This page outlines some of my selected work in defining, exploring and applying Femme Theory. 

Can Femme be Theory? Exploring the Epistemological and Methodological Possibilities of Femme.

Narrative-works are the lifeblood of femme scholarship. Through this medium, femmes write themselves into existence. In this article, I begin with my own story of femme and examine the backdrop of patriarchal femininity that positions pieces of me as being at odds, disjointed, and something needing to be reconciled. Indeed, many current frameworks and dominant framings for understanding femininity create disjunctures needing to be reconciled and fail to include diverse feminine perspectives in ways that constitute epistemic and hermeneutical injustices. Using my own femme becoming as a guide, I offer this process of femme reconcilement as a framework that can be applied to dislodge feminine normativity and challenge the assumptions researchers make about femininity within their work. In this article I highlight the importance of femme epistemologies; the importance of valuing feminine knowledge, and how the absented femme highlights the continued god-trick of objectivity. Here, I discuss how femme narratives can be used to bolster femme as theory and critical analytic. This situated knowledge holds the possibility to inform novel methodological frameworks and to substantially shift the way researchers think about femininity and feminine people.

Femmephobia is a uniquely powerful predictor of anti-gay behaviour.

The current study explored a form of femmephobia (specifically, negative attitudes toward femininity in men) as a predictor of anti-gay behaviors among a sample of heterosexual men (N = 417). Additional predictor variables included hierarchical worldviews (i.e., social dominance orientation, right-wing authoritarianism, narcissism) and prejudicial attitudes (i.e., old-fashioned and modern homonegativity). Femmephobia emerged as a robust predictor, accounting for 23% of the variance in anti-gay behavior, surpassing the explanatory power (15%) of all other considered variables combined. Moreover, social dominance only predicted anti-gay behavior when femmephobia levels were high. Future research on discrimination and violence related to sexual identity and gender expression should incorporate femmephobia as a key predictive factor.

Femmephobia: The Role of Anti-Femininity and Gender Policing in LGBTQ+ People’s Experiences of Discrimination

Since the 1970s social science researchers have documented the cultural devaluation of femininity and its impact on experiences of discrimination among sexual and gender minorities. Yet, despite the continued and accumulating evidence demonstrating the role of anti-femininity (or femmephobia) in these experiences, little research has specifically examined femininity as an intersecting component of discrimination. Using in-depth interviews with sexual and gender minorities (N = 38), the current study explores the intersecting role of femmephobia in experiences of discrimination. Under the global theme of “femininity as target,” 5 key sub themes were identified: femininity and passing, regulating sexualities, masculine right of access, biological determinism, and the feminine joke. Participants illuminated femmephobia as a regulatory power within LGBTQ+ communities and society at large, as well as how femininity itself operates as a target in their experiences of gender policing and discrimination. By turning attention toward femininity, the current paper provides a clearer understanding of what may possibly lay at the heart of many social issues surrounding discrimination and violence. These findings have implications for the study of social inequalities, as well as strategies for remedying the pervasive devaluation of femininity.

Femmephobia versus gender norms: Examining women’s responses to competing and contradictory gender messages.

Abstract: While women experience pressure to be more feminine/less masculine, recent years have documented their simultaneous experiences of feeling pressured to be more masculine/less feminine. This phenomenon can be linked to the concept of femmephobia – the way femininity is devalued and regulated across bodies, identities, and various social locations. Despite the accumulating research documenting the existence of femmephobia across identities, how women respond to these experiences remains unexplored. Thus, the current study examined women’s (N = 97) responses to femmephobia. Participants were asked to describe whether (and how) they attempted to modify any of the feminine expressions they felt were targeted in the femmephobic incident they reported. Results of the thematic analysis supported the hypothesized response types of amplification, suppression, and no change to feminine expressions following the femmephobic incident. We found that women overwhelmingly suppressed their femininity in response to femmephobia. Strikingly, while some women reported not making any changes, almost none of the respondents reported amplifying their feminine expressions in response to a femmephobic incident (and the few who did were all LGBTQ+). We theorize these findings in the context of women’s gender policing more broadly, specifically the tension between gender norms (pressure to be more feminine/less masculine) and femmephobia (pressure to be less feminine/more masculine). We argue that the frequency of suppressing femininity in response to femmephobia suggests that, when faced with contradictory gender messages, femmephobia may be more influential than considered by previous research.

Critically feminizing family science: Using femme theory to generate novel approaches for the study of families and relationships.

Abstract: How do values, beliefs, and assumptions about femininity shape relational experiences? To answer this question, we critically feminize family science by applying femme theory to the field. Through this analysis, we present some of the ways that femmephobia (i.e., the systematic devaluation and regulation of femininity across all bodies and identities) is established in childhood and perpetuated throughout various relational contexts across the life course. Specifically, we examine how femmephobia is socialized via families, systematically normalized and perpetuated throughout childhood, and how it shapes gender-based violence risk, perpetration, and tactics. We demonstrate how femme theory illuminates the importance of disentangling the intersectional axes of gender, sexuality, and gender expression, thereby generating novel approaches for family and relationship science and interventions that promote systemic social change. Subordinating and regulating femininity affects all individuals, making its disruption of critical importance for the prevention of gender-based violence and the promotion of healthy families and relationships.

Femme frontiers: Tracing and troubling the lineage of fore-femmes through to contemporary identities and femme theory. 

Abstract: How did a lesbian identity that emerged in the 1940s give way to a theoretical framework that not only offered a novel approach to the theorisation of gender, but also formed the backbone of an emergent field of inquiry? This chapter begins with a brief history of femme, including the misunderstanding, and subsequent mistreatment, of femmes by second-wave feminism. By the turn of the 21st century, scholars – albeit very few – began to incorporate femme perspectives within their work and sought to better understand femme lives and identities (Levitt et al. 2003). These foundational works marked the beginning of contemporary femme identities and femme theory. Much of this earlier work sought to understand femme identity itself, particularly in light of its misrepresentation within feminism, and its erasure within and outside of LGBTQIA+ communities. In tandem with the growth of scholarly work, a growing body of narrative work pointed to an unspoken diversity of femme identities, beyond that of lesbian fore-femmes (Brushwood Rose and Camilleri 2002; Coyote and Sharman 2011; Volcano and Dahl 2008). Building from this momentum, and in response to these community voices, Blair and Hoskin (2015, 2016) sought to empirically examine the diversity of femmes, finding that contemporary femme identities were not tethered to particular sexual orientations, or gender identities. What, then, does femme mean? Femme theory emerged in the process of answering this question, and with it the concept of femmephobia as a lens through which to understand the societal devaluation and regulation of femininity (Hoskin 2017). After tracing the legacy of femme epistemologies that have contributed to contemporary invocations and femme theory, this chapter describes the contributions of femme theory to the field of critical femininities (Hoskin and Blair 2021). The goal of this chapter is to highlight femme epistemologies – historic and contemporary – as integral to the study of femininity.

Femininities

Abstract: Does gender theory have an anti-femininity bias? This chapter begins by examining what sociologists have referred to as the displacement of femininity within gender theory. While some argue that this “feminine gap” is a product of a deeply entrenched masculine epistemological framework, others argue that the anti-femininity bias itself makes us unable to recognize the scholarship that does, in fact, exist. The chapter then provides a brief history of feminist approaches to femininity, segueing into contemporary approaches including Critical Femininities and Femme Theory. Applying these frameworks, the chapter then grapples with questions such as: Can femininity be empowering, empowered, or powerful? And, how might we understand feminine power? After fleshing out these questions, the chapter concludes with an overview of the feminine typologies most influential on the field and highlights the importance of examining femininity through a multifaceted, intersectional, theoretically grounded, historically and culturally specific lens.

Femininities Scale

Although recent advances in understanding gender have acknowledged multiple dimensions of masculinity, femininity is commonly construed as a unitary concept.  Existing unilateral measures have led to false assumptions about the association between femininity and psychological adjustment, and neglected key conceptual differences between self-actualized versus assigned/essentialized femininity. The Femininities Scale was developed based on Femme Theory’s description of multiple femininities. It allows for a more accurate assessment of the varied ways respondents might enact their own femininity, or construe the concept of femininity.

Experiences of femme identity: coming out, invisibility and femmephobia

A qualitative analysis of 146 femme-identified individuals’ responses to questions about sexual identity, femme identity, gender expression and experiences of discrimination were examined in an attempt to better understand the experiences of femme-identified individuals. Specific emphasis was placed on the process of self-identifying as femme, as opposed to being categorised as femme on the basis of gender expression. Femme-identified participants described experiences of coming out femme in contrast to coming out as sexual minorities, processes of femme-identity development that were largely shaped by the prevalence of masculine privileging within queer communities and related experiences of discrimination based on their femme identity or femmephobia. The occurrences of four different types of femmephobia were explored and comparisons were made between participants as a function of their sexual identities. The study demonstrates that femme identity is not limited to individuals in exclusively butch–femme relationships or communities and that there is an important element of agency and self-actualisation associated with femme identity. Furthermore, participants of diverse sexual and gender identities self-identified as femme, indicating that femme is an identity that transgresses gender and sexuality and is not limited solely to cisgender lesbian and bisexual women.

Contemporary understandings of femme identities and related experiences of discrimination

Although the term ‘femme’ is most often used to describe feminine lesbians or bisexual cisgender women, recent femme theorists have argued that this definition is insufficient and fails to account for the sexual and gender diversity of those who self-identify as femme. The current study sought to examine the multiplicities of femme identity by exploring who identifies as femme and whether femme-identified individuals experience in-group discrimination as a function of their femme identity (i.e., femme-negativity). Femme-identified individuals in the study were diverse with respect to both gender and sexual identity, and queer identification was highlighted as an important element of femme identity. Many of the femme-identified individuals reported experiences of femme-negativity and femme-related stigma consciousness. In contrast to previous research, femme-identified individuals in the current study were not found to have higher levels of internalised homophobia or identity concealment when compared to butch and androgynous identified sexual minority participants.

Critical Femininities: A “New” Approach to Gender Theory

Critical femininities examines femininity through a nuanced, multidimensional framework, moving beyond femininity as a patriarchal tool, to instead consider the historical, ideological, and intersectional underpinnings of femininity, particularly those that contribute to femmephobia.  While Critical Femininities is often deemed an emergent area of scholarship, this framing is both paradoxical and, conceivably, inaccurate. Rather than being a nascent field, interdisciplinary scholars have contributed to Critical Femininities for over 60 years, whether or not they labeled their research as such. Arguably, Critical Femininities is a field whose emergence can be traced back to the second wave of feminism or even earlier. However, while Dahl (2012) notes that the question of “what is femininity” is as old as de Beauvoir’s (1949) Second Sex, there is a continued lack of scholarly endeavours not only in terms of how the question of femininity has been addressed, but also in terms of how this question is integrated within research.  In this article we theorize why Critical Femininities has remained in a continuous state of emerging without recognition for its contributions as a field.  We argue that the field’s stalled emergence can be explained by the tendency to view femininity as unidimensional, anti-intellectual, and infantile. Moreover, we see this stalled emergence as a product of the masculine epistemological centre that informs the very fabrics of society. In response, we aim to facilitate the continued growth of the field, and to make visible the taken-for-granted presence of masculinity that remains pervasive within gender theory and epistemological frameworks.

Using Femme Theory to Foster a Feminine-Inclusive Early Childhood Education and Care Practice

Within the field of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) and education more broadly, the feminization of care work has resulted in conversations surrounding the purported state of “masculinity in crisis.” Largely, this is due to the small number of male-identified early childhood educators (ECEs) in the field (Haywood, Popviciu, & Mac An Ghall, 2005) and a lack of respect for the field of ECEC broadly (Rots, 2002). Discourses of professionalization seek to “masculinize” the field of ECEC in order to elevate the respect and valuation of early childhood educators (ECE) (McNaughton, 2000, 2005). This phenomenon can be seen in other traditionally feminized fields, such as library science (Dilevko, 2014; Stauffer, 2016), and nursing (Ardnt & Bigelow, 2005). Such efforts to denigrate femininity and move the field of ECEC away from care, such as through notions of professionalization and standardization, reify pre-existing gender hierarchies that privilege men and masculinity over women and femininity (Martino, 2008; Hoskin, 2019). Rather than masculinize, as the literature suggests, what if efforts were made to value femininity instead? A growing area of inquiry has attended to the valuing and devaluing of femininity: Critical Femininities and Femme Theory. Following Middleton (2019), we ask what it would be like to curate a space wherein femininity was valued and embraced. This central question via femme theory (Hoskin, 2017; 2019) will guide the current paper in revisioning a feminine-positive space and dislodging the naturalization of femmephobia embedded within current ECEC efforts to “remasculinize” or otherwise offset “feminization.” In this chapter, we seek to promote a feminine inclusive ECE practice that embraces and affirms femininity and an ethics of care in the field of ECEC, while distinguishing sex (e.g. female, male, intersex, etc.), gender/sex (e.g., woman, man, non-binary, etc.) and gender (e.g., femininity, masculinity, androgyny, etc.) in line with Sexual Configurations Theory (van Anders, 2015). Through such efforts, conversations can be shifted away from a focus on biological sex and gender essentialist discourses towards affirmative constructions of femininity and care. Drawing from relevant care literature in education (Gilligan, 1982; Langford, 2019; Noddings, 1984, 2013; Tong, 1998) and femme theory (Blair & Hoskin, 2015; 2016; Hoskin, 2017, 2019), this chapter will engage with how femininity can be centralized and operationalized in everyday practice in early learning and care settings to interrupt the denigration of femininity and care work within discourses of professionalization surrounding ECEC. In turn, this chapter will provide recommendations to address femmephobia embedded within the field of ECEC by the bridging and application of femme theory and care theories. We will address the implications for relevant stakeholders, such as administrators in childcare centres, ECEs themselves, policy makers, and how the devaluing of femininity applies across various institutions and contexts.

The new lesbian aesthetic? Exploring gender style among femme, butch and androgynous sexual minority women

The current study explored sexual minority women's gender aesthetic and style by using van Anders' (2015) sexual configurations theory (SCT), which allows for nuance in the measurement of gender/sex research. Previous research on sexual minority women has suggested a markedly masculine “Lesbian Aesthetic” (Huxley et al., 2014) and has connected aesthetic expression to internalized homophobia and levels of outness such that sexual minority women categorized as more feminine report higher rates of internalized homophobia and identity concealment. However, the bulk of past research used dichotomous measures of assessing gender and predated an ostensible shift in LGBTQ+ identities. To update this body of research, the current study explored gender aesthetics by asking sexual minority women to map their gender expression using SCT diagrams and complete measures of outness and internalized homophobia. We found no significant group differences in internalized homophobia or outness for femme, butch, and androgynous participants. Content analyses of gender diagrams suggest that the gender aesthetics of sexual minority women are neither monolithic nor masculine but may be beginning to lean towards the feminine and most certainly encompass a complex and diverse range of expressions.

Feminizing Theory: Making Space for Femme Theory

Abstract: The term" femme" originates from 1940s Western working-class lesbian bar culture, wherein femme referred to a feminine lesbian who was typically in a relationship with a butch lesbian. Expanding from this original meaning, femme has since emerged as a form of femininity reclaimed by queer and culturally marginalized folks. Importantly, femme has also evolved into a theoretical framework. Femme theory argues that" femme" constitutes a missing piece in queer and feminist discourses of femininity. Attending to this gap, femme theory centres queer femininities as a means of pushing against the deeply embedded masculinist orientation of queer and gender theory. Thus, femme theory offers tools to shift the way researchers and readers understand femininity as well as systems of gender and power more broadly. This book is an introduction to femme theory, showcasing how femme can be used as a theoretical framework across a variety of contexts and disciplines, such as Film & Media Studies, Psychology, Sociology, or Critical Disability Studies; from countries, including Canada, China, Guyana and the USA. Femme theory asks readers to reconsider how femininity is conceptualized, revealing some of the many taken for granted assumptions that are embedded within cultural discourses of gender, sexuality, and power.

Critical Femininities

Abstract: What would change about our existing world if we re-imagined and re-valued femininity? Critical Femininities presents a multidimensional framework for re-thinking femininity. Moving beyond seeing femininity as a patriarchal tool, this book considers the social, historical, and ideological forces that shape present-day norms surrounding femininity, particularly those that contribute to femmephobia: the systematic devaluation and regulation of all that is deemed feminine. Each chapter offers a unique application of the Critical Femininities framework to disparate areas of inquiry, ranging from breastfeeding stigma to Incel ideology, and attempts to answer pressing questions concerning the place of femininity within gender and social theory. How can we conceptualize feminine power? In what ways can vulnerability act as a powerful mode of resistance? How can we understand femininity as powerful without succumbing to masculinist frameworks? What ideological underpinnings maintain Critical Femininities as an emergent field, despite traceable origins pre-dating second-wave feminism? As the provocative entries within this volume will certainly generate additional questions for anyone invested in society’s treatment of femininity, this book offers a launching pad for the continued growth of a field that cultivates insight from a feminine frame of reference as a means of rendering visible the taken-for-granted presence of masculinity that remains pervasive within gender theory.

Fat femininities: On the convergence of fat studies and critical femininities

Abstract: What is the relationship between fatness and femininity? How do prejudices toward fat bodies (i.e., fatphobia) and femininity (i.e., femmephobia) intersect? How does scholarship on femininities converge with scholarship on fatness? And, what novel insights can be cultivated by putting the fields of fat studies and critical femininities into conversation? In this article, we explore these questions, arguing that fatphobia and femmephobia, as well as the dominant cultural framings of fatness and femininity, are inextricably intertwined. Specifically, we challenge femininity’s associations with superficiality and oppression, discussing instead the importance of intersectional and recuperative approaches to fat femininities. Accordingly, this article illuminates the complex relationships between femininity and fatness; how these relationships differ across intersectional axes of privilege and oppression; as well as the ways femininity and fatness – or, by extension, femmephobia and fatphobia – intertwine to create unique experiences of gendered embodiment. Ultimately, with this article, we advocate for the importance of exploring diverse fat feminine embodiments and the potential for critical femininities to transform how we think about and embody fatness.

The feminine target: Gender expression in same-sex relationships as a predictor of experiences with public displays of affection

Abstract: The extent to which sexual minority individuals present publicly as masculine, feminine, or both has been associated with their perceptions of threat and safety in public spaces. The current study investigates the role of gender expression in men and women’s experiences of public displays of affection (PDAs) in same-sex relationships. Participants (N = 528) reported their own gender expression as well as that of their partner, perceptions of support for PDAs, PDA-related vigilance, general vigilance and overall PDA frequency. Men in same-sex relationships reported less frequent PDAs and greater PDA-related vigilance than women, while women reported greater overall variability in their gender expression than men. Multiple regression analyses show femininity within the participant. (for men) or their partner (for both men and women) was associated with greater general and PDA-related vigilance. These findings align with previous research on femmephobia, in which femininity is described as making individuals feel ‘targeted’ for other forms of oppression (e.g., homophobia, sexism, transphobia; Hoskin, 2019). Although femininity was associated with greater vigilance, the association between masculinity within a same-sex relationship and vigilance was more tenuous, demonstrating evidence of masculinity serving as both a potential target for homophobic violence as well as a source of protection. The dual nature of masculinity was particularly salient among women in same-sex relationships, where masculinity tempered by femininity was associated with greater perceived support for PDAs but for women with partners low in femininity, the more masculine their partner, the greater their reported levels of vigilance.

Femme-toring: Leveraging critical femininities and femme theory to cultivate alternative approaches to mentoring.

Abstract: Both traditional and new-wave mentoring (or men-toring), intentionally or unintentionally, maintain and reproduce neoliberal toxic masculinist norms in academia. By applying femme theory and critical femininities frameworks, we expose how men-toring is exclusionary and assimilationist. We then queer and feminize mentoring, developing femme-toring as an alternative reformist approach rooted in fem(me)inist epistemologies and ethics of care, in particular, softness, vulnerability, collaboration, and yielding. Leveraging systems theory and Foucauldian theory, we contend that by centering femininity in these ways, femme-toring unsettles toxic masculinist norms and offers possibilities for a more inclusive academia.

Femme praxis: Using femme theory to foster vulnerability within research design and institutions.

Abstract: Feminist scholars have long contended that academic institutions value the masculine over the feminine. Masculine bodies are more prevalent and are considered the “ideal norm” while feminine bodies are othered. Masculine epistemologies and ways of being are also regarded highly and esteemed, whereas feminine knowledge and lived experiences are marginalized and devalued. “Mentoring” (or, as we intimate, men-toring) is one way in which toxic masculinist values are reinforced and reproduced (e.g., legitimizing domination tactics, fuelling hyper-competitive pursuits of “high” ranking publications, misusing peer review to stall competitors etc.). To throw off the yoke of this masculinist epistemological centre, we put forward femme theory and, more specifically, femme-torship as alternative “guides” rooted in the radically feminine to shift sexist, racist, homophobic, transphobic, and femmephobic practices. Against the backdrop of masculinist power-infused hierarchies, we position femme-toring as a form of relational femme praxis that, instead, recognizes the value of feminine-coded qualities, in particular, vulnerability. Vulnerability is extremely important in research and academia. It can inspire trust and connect people. Vulnerability can be embodied in intellectual humility and an openness to learning. It can be manifested in authentic narrations of research imperfections and can be fostered to enhance trust between researcher and participant, or indeed, co-researcher. In these ways and others, femme theory and the femme praxis of femme-toring can function as a catalyst to achieve broader systemic change within research and more widely in the academic institution.

The complexities of passing: Dual realities of a queer, crip, white femme of jewish descent

Excerpt: Passing and failing: passing as that with which I disidentify, failing to approximate norms of cultural intelligibility. I am a queer, crip, white femme of lost Jewish descent whose family, culture, and community were obscured by antisemitism. Through these pieces, I unpack my experiences of passing, failing, and disidentification: of being placed among the groups to which I do not fully belong. As a femme, I grapple with issues of passing/invisibility, while attempting to claim membership in a community that privileges masculinity. My invisibly crip body receives able-bodied privilege, and yet it can also act as a barrier for obtaining accessibility needs. I am Jewish and, thus, while I benefit from white privilege, my whiteness is contextual and historically contingent—white but never “fully assimilated” and always “ambiguously placed.”

Beyond aesthetics: A femme manifesto.

Abstract: This creative piece pushes the reader to think beyond femininity's articulation as a source of oppression to, instead, consider how it can be reframed as a form of resistance.

The femmephobia 101 workbook

Abstract: While many see and feel the weight of how society treats femininity, we don’t necessarily have the words to describe it. In this workbook, we introduce the concept of femmephobia to talk about how society devalues and controls femininity - whether it’s femininity in women, men, or nonbinary people. Femmephobia is a prejudice we have all witnessed, participated in, and experienced - yet we never discuss it! This beautifully illustrated workbook sparks a much-needed conversation about the “social rules” that label femininity as somehow “less than” masculinity. It consists of information, examples, questions, and lots of personal reflection exercises that cover topics like examining our relationships to femininity; naming and examining assumptions we have about femininity; considering the consequences of "breaking the rules" of femininity; debunking myths about femininity; untangling femmephobia from misogyny, homophobia, and transphobia; identifying examples of femmephobia in our world; and challenging femmephobia through revaluing femininity. We are all born into a world of “gender rules,” expectations, and assumptions. This workbook offers a starting point to begin questioning these rules and how they limit, restrict, and devalue femininity, helping readers value and embrace feminine diversity and understand the broader impact of femmephobia.

Holy anorexia: Views of femininity as a potential mediator in the association between religiosity and disordered eating.

Abstract: Is being more religious a protective factor when it comes to eating disorders, or a risk factor? Past research has provided conflicting answers to this question, and thus, the purpose of the present study was to determine whether the variable association between religiosity and eating disorders can be explained through the mediating variable of views of femininity. Using a sample of 231 individuals, the current study demonstrated that the ways in which individuals view their femininity mediates the association between religiosity and disordered eating. More religious individuals were more likely to hold an essentialized (unexplored or unexamined) view of their own femininity, and this view was associated with an increased risk of disordered eating. However, more religious individuals were also less likely to feel excluded by others on the basis of how they enact their femininity, and that view was associated with a decreased risk of disordered eating. These two indirect effects effectively canceled each other out, leaving no significant overall association between religiosity and eating disorders. Future researchers are encouraged to explore further applications of considering femininity as a multifaceted concept when studying both religion and eating disorders.

Femme-inist approaches to early childhood education & care: Cultivating pedagogies of care via Femme Theory

Abstract: In this chapter, we forward the importance of femme-inist approaches within research in early childhood education and care (ECEC), specifically the necessity of using a femme theory lens in analyzing the regulation of Early Childhood Educators’ (ECEs) subjectivities. Femme theory and its focus on deconstructing systems of femmephobia – the sociocultural subjugation and devaluation of femininity – is an important and under-utilized analytic in ECEC literature and research. We propose that femme theory and femme-inist approaches to ECEC can cultivate caring pedagogies that emphasize intersubjectivity, revalue feminine emotional and material labour, and contribute to important feminist conversations in ECEC – such as care theories and feminist poststructuralism – by cultivating a feminine form of relationality distinct from White cisgender heterosexual womanhood and gender essentialist notions.

Critical femininities: The development and application of femme theory (Doctoral Thesis)

Abstract: Despite the accumulating evidence to warrant the deliberate consideration of femininity, there has been a continued neglect of femininity as an important intersectional axis. In addition, despite the numerous manifestations of oppression based in femininity (e.g. slut-shaming, sissyphobia, effemamania, femiphobia, misogynoir, trans-misogyny), there has yet to be an examination and application of how these systems relate and inform one another. This collection of articles argues that these sources of oppression are different symptoms of the same underlying social prejudice: the devaluation of femininity. Consequently, over the course of the three iterative chapters, I establish Femme Theory as a theoretical framework that requires bringing feminine multiplicities and feminine devaluation into focus within interdisciplinary and intersectional research. In so doing, this dissertation proposes and facilitates the growth of Critical Femininities as an emergent field of inquiry in which feminine intersections are central to understanding the ebbs and flows of power, particularly in relation to social inequalities. This dissertation contributes to the growth of a field of Critical Femininities through the development of Femme Theory, its subsequent illumination and refinement using a qualitative approach, to finally applying Femme Theory using quantitative methodologies. Consequently, this dissertation develops a theoretical framework that makes central the roles of femininity and femmephobia in making sense of social realities, while highlighting the importance of an intersectional approach that not only includes race, gender, class, and sexuality, but also gender expression and, more specifically, femininity.

Femme theory: Femininity’s challenge to western feminist pedagogies (Masters Thesis)

Abstract: Contemporary Western feminist scholarship fails to explore the backdrop to the naturalization of feminine subjugation. By analyzing the structures, histories, and theories of gender relations, this study dislocates femininity from its ascribed Otherness and, in doing so, demonstrates how empowered femininities have been overlooked or rendered invisible within gender studies. Femme, as the failure or refusal to approximate the patriarchal norms of femininity, serves as the conceptual anchor of this study and is used to examine how femmephobic sentiments are constructed and perpetuated in contemporary Western feminist theory. In part, this perpetuation is achieved through the pedagogical and theoretical exclusions from the texts chosen for gender studies courses, revealing a normative feminist body constructed through the privileging of identities and expressions. Privileging of identities is demonstrated through the designation of literary space and in an overview of dominant theories, such as how the feminine subject is maintained as the object of critique and as not able to be “properly” feminist. This assessment of gender studies course texts reveals a limited understanding of femme and femininity that maintains these identities as white, middle-class, normatively bodied, and without agency. Feminist theory demonstrates an embedded normative feminist subject, one marked by whiteness and body privileges. By deconstructing the privileging of theories of the normative feminist subject, this study argues that gender studies has replicated feminist histories in which the politics and concerns of the white socially privileged subject are the first to be addressed. While white femininity is present in hir Otherness and in critiques of hir femininity, the racially marked femme does not exist, even in absence. The femme—as a queer potentiality—offers a way of thinking and re- iii thinking through the limitations of contemporary Western feminist theory and the paradoxical preoccupations with the absented femme