Isn't exclusion necessary?
When we were talking about how Persepolis excludes many women, and only tells the story of one woman, I kept coming back to the idea that exclusion is necessary. Although feminism seeks to give voice to those who have been underheard, I don't think that works of literature can, or should try to show every side of the story or have every voice heard. Of course, it would be great if everyone's story were told through some medium, but individual works shouldn't have to do any more than tell one story. It's up to the reader to think about the other characters, such as the extremists in Iran, who we are not hearing from. I don't think that excluding an opinion makes something un-feminist. So many choices have to be made in the process of creating a story or work of art, that it seems ridiculous to say that feminism means hearing from the unheard, and therefore a text or peice is not feminist if it only gives one side to a story. A feminist person should try to hear all opinions, but it's too much to hold up each text and ask if it represents all sides of a story, although it is important to keep in mind who we are actually hearing from and not hearing from.