Conclusion
As these women’s experiences show, it is precisely through sharing intimate moments and personal choices that greater public discourse is promoted in the minds of viewers, in the attitudes of video bloggers themselves, and publicly through the circulation of issues raised in the videos and on blogs. The sharing of these intimate moments is not self-indulgent, solipsistic obsession. Rather, it provides a means to connect with others and raise awareness in ways that are less overt than acts such as public marches but are nevertheless quite important. Video bloggers acknowledge that the video image, rather than text alone, promotes a key connection. As one video blogger observed, even though she had been writing about personal issues for years, it was video that stimulated her audience to listen to her opinions and reconsider their own views.
Michelle: [I] mean people just connect more emotionally with somebody’s face than maybe with text, [that’s] the simplistic version of it. And I noticed that when I started doing the video blogs because I had been writing about personal stuff for years.
But as soon as I started doing video blogs, people were like [wow]. It kind of surprised me because I thought who wants to see me sitting around talking about my feelings? But they do. I don’t know why, but they do.
Originally, the feminist motto “the personal is political” was an attempt to bring into the public discourse problems that had been “hidden in the private realm such as sexual violence, abortion, and sexual orientation.”1 It served as “a way to convey to women who were suffering in silence that their individual experiences were, in fact, instances of widespread sexism.”2 Some feminists have criticized this motto, arguing that it invites unwanted public intervention into women’s private lives. Equating notions of “publics” with “government,” some feminists argue that such a position invites the public to adjudicate women’s personal matters in sexist ways. In this sense, reclaiming a “right to privacy” functions to shield women from inappropriate, sexist coercion. Gallagher traces how public discourse can be replaced by salacious interest in private affairs, as evidenced by the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal. She argues that mass media promotes these dynamics and concludes that, “since the development of mass communications, especially in the form of television, has personalized the content of political discourse, the notion that citizens could meet in a public forum to solve their common problems has become increasingly difficult to sustain.”1
In a more optimistic light, Williams argues that feminists who conflate the idea of the “political” with “government intervention and coercion” create an impoverished view about what the personal-as-political framework can achieve. As she states, “power can be politicized without authorizing government to publicize the details of intimate life or even involving government in private decisions at all.”2 Although I share concerns about inappropriate government intervention, I also agree with Williams that “the political” should not be equated with government action upon people. The political can mean, as it does for many video bloggers, ideas and solutions circulated in discourse that emerge from intimate actions and thoughts. These shared intimacies may translate into larger spheres of social action and political participation. Part of the problem in either attacking or supporting notions about the personal as political is that the distinction between the public and the private is blurring in certain ways. As more people carry around cameras and mediate their everyday experiences, private moments posted on the Internet enter the public record, with images archived in searchable, reproducible ways.
Admittedly, the circulation of one’s private moments and choices is not without a number of serious risks, which I do not wish to make light of. Nor do I wish to advocate that each of us share our intimacies on the Net. That is a highly personal decision which, as stated above, contains numerous risks. I am merely observing that the experience of a number of video bloggers shows that by being vulnerable and sharing intimate moments and choices, it is possible to promote increased public discourse about formerly uncomfortable, distasteful, or difficult topics in ways that other media and other methods have not. Video blogging about one’s own life is far from an insular practice. For many, sharing intimacies is socially transformative because the vibrant discussions and responses they prompt demonstrate that vital issues on video bloggers’ minds are also important to others.
- S. Gallagher, “The Personal Is Political. Now What? Privacy, Publicity, and Gender in American Politics,” http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/personalispolitical.htm. [↩] [↩]
- J. Williams, “The Personal is Political: Thinking Through the Clinton/Lewinsky/Starr Affair,” http://faculty.uml.edu/sgallagher/Williams.htm. [↩] [↩]
