How Do We Hold #Girlboss Politicians Accountable?

#Girlboss culture sees a resurgence with the election of Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris

The girlboss was largely dying off from the mainstream culture when the election of Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris brought it surging back to the forefront.

The term originated in 2014 in entrepreneur and Nasty Gal founder Sophia Amoruso’s memoir titled #Girlboss. In this memoir, she argues that the professional success of young women was its own form of activism. Career women’s pursuit of power was rebranded as a fight for equality and that personal gains in attaining power and wealth would lift up the women below them. The girlboss is a corporatized rebranding of female empowerment that celebrates everything a woman does simply because a woman did it.

Though this corporatized branding of female empowerment was never intended to be political, the girlboss brand has seeped into politics. From Senator Elizabeth Warren to late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the term girlboss has been used to idolize white female political figures for breaking glass ceilings. It sanitizes their political records and protects them from scrutiny.

We see this girlboss branding taken a step further with the onslaught of political merchandise that flattens elected officials into sellable feminist icons. As Terry Nguyen wrote for The Goods, “Americans, regardless of their political party or socioeconomic standing, seem to take pride in wearing hacky tag lines or garish emblems that seemingly portray their values.” The thousands of products emblazoned with “Nevertheless She Persisted” and the portrait of Notorious RBG and sold on sites like Etsy and Redbubble point to this commercialized phenomenon. For many liberals, this commodified girlboss feminism takes the place of tangible activism. This is an extension of the original girlboss brand that turned individual corporate success into feminist activism.

Leftists have weaponized the girlboss title to mock the moderate wing of the democratic party for idolizing powerful white female political figures simply for being women in positions of power despite supporting policies that hurt marginalized communities.

This girlboss branding has seen a resurgence with the nomination and election of Vice President-Elect Kamala Harris. Fancams of Harris continue to circulate on social media, including one posted to TikTok by GirlBoss, the media company founded by the original girlboss Sophia Amoruso. These fancams, set to Megan Thee Stallion songs, fashion Harris into a celebrity figure whose style and one-liners outshine not only the real symbolic power of her election but also her contentious prosecutor record.

Her now famous phrase “I’m speaking” that she fired at Mike Pence after he interrupted her at the VP debate has become a feminist symbol, one that was quickly monetized. In less than 2 months, Etsy sellers have listed over 9,000 shirts, stickers, mugs, etc. that feature the phrase. At face value, they seem like innocent internet celebrations of this historic election. But coupled with the social media fancams, this profit-driven girlboss feminism fuels the fandom and creates a cult of personality around her that makes her untouchable.

Leftists have ridiculed this rebranding of Harris because it flattens her into a one-dimensional symbol that leaves no room for critique. However, they have mocked it to such an extent that they leave no space for anyone to celebrate what her election means in terms of representation.

Black women have historically been shut out of politics despite constituting one of the largest and most consistent voting blocs of the Democratic Party. Since 1968, only 47 African American women have served in Congress, and only two of those women have served in the Senate, one being Kamala Harris herself. Harris’ ascent to the vice presidency marks a historic moment in United States history.

By assigning this white feminist title to Kamala Harris, the first black and Asian woman vice president, it diminishes the power of that symbolic representation and what that symbolism means to the black women and women of color who see themselves in her.

One excited supporter told 6 ABC News in Philadelphia that Harris “represents an idea that we could be better. It’s not about leadership, it’s about changing how people are thinking in this country.”

This white feminist title also diminishes what her vice presidency means to the young girls who see her as the symbol of what they can be one day.

At the same time, the girlboss idolization that fuels fandom culture makes it difficult to hold Harris and her prosecutor record accountable by placing her on an untouchable pedestal. As Amanda Hess wrote for the New York Times, “citizens may be the ones creating material about the candidates, but they are also helping to build cults of personality around politicians that erode their accountability.”

Her election to the vice-presidency followed a summer of protests against police brutality and systemic racism. Many activists and leaders on the left saw her VP nomination and her pro-cop record during her time as San Francisco district attorney and later as California Attorney General as a sign that their calls for progressive action were falling on deaf ears among moderate Democratic leaders.

Vice President-Elect Harris has repeatedly called herself a “progressive prosecutor,” but today’s activists have criticized her pro-cop, moderate record. According to the New York Times, she was publicly silent in 2007 “as police unions opposed legislation that would grant public access to disciplinary hearings” as San Francisco district attorney. During her tenure as California’s attorney general, she rarely intervened in cases involving killings by the police. Against the backdrop of national outrage over the killing of Michael Brown and despite pleas for her office to investigate several police shootings in San Francisco in 2014, she refused to do so. In general, she has been criticized for implementing moderate reform when progressive action was needed.

Trans advocates also see her record on trans issues during her time as California AG as cause for concern. As Chris Johnson wrote for the Washington Blade, Harris defended the state’s decision “to deny gender reassignment surgery for transgender inmates” in 2015. She not only defended the denial of care but also appealed subsequent decisions that ruled in the inmates’ favor. She has since then taken full responsibility for her actions.

By turning her into a girlboss feminist figure, her most ardent fans sanitize her record and silence the voices of Democrats with valid concerns over her past decisions. According to Hess, stans are by nature exclusionary. By building a micro-fandom out of this girlboss persona of the Vice President-Elect, they drive a deeper wedge between themselves and the left wing of the party.

The girlboss idolization of her is weaponized on both sides: it exacerbates the fandom problem, making it more difficult to hold her accountable without getting attacked for belittling her achievements. It’s used on the far left to ridicule her and her supporters for putting too much stake in her identity and that representation, effectively diminishing her accomplishments and what her Vice Presidency represents.

The question remains: can we hold Vice President-Elect Harris accountable for her moderate record on police reform while still acknowledging the historical significance of her election?

I think it’s possible to do both, but girlboss culture may need to finally die off first.