You're obviously trolling or conflicted about this but I'll answer nonetheless.
I'm so confused! Doesn't The Patriarchy ruthlessly enforce 'feminity' itself, as 'society' understands it? Wouldn't that necessarily mean that Margaret Thatcher might actually be the most feminine precisely because she adopts exactly what 'society' says is not feminine?
Yes. That is the viewpoint of first wave feminism as I understand it and I'm not one to argue in favor or against it. I can confirm that it's not a belief universally held by all feminists.
Is it Sherly Sandberg's hairstyle(s) that make her more feminine than Thatcher?
No, even though that it's probably related. What makes her more feminine is that she embraces her softer and more nurturing side.
Or did she "capitalize" on engaging in Patriarchy-approved feminine behaviors?
She capitalized on it to the degree that one could argue that given Mark's lack of soft skills her softer, nurturing, communicative side (which are indeed traditionally perceived as more feminine) were themselves a crucial asset in attaining her current position.
Comments
You're obviously trolling or conflicted about this but I'll answer nonetheless.
Yes. That is the viewpoint of first wave feminism as I understand it and I'm not one to argue in favor or against it. I can confirm that it's not a belief universally held by all feminists.
No, even though that it's probably related. What makes her more feminine is that she embraces her softer and more nurturing side.
She capitalized on it to the degree that one could argue that given Mark's lack of soft skills her softer, nurturing, communicative side (which are indeed traditionally perceived as more feminine) were themselves a crucial asset in attaining her current position.