part 2: 
Does the Pussy Grab Back? Analyzing the Technofeminist Reclaiming of the Term Pussy in Relation to the 2017 Women’s March  
Overview
​
Does the Pussy Grab Back? focuses on the "after" of the digital divide, specifically how does communication operate once individuals are able to get online. While there are no set rules for who communicates online, there are still restrictions on who can participate within a social media space and in what ways. For the focus of the paper I explore how individuals attempt to reclaim the term "pussy" in digital spaces. 
​
This paper was written for Dr. Bethany Davila's English 540 Rhetorics of Oppression course.
​
​
#PussyGrabsBack
​
Prior to 2016, the term "pussy" was used a derogatory slang term for women. Specifically pussy was used as a term for "women as a sexual object" as early as 1880 (Partridge). After the infamous 2005 Access Hollywood video with host Billy Bush and Donald Trump was released, the response was instantaneous.
​
One such group who responded was the Pussyhat Project. Using self-labeling, this group attempted to reclaim the term pussy for empowerment, reframing what pussy has been negatively used as previously.  Other groups took their reclaiming specifically with a focus on digital technology. The most apparent way was through the hashtag #PussyGrabsBack to create an online community with a collective identity. Creation of collective identity results from a serial of people having “similar experiences of material conditions, such as relationships to the labor or biological functions of the female body that produces the serial “women” (Luna 771). 
​
​
​
Difference-in-sameness vs. Same difference
​
When it comes to creating a collective identity there can be a possibility of individuals within a community overlooking or "glossing over" differences in favor of maintaining a collective identity. Luna analyzed the group Sister Song's collective identity and found two different ways differences were handled:
  • Same difference where differences within a group were acknowledged as making up to overall identity of womanhood
  • Difference-in-sameness where "mini-communities" were directly addressed and given preference depending on need within a group 
​
​
​
​
​
Who Gets to Participate in the Collective Identity?
​
Looking at how the collective identity of how the Women's March functioned online, I wondered how participation and communication worked when it came to attempts to reclaim pussy. Primarily I looked at gender differences to see how they were handled online. Would they be part of the "daddy hood culture" that Michelle Lazar mentions in her analysis of Family Life advertisements? In other words would the way men were referenced were vis-à-vis to women as Lazar found when looking at differences in gender.
​
Herring et al.'s research provided additional insight into how women and men communicated in online spaces, especially in terms of establishing dominance. The results found that dominance was established by feminist groups over non feminist groups. Men would use techniques of avoidance, anger, and redefining terms to attempt to establish dominance. 
​
​
​
​
Social Media Analysis
​
Using Nick Offerman's and Julia Louis-Dreyfus' Twitter and Facebook (when available) posts I attempted to create a "snapshot" of the communication strategies that worked to reject or accept the reclaiming of the term pussy.
​
Humor as a Silencing Tool
​
  •  Male FB User 1 “PUSSYGRABSBACK? I hope so. That’s good pussy.”
​
​
Avoidance
​
  • Female Twitter User 3 “@Nick_Offerman now identifies as a woman. Can someone please show HER where the gender neutral bathrooms are? #WomensMarch #MAGA #DisruptJ20”
​
 
Conditional Gender Support for Participation and Support 
 
  • Male Twitter User 6 “My wife is knitting me a pussy hat! I’ll wear it in solidarity.”
​
​
​
 
​
​
​
bottom of page