Search Eminism.org

  • Enter search term(s):

Regression of the Third Wave

are we turning into our mothers?

Forum: Strap-on.org
Date: 12/28/2001

<< in response to the conmparison of "Manifesta" by Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards and "Cunt" by Inga Muscio >>

I'm actually surprised to read that some people are characterizing "Manifesta" as girly feminism - they clearly *criticize* girly feminism a la BUST. I think that "Manifesta" and "Cunt" are contemporary rendition of classical "liberal feminism" and "radical feminism" respectively. I think they represent the regression of what was once third wave feminism back to the second. After Amy Richards and Jennifer Baumgardner (I had a dinner with them once and I do like them personally) spoke in Portland, a Women's Studies professor of mine, herself a socialist feminist, gave me condolences that I will have to deal with the Amy Richards feminism the way she had to deal with the Gloria Steinem feminism.

Take, for example, how "Manifesta" deals with racism. It is mentioned three times in the book, two of which are in the context that patriarchal backlash accused feminism of being racist in order to discredit it, and only once that "some women of color actually felt marginalized" (notice the word "felt," rather than that they *are* marginalized). Their 13-point "agenda" for the third wave does not include anti-racism. Or consider how "Manifesta" discusses the concept of bisexuality as a good way for straight girls to experiment, rather than valid sexual identity/choice on its own.

I know that Inga Muscio has lots of great insights beyond those expressed in "Cunt" - and I look forward to reading her new book ("Autobiography of the Blue-Eyed Devil") when it comes out. The problem with "Cunt" and also with "The Vagina Monologues" for that matter is not just how they neglect trans women, but their insistence that there is something universal just because we are all women. There is a statement in "Cunt" that, with advanced communication technology, talking about cunts will unite "all women" - this is the same old "radical" feminist assumption of universal women's experiences/interests/oppression that function as an oppressive mechanism against women of color, working class women, etc.

Even with these problems, I encourage everyone to read their books, partially because they will become Gloria Steinem of the new generation whether or not we like it, and also because I think we should support younger feminist leaders. I will continue to criticize their works within third wave context, but I will defend them when they are unfairly attacked or discredited by second wave feminists - much like I would defend NOW from the attacks by the religious right even as I have major problems with NOW myself.

Leslie Heywood and Jennifer Drake, who edite "Third Wave Agenda," discussed that approaches that third wave feminists take are influenced by earlier works by women of color, working class women, and others who fell outside of the mainstream of feminism. Ednie Garrison and I go a bit further and re-define third wave fefeminism as something that is "outside of" the second wave, rather than "after" it, making it a theoretical position rather than a generational affiliation. I founded National Women's Studies Association's "Third Wave Feminisms Interest Area Group" (read more at www.nwsa.org/twf.htm ) under this definition.

One caution, though: remember that what you see in print is not necessarily exactly how writers wanted to write. After all, it is second wave feminisms who have vested interest in keeping "third wave" or "young women's voices" palatable who control the feminist presses such as Seal.

Emigrl

p.s.
So, I have problems with "Manifesta" but I don't want to discourage others from reading it, so I want to add some of the things I liked about "Manifesta":

1) Defense of Katie Roiphe. I don't think most people who dislike Katie even read her books, "Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism on Campus," which I consider to be a valid contribution to feminist debates about sexuality. Sure, I have problem with many of the things she says, but she did not deserve the kind of malicious and ruthless bashing that she received.

2) Criticism of "Girl's Movement" by Second Wave Feminists. It is *so* true that so much of second wave feminists' work to "empower young girls" is not about young girls' crisis at all, but about older feminists' own existential crisis. I do think that it would have been better if Amy and Jennifer could write about how feminists who are now 20s or 30s can avoid making the same mistake with younger girls.

3) Criticism of Phyllis Chesler's "Letters to a Young Feminist." I like Phyllis' "Letter to a young feminist who happen to be a man who happened to be my son" - but the rest of the book is *way* too patronizing. Again, Amy and Jennifer could have made much better critique if they realized that "mother-daughter" trope to describe second and third feminisms is a white-centered view.

-----
http://eminism.org/ * Putting the Emi back in Feminism since 1975.