You are visiting Liisbeth’s archives! 

Peruse this site for a history of profiles and insightful analysis on feminist entrepreneurship. 

And, be sure to sign up for rabble.ca’s newsletter where Liisbeth shares the latest news in feminist spaces.

Categories
Our Voices Uncategorized

Woman is Wolf to Woman

Image depicting half of a wolf's face and hale of a woman's fact
Artist Unknown

Hobbes’s commonly cited phrase “man is wolf to man” refers to the prurient horrors humanity can do to itself. That metaphor poses men as a wild animal capable of barbarous atrocities against his own species and, ultimately, himself. Note how the word “man” implies the whole of humanity; philosophy cannot assume subjectivity without first supposing that the subject is masculine. Historically, women were designed to compete, determined by chauvinist hegemony and simmering misogyny, tamed to deliver; women tend to turn on each other. With that estranged camaraderie, a woman can be wolf to woman. She often views other women as an enemy. What is she like? ponders the friend or acquaintance of a cheated woman. Too often, women try to thwart other women because they are seen as dangerous competitors. I’ve noticed in my psychotherapy practice how women rashly ask about the other woman, assuming she is the provoker, inferring her hostility. This other woman becomes a measuring rod: Is she younger? Prettier? Better? Wolf woman is gossip, tattler, looking for the flaws, searching for “buts.”  But…she has cellulitis, but…her breasts are not real, but… she is a fake blond.

Have you ever noticed how women stare at other women? Scanning, perusing, noticing, even before a man does. Slaves in a harem, always wary there is a mistrustful one, plotting and scheming among them creating a relentless and exhausting struggle for defense of territory, security and self-preservation. Too many hens in the same henhouse. In such an environment, nothing is more difficult to achieve than the applause of another woman.

Men blame women and women blame women. Women’s hostility to each other often seems unfounded, but in reality, it covers up a camouflaged accusation to our sex. The decree that the other woman provoked him, endorsed by a justifying narrative of a rapist society, is the most atrocious consequence of the historical women’s objectification by men. A woman-object also makes herself into a thing, viewing other women with suspicion. Isn’t she skinnier, smarter, sexier? A fundamental hostility against each other is established as the other woman becomes an adversary, a threat, with an ongoing reciprocal rivalry. That, in turn, gives more absolute power to men.

And some women even cheer and applaud misogynist narratives while condemning feminists. With self-esteem dependent on men, some women conform to the objectifier, who they estimate superior, validating locker room rhetoric used to minimize and humiliate them. Like a Stockholm hostage, a woman can adapt manners, beliefs, behaviors, and symbols of her captor. That dissenting feminist is, once again, inadvertently coerced. Systematically disempowered and underprivileged, women identify with the opposite gender, joining with them because they cannot transcend them. Exercising masculine oppression, paternalism, even naiveté, men can be arrogant, aggressive and disdainful to women, all while they are still enchained to a woman’s appeal. That is our ransom and some don’t want to forsake it.

But what happens if we decide not to be that woman? The one designed, shaped, constructed by the male narrative.

Masculine domination is so anchored in our social practices and our unconscious that we can hardly perceive it: symbolic violence, like male privilege; invisible dominance, ingrained in the very blueprint of what women must be. Implicitly and explicitly controlled, not gently but pervasively by everyday practice, women behave as men’s accomplices.   

What are we really up against when we try to escape being men’s object? When we don’t comply with standards of femininity? When we attempt to break out of norms we didn’t create? The “reward” for such renegade behavior often, dangerously, is low self-esteem or diminished self-worth.

But if we don’t break out? Objectification confines women to sex. We become that desired enemy, needed but rejected. The abominable statistics of sexual abuse indicate how easily a man can usurp a woman’s body. An objectified woman, virgin or whore, is made frail, dependent, alienated, undermined and robbed of intrinsic worth. In my work as a mental health professional, I see how male abusers deny, minimize, and blame, on the premise that women are guilty on two fronts: They tempt so they deserve the usurpation. Abusers see their victims as objects and, by grabbing that body, they rationalize abuse as a righteous act, as if the temptation a woman arouses justifies his taking power and control.

How on earth did we get here?

History, as written by (predominately) men, has concocted this recipe for femininity, a formula of social and moral imperatives that straitjackets what a woman should be. We became rather than were born. Men in male-controlled society made us become the other gender, a weak and dominated one, perhaps to assuage some sort of anxiety about their own virility. But it has gained historical validity to the extent that most men cannot fathom the scope of gender inequality. Their privileges are as invisible to them as the injustices against women.

Some women don’t see the extent of the damage either. Simone De Beauvoir said, “Women don’t call themselves we.” We distance ourselves from other minorities and activist movements of equality or civil rights. Women don’t make revolutions. We don’t overthrow, usurp the dominance. The truth is, we have not achieved more than men are willing to concede.

But equality is not a mere ethical claim. It is more than an amendment to patriarchy. Equality is a truth, a certainty, a must, and a given; it belongs to the realm of what it is to be human.   

So what happens if this truth brings us together? If we unite to break free from straitjackets? To reveal intrinsic repressive and abusive power and control mechanisms. To recover the strength of unity. To understand that our simmering hostility to each other only serves male dominance?

It is only through feminism, that women can form a united front. And activism is the only way women can bring about transformation in ourselves, not just socially and politically, but in refusing being wolf to women in our mundane realities. Feminism must be code, to imply unison and cohesiveness. It must breach the solitude of a few agitators and coalesce women of the present and future into a common cause.

Feminism is not revenge, anger or aggression. It is not blaming or victimization either. Feminism does not entitle women to take over men. That would simply chain us to the same patriarchal practices of dominance and supremacy. Feminism means coming together. It requires identification and understanding of the processes underlying gender identity. Feminism requires challenge and change. And if anything, and for starters, it means women is wolf to women, no more.

Categories
Activism & Action Our Voices

A Conversation with “WE WERE FEMINISTS ONCE” author Andi Zeisler

On September 20th, 2016, Andi Zeisler, author of “We Were Feminists Once: From Riot Grrrl to Covergirl®, the Buying and Selling of a Movement,” spoke at LiisBeth’s first-ever salon (sold out).  Just prior to the event, Liisbeth’s Managing Editor, Margaret Webb, interviewed Andi.

LiisBeth: Your brilliant critique argues that feminism has been high jacked by neoliberalism, giving us what you call marketplace feminism, where women are engaged with individual choice and empowerment rather than the hard work of tackling and fixing systemic inequality. I want to start where your book leaves off. What kind of feminism do we need going forward in order to make meaningful change?

Andi Zeisler: Something that I hope is clear throughout the book is that I don’t think that marketplace feminism has replaced systemic, boots-on-the-ground feminism. I absolutely think that’s always been happening and will continue to happen. Marketplace feminism just happens to be the most amplified version of feminism right now. All the feminism work that’s been going on over the past decade is absolutely having an effect on things and that will continue to happen. I have seen feminism become much deeper, much more intersectional, much more enmeshed in people’s everyday lives and that’s the kind of feminism we need going forward. It’s not an activist project they need to take time out of their lives to do but it is their real lives and part of their everyday life.

LiisBeth: In your critique of choice feminism — whatever a self-declared feminist chooses is feminist is feminist — you argue that there has to be a “line in the sand,” that surely feminism has to stand for something. What is that?

AZ: It has to stand for equality and the autonomy and freedom of all women, not just women who can afford to make consumer choices that prop up their sense of empowerment or sense self actualization. It has to be about supporting women’s equality in every way, whether that’s financial, body, social, as a parent or whatever. It really does have to be about real equality and not a facsimile of it.

LiisBeth: You offer great examples of how feminism has been co-opted by neoliberalism and capitalism, for instance with femvertising, which is using feminism to sell things. How is this harmful to women?

AZ: Anytime a political and social movement becomes excessively individualized and made to seem that it’s something you can choose and has no impact on everyone else, that is harmful. A good example is the so-called mommy wars that has being going on for the last couple of decades, where women who opt out of the workforce because they can afford to…and talk about it as if that’s a choice versus something that’s coerced out of them by a capitalist system that’s still based on having a stay-at-home parent as an anchor. That’s damaging. It makes it seem like it’s a choice and has nothing to do with how we value women in society and in the workforce. It’s like saying that the framework of capitalism has nothing to do with people’s choices and, of course, it does.

LiisBeth: Given that we exist in this neoliberal world of capitalism, how should feminists engage with it? Are there areas or ways we can co-opt or exploit capitalism to move the feminist project forward?

AZ: I’m not saying this is an ideal form of activism but it’s one we have that seems to work well and that is public shaming — calling out companies when they stereotype women in advertising, when they make really gross gender generalizations. Or calling out TV shows when they use slurs or stereotypes. All of these things threaten to hit corporations and pop culture products where it counts, which is in the chequebook. When a critical mass of people tell them what they are doing is wrong and threaten their bottom line, that tends to get their attention.

LiisBeth: How do you think we can engage men in feminism?

AZ: This is one of those questions that I find bothersome, the very idea that men have to be invited to engage in feminism. If men care about feminism, they should not have to be invited…. (Their role) is to take feminism into spaces where they already have the ears of their peers or superiors and make change there. We absolutely need men advocating for gender equality. But if they are men who are going to wait to be invited, they are probably not the people we need. We need the people who are already on our side and willing to do the work in their community

LiisBeth: Okay, put another way, how can men gain from feminism?

AZ: Feminism has always been, by extension, about men because it’s about decimating the idea there’s a gender binary, that there are certain things women do and certain things men do. Of course, feminism has already had men in mind when we talk about things like child rearing, emotion and sexuality. That women should not be constrained by centuries of stereotypes that are often based on nothing applies to men too. When women are liberated from constricting ideas of gender, so are men and that can be really powerful.

LiisBeth: Bitch has grown from a zine into a business with a website, a lecture series, a feminist curriculum for the classroom, a lending library, a writing fellowship. How do you promote or maintain feminist values in your business?

AZ: For a long time, it was really hard because we are a nonprofit running on a shoestring and there were definite issues around the amount we were able to pay people or that we weren’t able to pay health insurance for a long time. Part of the reason we moved (from San Francisco) to Portland 10 years ago was so we could have an organization that could live its mission of being feminist. That means paying everyone a fair wage; paying health insurance for everyone, including part-time employees; having family leave policy; having a generally hierarchical but respectful staff structure. As a nonprofit, we talk about mission and visioning a lot. We talk about communication and the importance of communicating respectfully, listening to people, being open to discussion, being open to dissent. It’s not necessarily enforced in a structural way, but it’s an important organizational value.

LiisBeth: How do you practice feminism in your personal life?

AZ: I accepted a long time ago that you can be a feminist, you can advocate for feminism, but it’s impossible to live every bit of your life in what other people might consider a feminist way. For instance, I was married for almost 16 years, but I would never argue that marriage is a feminist institution or that as a feminist getting married, I made it feminist. Whether it’s where you live or how you live, what you wear, whether you shave legs — when we start talking about whether x or y is or isn’t feminist (that) gets us into that individual unhelpful place where feminism is no longer an ongoing ethic but this idea of a personal choice that can be weighed on the scales of goodness and found acceptable.

LiisBeth: You have said that feminism is not supposed to be fun or cute or sexy. It’s a movement about changing a system and changing values and that’s really hard work and demands hard conversations and conflict and confrontation. Are you bitch slapping feminists to get back into the streets to hold meaningful protests? If so, what kind of protests would you like to see?

AZ: I don’t think there’s any lack of protests. They just don’t look like they did 40 years ago. A lot of activism now happens online, which is a much more inclusive way to do activism when you think about it. Consider how many people couldn’t participate in those protests in the ’60s and ’70s because they were working in factories or their religions didn’t permit it or whatever. I think there’s much more acceptability in how we collectively practice activism and understand activism now. Feminist activism needs a range of people. Some are going to put their heads down and write policy; some will be out in communities talking to and mobilizing people. The way activism is understood now, there’s a lot more for people to do according to their strengths and what their skills are.

LiisBeth: What makes you optimistic about feminism?

AZ: There’s a lot that makes me optimistic. A lot of it is going to universities and seeing that young women are so very immersed in and involved in feminism and politics and thinking deeply and critically about media and economics and gender roles and things like that. I never understand when older feminists say, where are all the feminists? I just think they’re looking in the wrong place or they’re looking at a much narrower range subjects than today’s feminists are actually focusing on.

LiisBeth: Do you think your work at Bitch will change as a result of immersing yourself in this look at feminism, or your views of feminism will change?

AZ: I’m not sure if I can answer that. A lot of things that I wrote about are still happening and in some ways becoming more pronounced. I also think that marketplace feminism is not necessarily going to remain at the kind of tenor it is now. It’s like environmentalism 10 years ago, which was really embraced by Hollywood and advertising and at some point it was no longer the new lens to promote things. That didn’t mean people stopped caring about environmentalism. It just became less overt. I don’t think that feminist activism has ever stopped or will ever stop as long as things are the way they are. When marketplace feminism is no longer a culturally amplified thing, there will still be a ton of feminist work to be done and a ton of feminists doing that work.

 

Related Media:

A Conversation with Gender Capitalism Expert Sarah Kaplan, by Margaret Webb

How to Embed Feminist Values Into Your Company, by Valerie Hussey

Why We’re Feminists, by Valerie Hussey

Confessions of a Bad Feminist, Roxanne Gay’s Ted Talk,  by LiisBeth Curator

CBC Here and Now Interview with Andi Zeisler (audio) 

Rotman School of Management Talk Video Clip

Categories
Activism & Action Our Voices

A Conversation with "WE WERE FEMINISTS ONCE" author Andi Zeisler


On September 20th, 2016, Andi Zeisler, author of “We Were Feminists Once: From Riot Grrrl to Covergirl®, the Buying and Selling of a Movement,” spoke at LiisBeth’s first-ever salon (sold out).  Just prior to the event, Liisbeth’s Managing Editor, Margaret Webb, interviewed Andi.
LiisBeth: Your brilliant critique argues that feminism has been high jacked by neoliberalism, giving us what you call marketplace feminism, where women are engaged with individual choice and empowerment rather than the hard work of tackling and fixing systemic inequality. I want to start where your book leaves off. What kind of feminism do we need going forward in order to make meaningful change?
Andi Zeisler: Something that I hope is clear throughout the book is that I don’t think that marketplace feminism has replaced systemic, boots-on-the-ground feminism. I absolutely think that’s always been happening and will continue to happen. Marketplace feminism just happens to be the most amplified version of feminism right now. All the feminism work that’s been going on over the past decade is absolutely having an effect on things and that will continue to happen. I have seen feminism become much deeper, much more intersectional, much more enmeshed in people’s everyday lives and that’s the kind of feminism we need going forward. It’s not an activist project they need to take time out of their lives to do but it is their real lives and part of their everyday life.
LiisBeth: In your critique of choice feminism — whatever a self-declared feminist chooses is feminist is feminist — you argue that there has to be a “line in the sand,” that surely feminism has to stand for something. What is that?
AZ: It has to stand for equality and the autonomy and freedom of all women, not just women who can afford to make consumer choices that prop up their sense of empowerment or sense self actualization. It has to be about supporting women’s equality in every way, whether that’s financial, body, social, as a parent or whatever. It really does have to be about real equality and not a facsimile of it.
LiisBeth: You offer great examples of how feminism has been co-opted by neoliberalism and capitalism, for instance with femvertising, which is using feminism to sell things. How is this harmful to women?
AZ: Anytime a political and social movement becomes excessively individualized and made to seem that it’s something you can choose and has no impact on everyone else, that is harmful. A good example is the so-called mommy wars that has being going on for the last couple of decades, where women who opt out of the workforce because they can afford to…and talk about it as if that’s a choice versus something that’s coerced out of them by a capitalist system that’s still based on having a stay-at-home parent as an anchor. That’s damaging. It makes it seem like it’s a choice and has nothing to do with how we value women in society and in the workforce. It’s like saying that the framework of capitalism has nothing to do with people’s choices and, of course, it does.
LiisBeth: Given that we exist in this neoliberal world of capitalism, how should feminists engage with it? Are there areas or ways we can co-opt or exploit capitalism to move the feminist project forward?
AZ: I’m not saying this is an ideal form of activism but it’s one we have that seems to work well and that is public shaming — calling out companies when they stereotype women in advertising, when they make really gross gender generalizations. Or calling out TV shows when they use slurs or stereotypes. All of these things threaten to hit corporations and pop culture products where it counts, which is in the chequebook. When a critical mass of people tell them what they are doing is wrong and threaten their bottom line, that tends to get their attention.
LiisBeth: How do you think we can engage men in feminism?
AZ: This is one of those questions that I find bothersome, the very idea that men have to be invited to engage in feminism. If men care about feminism, they should not have to be invited…. (Their role) is to take feminism into spaces where they already have the ears of their peers or superiors and make change there. We absolutely need men advocating for gender equality. But if they are men who are going to wait to be invited, they are probably not the people we need. We need the people who are already on our side and willing to do the work in their community
LiisBeth: Okay, put another way, how can men gain from feminism?
AZ: Feminism has always been, by extension, about men because it’s about decimating the idea there’s a gender binary, that there are certain things women do and certain things men do. Of course, feminism has already had men in mind when we talk about things like child rearing, emotion and sexuality. That women should not be constrained by centuries of stereotypes that are often based on nothing applies to men too. When women are liberated from constricting ideas of gender, so are men and that can be really powerful.
LiisBeth: Bitch has grown from a zine into a business with a website, a lecture series, a feminist curriculum for the classroom, a lending library, a writing fellowship. How do you promote or maintain feminist values in your business?
AZ: For a long time, it was really hard because we are a nonprofit running on a shoestring and there were definite issues around the amount we were able to pay people or that we weren’t able to pay health insurance for a long time. Part of the reason we moved (from San Francisco) to Portland 10 years ago was so we could have an organization that could live its mission of being feminist. That means paying everyone a fair wage; paying health insurance for everyone, including part-time employees; having family leave policy; having a generally hierarchical but respectful staff structure. As a nonprofit, we talk about mission and visioning a lot. We talk about communication and the importance of communicating respectfully, listening to people, being open to discussion, being open to dissent. It’s not necessarily enforced in a structural way, but it’s an important organizational value.
LiisBeth: How do you practice feminism in your personal life?
AZ: I accepted a long time ago that you can be a feminist, you can advocate for feminism, but it’s impossible to live every bit of your life in what other people might consider a feminist way. For instance, I was married for almost 16 years, but I would never argue that marriage is a feminist institution or that as a feminist getting married, I made it feminist. Whether it’s where you live or how you live, what you wear, whether you shave legs — when we start talking about whether x or y is or isn’t feminist (that) gets us into that individual unhelpful place where feminism is no longer an ongoing ethic but this idea of a personal choice that can be weighed on the scales of goodness and found acceptable.
LiisBeth: You have said that feminism is not supposed to be fun or cute or sexy. It’s a movement about changing a system and changing values and that’s really hard work and demands hard conversations and conflict and confrontation. Are you bitch slapping feminists to get back into the streets to hold meaningful protests? If so, what kind of protests would you like to see?
AZ: I don’t think there’s any lack of protests. They just don’t look like they did 40 years ago. A lot of activism now happens online, which is a much more inclusive way to do activism when you think about it. Consider how many people couldn’t participate in those protests in the ’60s and ’70s because they were working in factories or their religions didn’t permit it or whatever. I think there’s much more acceptability in how we collectively practice activism and understand activism now. Feminist activism needs a range of people. Some are going to put their heads down and write policy; some will be out in communities talking to and mobilizing people. The way activism is understood now, there’s a lot more for people to do according to their strengths and what their skills are.
LiisBeth: What makes you optimistic about feminism?
AZ: There’s a lot that makes me optimistic. A lot of it is going to universities and seeing that young women are so very immersed in and involved in feminism and politics and thinking deeply and critically about media and economics and gender roles and things like that. I never understand when older feminists say, where are all the feminists? I just think they’re looking in the wrong place or they’re looking at a much narrower range subjects than today’s feminists are actually focusing on.
LiisBeth: Do you think your work at Bitch will change as a result of immersing yourself in this look at feminism, or your views of feminism will change?
AZ: I’m not sure if I can answer that. A lot of things that I wrote about are still happening and in some ways becoming more pronounced. I also think that marketplace feminism is not necessarily going to remain at the kind of tenor it is now. It’s like environmentalism 10 years ago, which was really embraced by Hollywood and advertising and at some point it was no longer the new lens to promote things. That didn’t mean people stopped caring about environmentalism. It just became less overt. I don’t think that feminist activism has ever stopped or will ever stop as long as things are the way they are. When marketplace feminism is no longer a culturally amplified thing, there will still be a ton of feminist work to be done and a ton of feminists doing that work.
 
Related Media:
A Conversation with Gender Capitalism Expert Sarah Kaplan, by Margaret Webb
How to Embed Feminist Values Into Your Company, by Valerie Hussey
Why We’re Feminists, by Valerie Hussey
Confessions of a Bad Feminist, Roxanne Gay’s Ted Talk,  by LiisBeth Curator
CBC Here and Now Interview with Andi Zeisler (audio) 
Rotman School of Management Talk Video Clip

Categories
Activism & Action

Entrepreneurs by Choice; Activists By Necessity

Entrepreneurs-by-Choice-Activists-By-Necessity-LiisBeth

Writer Natalie Clifford Barney once called entrepreneurship “the last refuge of the troublemaking individual.” Surprising words, considering charm and tact are considered essential tools for anyone starting a business. And kicking down doors isn’t exactly charming behaviour.

But for many women, particularly those working within oppressive environments, the very act of starting a business can be frighteningly disruptive to the social order. When entrepreneurship also entails rising out of prejudice or poverty, activism becomes a necessary part of the toolkit. As history shows, it can be an incredibly valuable tool.

Many female business pioneers consistently spoke truth to power while simultaneously building what we would now call their brands. Take, for example, cosmetics magnate Elizabeth Arden. Born Florence Graham in 1884 in Woodbridge, Ont., Arden popularized makeup for women at a time when it was worn primarily by actors and prostitutes. Since that time, of course, women’s relationships to cosmetics can best be described as uneasy; in fact, some might criticize Arden for fostering a culture that not only allows, but mandates cosmetic “improvement.”

But in the early 20th century, wearing makeup was a sign of a woman’s determination to please herself. On a spring day in 1912, Arden did her own unique part to advance the suffrage movement by getting marchers in a New York City parade to sport her signature lipstick. It was bright red of course, the colour of daring and defiance.

Arden’s contemporary, Mary Pickford, is best known as a Hollywood film actor who became “America’s sweetheart.” But she was also a highly successful business executive who also happened to hail from Canada. Pickford (born Gladys Smith) began producing her own features shortly after her acting career began and later co-founded the United Artists studio to secure financial and artistic freedom for filmmakers.

Pickford constantly used her power and profits to help others in the screen trade. Her projects included building a specialized hospital for ailing industry workers, as well as establishing the Motion Picture Relief Fund to provide assistance to impoverished actors. She was also a major fundraiser for the American army’s efforts during the First World War.

Georgina Binnie-Clark wasn’t nearly as famous as Arden or Pickford, but deserves equal celebration. Binnie-Clark was an aristocratic Englishwoman who found herself in a precarious economic position in the early 1900s. At the time, there were almost a million more young women than men in England after many of the latter had been lost to immigration and war. Marital uncertainty became a problem for upper-class women, whose identity was solely defined by their husband and children (working-class women routinely held jobs outside the home).

Binnie-Clark immigrated to Saskatchewan where she did the most shocking thing for an upper-class woman: she became a successful farmer. Throughout her life on the prairies, she fought numerous obstacles. Because she was a single woman, the government deemed her ineligible to own a homestead, despite a petition signed by 11,000 men to get the law reversed. Undaunted, Binnie-Clark devised a plan to bring single British women to Canada and train them in the art of farming. Unfortunately, the program was cancelled due to the outbreak of the First World War. She also wrote two books in which she advocated not only for female farmers, but for all western farmers afflicted by unfair financing practices.

Binnie-Clark, Pickford and Arden were entrepreneurs by choice and activists by necessity. With improved conditions for women in business, is activism a thing of the past?

Not by any means, but there are different reasons for this. Some entrepreneurial activists are so massively successful (think Oprah Winfrey or Jane Fonda) that they can afford to be as troublesome as they wish. Others may start off with less, but find their desire to upset the social apple cart is shared by many other willing partners. An example is Kathryn Finney, creator of digitalundivided (DID), which supports the success of tech start-ups led by African-American and Latina women.

Across the world, others are still fighting for basic gains; like their forebears, they can’t afford not to be activists. Sarah Abu Alia, a concert promoter in Jordan, embraces the role heartily. Of the work climate in her home country she says: “As a woman, you have to fight for everything here, which is a great preparation for being an entrepreneur.” The women of yesterday would no doubt agree.

 

Publisher’s Note: Micah White, author of The End of Protest, writes, “The lack of protest is perilous for society.” And he might be right. In a time where even innovative protest efforts like Occupy failed to create change, and in a year where presidential hopefuls like Donald Trump can take sexism and racism to a whole new level and still garner a massive following, it may, just may, be a sign to women* everywhere that we too need to examine our toolkit and ask ourselves if our current atomistic, individual “role modeling” and “don’t rock the boat” efforts to advance equality and inclusion are also no longer effective. Perhaps we need new, bolder tools to drive social change. And as entrepreneurs, perhaps we need to start seeing ourselves as social activists and drivers of social change, not just drivers of our economy.

*Defined in gender-expansive terms.