This is an article published in Ms. a while ago, but I just came across it and wanted to get some feeback. It is written by Lisa Jervis, the co-founder of Bitch magazine and she talks about what she considers a dated term--"wave" when refering to feminist activism and thought. She believes that in our attempt to distinguish ourselves as "third wave" feminists, we have caught ourselves in the belief that there is a singular way to be feminist.
In her reluctance to answer questions about "third wave" ideology, she responds...
This reluctance isn’t just me being cranky and not wanting to answer any hard questions. Here is the reality: We’ve reached the end of the wave terminology’s usefulness. What was at first a handy-dandy way to refer to feminism’s history and its present and future potential with a single metaphor has become shorthand that invites intellectual laziness, an escape hatch from the hard work of distinguishing between core beliefs and a cultural moment.
Interesting stuff. I also found this quote rather interesting...
Here’s what we all need to recognize so that we can move on: Those in their 20s and 30s who don’t see their concerns reflected in the feminism of their elders are ignorant of history; those in their 50s and beyond who think that young women aren’t politically active — or active enough, or active around the right issues — don’t know where to look.
These are some pretty intense statements. Have we reached a phase where we can stop differentiating between the different moments of feminism? My entire experience with 3rd wave agenda is that it put me, women of color, at the center of it's (non-linear) discourse. Not in the age-old, or previous "native informant" type of way, but in a way that recognized my differing relationship to the movement, to patriarchy and to society. The second wave failed to effectively do this. That is why I consider myself not only a 3rd wave feminist, but also a 3rd world feminist. I don't think we have reached a place to completely make amends with our foresisters (at least not with my experience with 2nd wavers in academia!). But that's just me.
What I do agree with...
We may not all agree on exactly what it looks like or how to get it. We should never expect to agree. Feminism has always thrived on and grown from internal discussions and disagreements. Our many different and often opposing perspectives are what push us forward, honing our theories, refining our tactics, driving us toward a more thorough dismantling of the white-supremacist, capitalist patriarchy (to borrow another phrase from hooks).
What do you think?
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I actually saw this article when it came out, and remember there was a lot of buzz. I work for a women's organization, so this was probably not the case everywhere-- but it's funny, b/c I particularly remember the buzz being from the "second wavers" that I work with, as they shot me hah- told you so" looks, as if they were right all along-- younger generations of feminists really didn't have different perspectives. Sigh.
That bitching out of the way, I personally like the term for similar reasons to Sahmita- I like to be able to distiguish myself from "their Feminism"-- that being "second wave" or whatever. But I personally am not sure of the significance. I've been wondering more and more if their is relevance outside of feminist academia (there have actually been lots of writings on this as well, since about the beginning of the "3rd wave"- in the early 90s). Does naming oneself part of the "third wave" mean anything to the young women out there constantly saying "I'm not a feminist, but..."? Probably not, b/c I'm guessing it's unlikely that they're all that familiar with the terminology, since it is mostly used in academia (with the exception of the Third Wave Foundation). The bigger problem, I think, are the misreprentations about feminism in general, whether it's first, second, or third wave, in the media which have led people to hestitate to define themselves as feminist period.
It's a distinction that never should have been made in the first place.
My context: I'm in my early 40s -- learned my feminism in the 70s as a kid, started practicing it in the late 80s as an activist, inspired more by ACT UP than by NOW. I was one of the founding members of WHAM! (the repro rights group, not George Michael's gig), and I remember how adamantly certain we were that we were doing something completely different, thinking thoughts that were completely new, framing feminism in an entirely new way. When older members of our group tried to share their insights from their earlier activism, we were disdainful. They had nothing to offer us.
Funny how 15 or 20 years changes your perspective. We owe those women an apology and some thanks.
Maybe it's because I'm a "cusper" in this alleged division as in the boomer/Gen-X division -- not truly in one camp or the other. But all I see is a continuum of learning, teaching and activism. The wave divide has always been just another way to keep women from working together.
In my day (the 70s, 80s, 90s, etc.)feminists were considered ballbusting, castrating, undesirable, etc. by the media. I am sure that this was true in the 1800s and will probably be the case in 2500s. For obvious reasons lots of women always say "I'm not a feminist, but......". After all, some of us want to get laid.
Well, my worry about the "Third Wave" terminology has always been primarily that it's premature. "First Wave" and "Second Wave" aren't generational terms; when we talk about "First Wave feminism" it's important to remember that we're talking about a historical movement that encompassed three generations of women--women spread across a huge array of different organizations and publications and campaigns, and women who at times had pretty intense conflicts within the movement over goals, tactics, ideology, organization, priorities, and (while we're at it) race; these conflicts often ended up taking shape as intergenerational conflicts between the older leaders and the upcoming young activists.
If we're going to start using "wave" as a generational term, then we're not in the third wave of feminism; we're in at least the 6th (which seems like a bit much). On the other hand, if we're going to take a bit longer historical view, then we could at least wait until we have put a good 72 years of effort into Second Wave feminism before we start hiving our efforts off into a new "Wave."
heh heh. if you're a feminist and you can't get laid, it's because you're a loser, not because you're a feminist.
Hmm. I've tried to post this twice, and typekey has not been my friend. Hopefully, the third time is the charm. Apologies if the earlier two posts pop up later!
I guess I think that it's impossible to have an inclusive and broad feminist movement if we exclude women over 50. I think that older women have specific experiences and perspectives and that it would be bad to ignore them.
Here's an example. I'm the right age to be Third Wave, but I'm dealing with issues that most Third Wavers don't even notice: stuff that has to do with chronic illness and healthcare of the sort that doesn't directly relate to reproduction and sexuality. And no offense to you guys, because I love you to bits, but I'm not convinced you even realize those are feminist issues. I don't see a lot of evidence that you realize that for a lot of women, pain management is a bigger issue than emergency contraception. I'm a lot more likely to have my issues acknowledged on a site that includes older women, because older women are a lot more likely to have experienced chronic illness or disability. It's not a coincidence that Andrea Dworkin's last published piece was about her experience of disability and chronic pain. When she was 23, I doubt she thought much about those things, either.
I absolutely agree that feminism has to reject false universalism and recognize that women are differently positioned in relation to society and the movement and patriarchy and everything. But older women are differently positioned than young ones. And I just can't get behind the idea of excluding whole classes of women in the name of inclusiveness. I sort of feel like a movement that works that hard to distinguish itself from older women is also going to end up marginalizing me.
While there are a huge number of variants and evolutions of 2nd wave feminism, it would be a mistake to forget how deeply involved many women in the early seventies were in the civil rights movement or later the black (extending to brown, red and yellow) power issues.
I'm not certain that the complex issues of the racial dialectic necessarily spread to the third wave. For example many feminists seem oblivious or in denial to the hostilit towards Nicole Simpson expressed by many on the jury, claim a sort of kinship with non white women despite the historical and continued abuse of domestic servants and do not realize the fact that the fact a white woman in much of older America could get a black man harassed, arrested or even lynched by claiming he looked at her sexually indicated a clear superiority in status.