On Sun, 18 Oct 1998, Doug Henwood wrote:
> Oh but Judy herself destabilizes notions of identity, a la the Lesbian
> Phallus, but anyway, the Spice Girls don't have much to do with JB. How is
> their citation of the iconography of babe-hood the least be subversive? You
> could argue - I wouldn't, but you could - that Madonna's citations of such
> are destabilizing and/or subversive, but Ginger, Posh, and Baby? Please.
I think it's QUITE telling that you left out Scary Spice, Doug. I think it's a sign of intellectual dishonesty. Quite clearly, it is in the person of Scary that the subversive messages regarding gender and race are found. By deliberately erasing her from the Spice Girls, you take their project, which is one of challenging traditional norms of gender, and particularly the power of female friendship, and you make it peripheral, if not completely invisible. In so doing, you recreate them in a way that is less threatening to white, male, heterosexual norms.
Frances