Recently--or, maybe not, as this has probably persisted for quite some time--there has been this prevailing notion that being socially aware of your surroundings inevitably leads to lacking to basic human functions of laughing, smiling, or just generally having a good time. If you're reading this and thinking, "That's probably the dumbest thing I've ever read," then cool, because that it is, indeed, the dumbest thing I've ever had to write. But here's the thing: this is actually a perception that exists. For instance, I, as a feminist that is also avidly interested in psychoanalysis and Marxism, am continuously asked, "Can't you just, I don't know, turn your brain off and enjoy something?"

Dude, no. I can't. Do you really think that's a beneficial way to live? It is my duty, not only as a writer, but as a sentient human being to dissect everything around me and find some sort of comprehensive understanding for the given medium or, if need be, acknowledge an apparent lack thereof. Being passive isn't something that should be praised, and while I genuinely hate this term and despise using it in regards to other people, you're literally acting like a sheep if you're living your life under the impression that certain aspects of life--especially artistic mediums--are meant to be merely enjoyed and not analyzed in any way.

It's about this point in the argument that the aforementioned question begins to rear its ugly head, and at first, I wasn't quite sure how to combat it, aside from the above explanation that relies heavily upon theoretical knowledge, since so much of the research conducted about such fields is, generally, done using learned theories that span from focuses upon cultural influences to the sexual orientations of the characters and creators (or, rather, a melting pot of multiple approaches, as these can often be used in tandem). Then I came to the realization that it really shouldn't be too difficult to understand because so much of my explanation relies upon everything I've previously stated. We'll use the term double consciousness, then, since that shouldn't be hard for anyone to understand. And here's how it all works. You ready?

Step 1: You acknowledge that something is inherently problematic.

Step 2: You vow to enjoy the thing (if you want, that is) but to keep said thing at arm's length, as it is not something that should be influencing your life decisions.

That's literally it.

Let's take David Guetta's "Hey Mama" ft. Nicki Minaj Bebe Rexha, and Afrojack.

In my opinion--lyrics not being considered, momentarily--this is a solid pop song. If it comes on while I'm in the car, chances are I'll dance and sing along because it's just one of those pieces of music that elicits that kind of response from me. But the lyrics aren't exactly the most flattering for women. In fact, they uphold a patriarchal theme that I cannot personally support in any way, and the idea of considering a man "the boss" just because he's the man in the relationship kind of makes me want to barf. That doesn't mean I have to hate the song, though. I can listen to it with my friends on road trips without letting these ideologies seep into my own brain, and I like to think that all other listeners have the ability to reach this basic level of intelligence, as well.

There are a plethora of other artistic mediums that contain texts that I don't find appealing on an ideological level (*cough* Lychee Light Club *cough*) but that doesn't mean they can't be novels, songs, films from which pleasure can be derived, as long as it's kept at a distance from being too influential.

So, yes. Feminists can enjoy things, as can Marxists, Psychoanalysts, and any other kind of intellectual that has a functioning brain. We just know not to let those pieces of art influence our inner workings without evaluating them thoroughly.