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
Allied Arts & Media

Canadian Illustrator Kate Beaton’s Hark! A Vagrant

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-wonder-woman
Wonder Woman by Kate Beaton on harkavagrant.com

Kate Beaton makes comics about Mary Seacole, Marie Curie, Susan B Anthony, The Brontës, Canadians, superheros, fat ponies, and more. Beaton lampoons historical and literary figures across the board. Her lively drawings and sharp wit have us laughing our way through our midweek. She launched her website Hark! A Vagrant in 2007, which according to the Paris Review receives more than a million hits each month.

More about the illustrator, in her own words:

Kate Beaton was born in Nova Scotia, took a history degree in New Brunswick, paid it off in Alberta, worked in a museum in British Columbia, then came to Ontario for a while to draw pictures, then Halifax, and then New York, and then back to Toronto. Maybe the moon next time, who knows.

The latest Hark! A Vagrant collection, Step Aside Pops is available as a convenient paper bound package. For everyday fun make sure to follow Kate Beaton on Twitter.

 

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-Suffragettes

Susan B. Antony may not approve.

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-Brontes

Dude Watchin’ with the Brontes

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-Mary-Seacole

“Florence Nightingale should can it!” Crimean War Nurse Mary Seacole FTW.

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-Laura-Secord

Bummer History with Laura Secord

 

Hark-A-Vagrant-Kate-Beaton-Straw-Feminists

Check your closets for Straw Feminists!

Categories
Allied Arts & Media

Every 16-year-old in Sweden to receive copy of We Should All Be Feminists

This weeks reason to smile is imported from Sweden. After the disappointing news that the UK is planning to drop feminism from the politics A-level, we were ecstatic to learn that every 16 years old in Sweden is being given a copy of We Should All Be Feminists, the internationally acclaimed TED talk (later developed into a published essay) by Nigerian novelist, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie.

The giveaway will be distributed by the Swedish Women’s Lobby and publisher Albert Bonniers. The Guardian reports that the lobby hopes the text will “work as a stepping stone for a discussion about gender equality and feminism.”

Adichie writes in the essay:

“My own definition of a feminist is a man or a woman who says, ‘Yes, there’s a problem with gender as it is today and we must fix it, we must do better. All of us, women and men, must do better.”

Some people ask: ‘Why the word feminist? Why not just say you are a believer in human rights, or something like that?’ Because that would be dishonest. Feminism is, of course, part of human rights in general – but to choose to use the vague expression human rights is to deny the specific and particular problem of gender. It would be a way of pretending that it was not women who have, for centuries, been excluded.”

In her video promoting the giveaway, Adichie says she is a feminist because she wants to live in a world that is more just.

Adichie continues:

“I want to live in a world where a woman is never told that she can or cannot or should or should not do anything because she is a woman. I want to live in a world where men and women are happier. Where they are not constrained by gender roles. I want to live in a world where men and women are truly equal. And that’s why I’m a feminist.”

The first copies of We Should All Be Feminists were handed out this week at Norra Real High School in Stockholm.

If you are not lucky enough to count yourself amount the 16 year old Swedish generation, do not fret. We Should All Be Feminists can be found online or at your local bookstore.

Categories
Activism & Action

A Sit Down With Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Gloria Steinem

 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, left, and Gloria Steinem in Justice Ginsburg’s chambers in the Supreme Court. Credit Hilary Swift for The New York Times
Photo source: Hilary Swift for The New York Times

Feminist trailblazers and longtime friends, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Gloria Steinem recently sat down with New York Times writer Phillip Gaines at Ginsburg’s Supreme Court chambers to talk about everything from rap names to the origins of the women’s movement and the setbacks they turned into inspiration along the way.

Here are a few of their most inspiring quotes to get you started, before you read their full conversation.

 

“Justice [Sandra Day] O’Connor once said: ‘Suppose there had been no discrimination when we finished law school. We’d be retired partners from large law firms today.’”
– Ruth Bader Ginsburg

 

“There were many firms who put up sign-up sheets that said, “Men Only.” And I had three strikes against me. First, I was Jewish, and the Wall Street firms were just beginning to accept Jews. Then I was a woman. But the killer was my daughter Jane, who was 4 by then.”
– Ruth Bader Ginsburg

 

“The great thing about obstacles is that they cause you to identify with other groups of people who are facing obstacles.”
– Gloria Steinem

 

“Equal pay for women would be the biggest economic stimulus this country could ever have.”
– Gloria Steinem

 

“[W]hat we want in the future will only happen if we do it every day. So, kindness matters enormously. And empathy. Finding some point of connection.”
– Gloria Steinem

 

 

Categories
Our Voices

Confessions of a Bad Feminist

Watch the video and enjoy reading the transcript below:

I am failing as a woman, I am failing as a feminist.

I have passionate opinions about gender equality, but I worry that to freely accept the label of “feminist,” would not be fair to good feminists.

I’m a feminist, but I’m a rather bad one. Oh, so I call myself a Bad Feminist. Or at least, I wrote an essay, and then I wrote a book called Bad Feminist, and then in interviews, people started calling me The Bad Feminist. (Laughter)

So, what started as a bit of an inside joke with myself and a willful provocation, has become a thing.

Let me take a step back. When I was younger, mostly in my teens and 20s, I had strange ideas about feminists as hairy, angry, man-hating, sex-hating women – as if those are bad things. (Laughter) These days, I look at how women are treated the world over, and anger, in particular, seems like a perfectly reasonable response.

But back then, I worried about the tone people used when suggesting I might be a feminist. The feminist label was an accusation, it was an “F” word, and not a nice one. I was labeled a woman who doesn’t play by the rules, who expects too much, who thinks far too highly of myself, by daring to believe I’m equal – (Coughs) – superior to a man. You don’t want to be that rebel woman, until you realize that you very much are that woman, and cannot imagine being anyone else.

As I got older, I began to accept that I am, indeed, a feminist, and a proud one. I hold certain truths to be self-evident: Women are equal to men. We deserve equal pay for equal work. We have the right to move through the world as we choose, free from harassment or violence. We have the right to easy, affordable access to birth control, and reproductive services. We have the right to make choices about our bodies, free from legislative oversight or evangelical doctrine. We have the right to respect.

There’s more. When we talk about the needs of women, we have to consider the other identities we inhabit. We are not just women. We are people with different bodies, gender expressions, faiths, sexualities, class backgrounds, abilities, and so much more. We need to take into account these differences and how they affect us, as much as we account for what we have in common. Without this kind of inclusion, our feminism is nothing.

I hold these truths to be self-evident, but let me be clear: I’m a mess. I am full of contradictions. There are many ways in which I’m doing feminism wrong.

I have another confession. When I drive to work, I listen to thuggish rap at a very loud volume. (Laughter) Even though the lyrics are degrading to women – these lyrics offend me to my core — the classic Yin Yang Twins song Salt Shaker – it is amazing. (Laughter) “Make it work with your wet t-shirt. Bitch, you gotta shake it ’til your camel starts to hurt!” (Laughter) Think about it. (Laughter) Poetry, right? I am utterly mortified by my music choices. (Laughter)

I firmly believe in man work, which is anything I don’t want to do, including – (Laughter) – all domestic tasks, but also: bug killing, trash removal, lawn care and vehicle maintenance. I want no part of any of that. (Laughter) Pink is my favorite color. I enjoy fashion magazines and pretty things. I watch “The Bachelor” and romantic comedies, and I have absurd fantasies about fairy tales coming true.

Some of my transgressions are more flagrant. If a woman wants to take her husband’s name, that is her choice, and it is not my place to judge. If a woman chooses to stay home to raise her children, I embrace that choice, too. The problem is not that she makes herself economically vulnerable in that choice; the problem is that our society is set up to make women economically vulnerable when they choose. Let’s deal with that. (Applause)

I reject the mainstream feminism that has historically ignored or deflected the needs of women of color, working-class women, queer women and transgender women, in favor of supporting white, middle- and upper-class straight women. Listen, if that’s good feminism – I am a very bad feminist. (Laughter)

There is also this: As a feminist, I feel a lot of pressure. We have this tendency to put visible feminists on a pedestal. We expect them to pose perfectly. When they disappoint us, we gleefully knock them from the very pedestal we put them on. Like I said, I am a mess — consider me knocked off that pedestal before you ever try to put me up there. (Laughter)

Too many women, particularly groundbreaking women and industry leaders, are afraid to be labeled as feminists. They’re afraid to stand up and say, “Yes, I am a feminist,” for fear of what that label means, for fear of being unable to live up to unrealistic expectations.

Take, for example, Beyoncé, or as I call her, The Goddess. (Laughter) She has emerged, in recent years, as a visible feminist. At the 2014 MTV Video Music Awards, she performed in front of the word “feminist” 10 feet high. It was a glorious spectacle to see this pop star openly embracing feminism and letting young women and men know that being a feminist is something to celebrate. As the moment faded, cultural critics began endlessly debating whether or not Beyoncé was, indeed, a feminist. They graded her feminism, instead of simply taking a grown, accomplished woman at her word. (Laughter) (Applause)

We demand perfection from feminists, because we are still fighting for so much, we want so much, we need so damn much.

We go far beyond reasonable, constructive criticism, to dissecting any given woman’s feminism, tearing it apart until there’s nothing left. We do not need to do that. Bad feminism — or really, more inclusive feminism — is a starting point.

But what happens next? We go from acknowledging our imperfections to accountability, or walking the walk, and being a little bit brave. If I listen to degrading music, I am creating a demand for which artists are more than happy to contribute a limitless supply. These artists are not going to change how they talk about women in their songs until we demand that change by affecting their bottom line. Certainly, it is difficult. Why must it be so catchy? (Laughter) It’s hard to make the better choice, and it is so easy to justify a lesser one. But — when I justify bad choices, I make it harder for women to achieve equality, the equality that we all deserve, and I need to own that.

I think of my nieces, ages three and four. They are gorgeous and headstrong, brilliant girls, who are a whole lot of brave. I want them to thrive in a world where they are valued for the powerful creatures they are. I think of them, and suddenly, the better choice becomes far easier to make.

We can all make better choices. We can change the channel when a television show treats sexual violence against women like sport, Game of Thrones. We can change the radio station when we hear songs that treat women as nothing. We can spend our box office dollars elsewhere when movies don’t treat women as anything more than decorative objects. We can stop supporting professional sports where the athletes treat their partners like punching bags. (Applause)

In other ways, men – and especially straight white men – can say, “No, I will not publish with your magazine, or participate in your project, or otherwise work with you, until you include a fair number of women, both as participants and decision makers. I won’t work with you until your publication, or your organization, is more inclusive of all kinds of difference.”

Those of us who are underrepresented and invited to participate in such projects, can also decline to be included until more of us are invited through the glass ceiling, and we are tokens no more.

Without these efforts, without taking these stands, our accomplishments are going to mean very little. We can commit these small acts of bravery and hope that our choices trickle upward to the people in power — editors, movie and music producers, CEOs, lawmakers – the people who can make bigger, braver choices to create lasting, meaningful change.

We can also boldly claim our feminism – good, bad, or anywhere in between. The last line of my book “Bad Feminist” says, “I would rather be a bad feminist than no feminist at all.” This is true for so many reasons, but first and foremost, I say this because once upon a time, my voice was stolen from me, and feminism helped me to get my voice back.

There was an incident. I call it an incident so I can carry the burden of what happened. Some boys broke me, when I was so young, I did not know what boys can do to break a girl. They treated me like I was nothing. I began to believe I was nothing. They stole my voice, and in the after, I did not dare to believe that anything I might say could matter.

But – I had writing. And there, I wrote myself back together. I wrote myself toward a stronger version of myself. I read the words of women who might understand a story like mine, and women who looked like me, and understood what it was like to move through the world with brown skin. I read the words of women who showed me I was not nothing. I learned to write like them, and then I learned to write as myself. I found my voice again, and I started to believe that my voice is powerful beyond measure.

Through writing and feminism, I also found that if I was a little bit brave, another woman might hear me and see me and recognize that none of us are the nothing the world tries to tell us we are.

In one hand, I hold the power to accomplish anything. And in my other, I hold the humbling reality that I am just one woman.

I am a bad feminist, I am a good woman, I am trying to become better in how I think, and what I say, and what I do, without abandoning everything that makes me human. I hope that we can all do the same. I hope that we can all be a little bit brave, when we most need such bravery. (Applause)

Categories
Allied Arts & Media

Robot Hugs: Gender Discrimination in Tech

Gender discrimination in tech. Illustrated by Robot Hugs

Technigal-by-robot-hugs-1 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-2 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-3 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-4 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-5 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-6 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-7 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-8 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-9 Technigal-by-robot-hugs-10

Robot Hugs is a webcomic based out of Toronto. The artist is identifies as a non-binary genderqueer peoplequeer mentally ill non-monogamous kinky critical feminist robot. They were always impressed by the creative work of their friend Chrissie who told them that since she came out as a woman she would find men persistently trying to direct her in her work which led to blended feelings of frustration, sadness, and lack of surprise.

Robot Hugs had this to say about Chrissie’s story:

When we talk about the differences in how men and women are treated professionally, especially in technical fields, we are often dismissed with ‘everyone has to deal with that’, or ‘women need to demonstrate more confidence with their skills’, or ‘they’re just trying to be helpful’, or ‘it’s all in your head’.

It’s frustrating when we know something like this is happening, but we spend so much of our time actually trying to get people to believe that it’s a real phenomenon. I find narratives like Chrissie’s validating in that she has a comparative set of experiences and is like ‘oh yeah, people totally think I’m less competent at my job now. it’s totally a thing’.  So, can guys just believe us already and get on helping it not happen? source robot-hugs.com

If you like discussion of identity, gender, and sexuality make sure to check out Robot Hugs’ website for  updated comics every Tuesday and Thursday.

Categories
Activism & Action Systems

The Three Waves of Feminism: Now a 4th?

Feminist_Suffrage_Parade_in_New_York_City,_1912

It is common to speak of three phases of modern feminism; however, there is little consensus as to how to characterize these three waves or what to do with women’s movements before the late nineteenth century. Making the landscape even harder to navigate, a new silhouette is emerging on the horizon and taking the shape of a fourth wave of feminism.

Some thinkers have sought to locate the roots of feminism in ancient Greece with Sappho (d. c. 570 BCE), or the medieval world with Hildegard of Bingen (d. 1179) or Christine de Pisan (d. 1434). Certainly Olympes de Gouge (d. 1791), Mary Wollstonecraft (d. 1797) and Jane Austen (d. 1817) are foremothers of the modern women’s movement. All of these people advocated for the dignity, intelligence, and basic human potential of the female sex. However, it was not until the late nineteenth century that the efforts for women’s equal rights coalesced into a clearly identifiable and self-conscious movement, or rather a series of movements.

The first wave of feminism took place in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, emerging out of an environment of urban industrialism and liberal, socialist politics. The goal of this wave was to open up opportunities for women, with a focus on suffrage. The wave formally began at the Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 when three hundred men and women rallied to the cause of equality for women. Elizabeth Cady Stanton (d.1902) drafted the Seneca Falls Declaration outlining the new movement’s ideology and political strategies.

In its early stages, feminism was interrelated with the temperance and abolitionist movements and gave voice to now-famous activists like the African-American Sojourner Truth (d. 1883), who demanded: “Ain’t I a woman?” Victorian America saw women acting in very “un-ladylike” ways (public speaking, demonstrating, stints in jail), which challenged the “cult of domesticity.” Discussions about the vote and women’s participation in politics led to an examination of the differences between men and women as they were then viewed. Some claimed that women were morally superior to men, and so their presence in the civic sphere would improve public behavior and the political process.

The second wave began in the 1960s and continued into the 90s. This wave unfolded in the context of the anti-war and civil rights movements and the growing self-consciousness of a variety of minority groups around the world. The New Left was on the rise, and the voice of the second wave was increasingly radical. In this phase, sexuality and reproductive rights were dominant issues, and much of the movement’s energy was focused on passing the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing social equality regardless of sex.

This phase began with protests against the Miss America pageant in Atlantic City in 1968 and 1969. Feminists parodied what they held to be a degrading “cattle parade” that reduced women to objects of beauty dominated by a patriarchy that sought to keep them in the home or in dull, low-paying jobs. The radical New York group called the Redstockings staged a counter pageant in which they crowned a sheep as Miss America and threw “oppressive” feminine artifacts such as bras, girdles, high-heels, makeup and false eyelashes into the trashcan.

Because the second wave of feminism found voice amid so many other social movements, it was easily marginalized and viewed as less pressing than, for example, Black Power or efforts to end the war in Vietnam. Feminists reacted by forming women-only organizations (such as NOW) and “consciousness raising” groups. In publications like “The BITCH Manifesto” and “Sisterhood is Powerful,” feminists advocated for their place in the sun. The second wave was increasingly theoretical, based on a fusion of neo-Marxism and psycho-analytical theory, and began to associate the subjugation of women with broader critiques of patriarchy, capitalism, normative heterosexuality, and the woman’s role as wife and mother. Sex and gender were differentiated—the former being biological, and the later a social construct that varies culture-to-culture and over time.

Whereas the first wave of feminism was generally propelled by middle class, Western, cisgender, white women, the second phase drew in women of color and developing nations, seeking sisterhood and solidarity, claiming “Women’s struggle is class struggle.” Feminists spoke of women as a social class and coined phrases such as “the personal is political” and “identity politics” in an effort to demonstrate that race, class, and gender oppression are all related. They initiated a concentrated effort to rid society top-to-bottom of sexism, from children’s cartoons to the highest levels of government.

One of the strains of this complex and diverse “wave” was the development of women-only spaces and the notion that women working together create a special dynamic that is not possible in mixed-groups, which would ultimately work for the betterment of the entire planet. Women, due whether to their long “subjugation” or to their biology, were thought by some to be more humane, collaborative, inclusive, peaceful, nurturing, democratic, and holistic in their approach to problem solving than men. The term eco-feminism was coined to capture the sense that because of their biological connection to earth and lunar cycles, women were natural advocates of environmentalism.

The third wave of feminism began in the mid-90’s and was informed by post-colonial and post-modern thinking. In this phase many constructs were destabilized, including the notions of “universal womanhood,” body, gender, sexuality and heteronormativity. An aspect of third wave feminism that mystified the mothers of the earlier feminist movement was the readoption by young feminists of the very lip-stick, high-heels, and cleavage proudly exposed by low cut necklines that the first two phases of the movement identified with male oppression. Pinkfloor expressed this new position when she said that it’s possible to have a push-up bra and a brain at the same time.

The “grrls” of the third wave stepped onto the stage as strong and empowered, eschewing victimization and defining feminine beauty for themselves as subjects, not as objects of a sexist patriarchy. They developed a rhetoric of mimicry, which appropriated derogatory terms like “slut” and “bitch” in order to subvert sexist culture and deprive it of verbal weapons. The web is an important tool of “girlie feminism.” E-zines have provided “cybergrrls” and “netgrrls” another kind of women-only space. At the same time — rife with the irony of third-wave feminism because cyberspace is disembodied — it permits all users the opportunity to cross gender boundaries, and so the very notion of gender has been unbalanced in a way that encourages experimentation and creative thought.

This is in keeping with the third wave’s celebration of ambiguity and refusal to think in terms of “us-them.” Most third-wavers refuse to identify as “feminists” and reject the word that they find limiting and exclusionary. Grrl-feminism tends to be global, multi-cultural, and it shuns simple answers or artificial categories of identity, gender, and sexuality. Its transversal politics means that differences such as those of ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, etc. are celebrated and recognized as dynamic, situational, and provisional. Reality is conceived not so much in terms of fixed structures and power relations, but in terms of performance within contingencies. Third wave feminism breaks boundaries.

The fourth wave of feminism is still a captivating silhouette. A writer for Elle Magazine recently interviewed me about the waves of feminism and asked if the second and third waves may have “failed or dialed down” because the social and economic gains had been mostly sparkle, little substance, and whether at some point women substituted equal rights for career and the atomic self. I replied that the second wave of feminism ought not be characterized as having failed, nor was glitter all that it generated. Quite the contrary; many goals of the second wave were met: more women in positions of leadership in higher education, business and politics; abortion rights; access to the pill that increased women’s control over their bodies; more expression and acceptance of female sexuality; general public awareness of the concept of and need for the “rights of women” (though never fully achieved); a solid academic field in feminism, gender and sexuality studies; greater access to education; organizations and legislation for the protection of battered women; women’s support groups and organizations (like NOW and AAUW); an industry in the publication of books by and about women/feminism; public forums for the discussion of women’s rights; and a societal discourse at the popular level about women’s suppression, efforts for reform, and a critique of patriarchy. So, in a sense, if the second wave seemed to have “dialed down,” the lull was in many ways due more to the success of the movement than to any ineffectiveness. In addition to the sense that many women’s needs had been met, feminism’s perceived silence in the 1990s was a response to the successful backlash campaign by the conservative press and media, especially against the word feminism and its purported association with male-bashing and extremism.

However, the second wave only quieted down in the public forum; it did not disappear but retreated into the academic world where it is alive and well—incubating in the academy. Women’s centers and women’s/gender studies have became a staple of virtually all universities and most colleges in the US and Canada (and in many other nations around the word). Scholarship on women’s studies, feminist studies, masculinity studies, and queer studies is prolific, institutionalized, and thriving in virtually all scholarly fields, including the sciences. Academic majors and minors in women’s, feminist, masculinity and queer studies have produced thousands of students with degrees in the subjects. However, generally those programs have generated theorists rather than activists.

Returning to the question the Elle Magazine columnist asked about the third wave and the success or failure of its goals. It is hard to talk about the aims of the third wave because a characteristic of that wave is the rejection of communal, standardized objectives. The third wave does not acknowledge a collective “movement” and does not define itself as a group with common grievances. Third wave women and men are concerned about equal rights, but tend to think the genders have achieved parity or that society is well on its way to delivering it to them. The third wave pushed back against their “mothers” (with grudging gratitude) the way children push away from their parents in order to achieve much needed independence. This wave supports equal rights, but does not have a term like feminism to articulate that notion. For third wavers, struggles are more individual: “We don’t need feminism anymore.”

But the times are changing, and a forth wave is in the air. A few months ago, a high school student approached one of the staff of the Center for Gender Equity at Pacific University and revealed in a somewhat confessional tone, “I think I’m a feminist!” It was like she was coming out of the closet. Well, perhaps that is the way to view the fourth wave of feminism.

The aims of the second feminist movement were never cemented to the extent that they could survive the complacency of third wavers. The fourth wave of feminism is emerging because (mostly) young women and men realize that the third wave is either overly optimistic or hampered by blinders. Feminism is now moving from the academy and back into the realm of public discourse. Issues that were central to the earliest phases of the women’s movement are receiving national and international attention by mainstream press and politicians: problems like sexual abuse, rape, violence against women, unequal pay, slut-shaming, the pressure on women to conform to a single and unrealistic body-type and the realization that gains in female representation in politics and business, for example, are very slight. It is no longer considered “extreme,” nor is it considered the purview of rarified intellectuals to talk about societal abuse of women, rape on college campus, Title IX, homo and transphobia, unfair pay and work conditions, and the fact that in the US has one of the worst records for legally-mandated parental leave and maternity benefits in the world.

Some people who wish to ride this new fourth wave have trouble with the word “feminism,” not just because of its older connotations of extremism, but because the word feels like it is underpinned by assumptions of a gender binary and an exclusionary subtext: “for women only.” Many fourth wavers who are completely on-board with the movement’s tenants find the term “feminism” sticking in their craws and worry that it is hard to get their message out with a label that raises hackles for a broader audience. Yet the word is winning the day. The generation now coming of age sees that we face serious problems because of the way society genders and is gendered, and we need a strong “in-your-face” word to combat those problems. Feminism no longer just refers to the struggles of women; it is a clarion call for gender equity.

The emerging fourth wavers are not just reincarnations of their second-wave grandmothers; they bring to the discussion important perspectives taught by third wave feminism. They speak in terms of intersectionality whereby women’s suppression can only fully be understood in a context of the marginalization of other groups an genders—feminism is part of a larger consciousness of oppression along with racism, ageism, classism, abelism, and sexual orientation (no “ism” to go with that). Among the third wave’s bequests is the importance of inclusion, an acceptance of the sexualized human body as non-threatening, and the role the internet can play in leveling hierarchies and gender-bending. Part of the reason a fourth wave can emerge is because these millennials’ articulation of themselves as “feminists” is their own: not a hand-me-down from grandma. The beauty of the fourth wave is that there is a place in it for all –together. The academic and theoretical apparatus is extensive and well honed in the academy, ready to support a new broad-based activism in the home, in the workplace, and in the streets.

At this point we are still not sure how feminism will mutate. Will the fourth wave fully materialize and in what direction? There have always been many feminisms in the movement, not just one ideology, and there have always been tensions, points and counter-points. The political, social and intellectual feminist movements have always been chaotic, multivalenced, and disconcerting; and let’s hope they continue to be so; it’s a sign that they are thriving.