I Hate To Jump On Another Thread...But What Is The Difference Between....

[THUNDER HANDS]

First, second and third wave feminism?

As referenced in this thread ---> http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1359049&mesg_id=1359049

I was reading it and got terribly confused. Can anyone clear it up for me as to when these waves occured and what made them different?

Thank you.

Sincerely,


An ignorant male

:D

[cally]

1. Did you read the other thread

Several posters explained it there.

[THUNDER HANDS]

2. a nice little summary would be appreciated

You know, in a nice little package, possibly with a bow on it.

;)

3. read post 2 in the other thread

(written by curse10)
That's a good start.

[cally]

4. Essentially, the third wave is a rejection

of the 70's feminist movement. The third wave is younger women saying that they can be feminine and sexy and be feminists. What I don't think most understand is older feminists believed the same thing so I reject the concept of the third wave as vastly different from the second wave. I just see it as an evolution.

5. evolution or break?

That sounds parallel to the discussion over whether post-modernism is an actual break from modernism or is simply a retranslation of it.

My knowledge of a lot of this is from the perspective of literary theory. I'm wondering how, in your opinion, the relation between 2nd and 3rd wave feminism relates to, parallels, differs the relation between American and European feminism. Specifically as spelled out here --

"She points out that "french feminism," as she calls it, wasn't like American "women's liberation," in that it wasn't a separatist movement, one favoring women and excluding or vilifying men. Rather, "french feminism" (or what we will call "poststructuralist feminist theory") emerges from women theorists who are direct disciples of male poststructuralist theorists, including Derrida, Lacan, Foucault, and Althusser.

While Anglo-American feminist literary critics in the early 1980s were focusing on creating analyses and critiques of fictional representations of women in men's and women's writings, these poststructuralist feminist theorists were studying how gender was created and/or destabilized within the structure of language itself, following Lacan; they examined how subject positions were gendered as "Man" or "Woman," masculine or feminine, rather than looking at individual gendered beings and how they were portrayed in literature."

This is a quote from Alice Jardine and from http://www.colorado.edu/English/engl2010mk/cixous.lec.html

[pmbryant]

6. Sounds like a simple generation gap to me

Every new generation apparently feels better thinking they are so very different from everyone that came before.

:shrug:

Peter

8. it's more complex than that

at least from my understanding.

The emphasis in the 3rd wave on being feminine is a critique of the tendency in second wave to become separatist and thus simply repeat hierarchical distinctions & to have a feminism that recodified/repeated "masculinist" patriarchal issues. That is, simply having women get into positions of power (equal rights) is not enough if they then engage in the same type of behavior as men have historically.
It is more subtle than I'm describing, but that is one thread of the thought, I believe.

[pmbryant]

13. I don't think so.

If that is the attitude of the "3rd wave", then I think it is based on a fundamental misunderstanding and vast oversimplification of the previous "waves".

Also, to critique this attitude of "3rd wavers" you describe: what historical men are women supposed to engage in different behavior than? Gandhi? Martin Luther King? Abraham Lincoln? Albert Einstein?

Yes, Hitler, Stalin, etc are obvious candidates, but nonsensical since men are not supposed to act that way either. Same for lesser bad examples like LBJ, Nixon, G.W.Bush, Ken Lay, etc.

I still think this is just a generational difference. A pseudo-rebellion by daughters against their mother's generation. These "daugthers" are generally young and have little historical perspective of their own and even less first-hand knowledge of how things used to be (and not even very much about how things currently are for that matter), so it is easy for them to think they are being different and original, when in fact, this same scenario has played out before: The 1920s "flapper" generation was a very similar rebellion against the turn of the century feminists.

--Peter

19. part of it is generational

part of it isn't.

I think you're oversimplifying things.
I may have been also, but I admitted it.

[pmbryant]

22. Yes

Oversimplifying is inevitable, yes, so no doubt I'm guilty of it too, to some extent. But the impression I have from that other thread, plus my readings on the history of women in this country, leads me to believe that the generational difference is the dominant factor here.

--Peter

23. a further thought

I actually do agree with you about this --

These "daugthers" are generally young and have little historical perspective of their own and even less first-hand knowledge of how things used to be (and not even very much about how things currently are for that matter), so it is easy for them to think they are being different and original, when in fact, this same scenario has played out before:

The third wave stuff I was referring to is my interpretation of the next wave that came from European feminism who definitely have an awareness of history. It's in my post above that quotes Alice Jardine.

I'm not completely conversant with third wave in America & looking through some of the threads, I'm beginning to see some elements of what you are saying.

[tishaLA]

14. It's NOT a "rejection"

it's just a mischaracterization to call it that. It's an evolution.

[Selwynn]

7. Here is one vastly oversimplified answer:

(56Kid please help me out here...)

First wave feminism - basic rights movement, i.e. suffrage

Second wave feminism - 60s/70s feminist activism, in addition to being about woman's empowerment and reclamation of self-identity, this movement did have one negative consequence of tending to be all or nothing: if you're a woman who stays at home, or wears make up or a bra, you are hurting woman and capitulating to a patriarchal society, etc. etc.

Third wave feminism - or, what I like to call "hot feminism" (just kidding!!) was/is in a lot of ways a reaction to the over-zealousness of (some) second wave feminism (I'm using huge generalizations here). Basically, it is the conviction that it is possible to have healthy self-identity and feminine empowerment without having to reject every aspect of society. No, wearing makeup in and of itself, does not making you male-dominated or an "oppressed woman." No, choosing family over a career does not make you a "victim" or a disgrace to woman's progress...

In a gross, over simplistic, not really literal metaphor: where a second wave feminists would burn bras and shout that Victoria's secret is a symbol of male dominance and societal oppression while demanding equal rights and status, a third wave feminist might model for Victoria's secret because she wants to, or stay at home as a mom because she wants to, or participate in other aspects of our culture because she wants to - NOT because it she is capitulating to some kind of oppressive societal structure -- and then also continue to demand her rights. :)

Please remember though, that ALL socio-political feminism was born out of philosophical feminist theory. Feminist theory is crucial study to understanding socio-political feminist movement in all its waves... :)

<edit - I also need to make a very important qualifying remark. First, Second, Third wave feminism is pretty different if you're talking about feminist theory or talking about socio-political feminism. On the side of philosophy, there is also a clear historical progression of "generations" of feminist thought. But the differences/developments between each "generation" is different slightly, or at least much more nuanced from the socio-political manifestions of "feminism" at different points in time.>

9. I've got to admire

the conciseness with which you present this stuff seeing as the field is so complex.
I took a graduate seminar in feminist theory 10 years ago which used the anthology by Warhol & Herndl, so I'm well aware how complex it is.

[ACK]

15. Yes but I feel like "Third wave feminists" are buying the RW line

That feminism was anti-feminine (which is just weird) and that all second wave feminist hating men and were at the least closet lesbians and usually full blown man hating lesbians.

Not all second wave feminist hating Victoria Secrets or shunned makeup.

It feels like third wave feminist are buying into the gross generalizations.

_

[slinkerwink]

16. and that sexist language is okay to use

:eyes:

[ACK]

24. I am sorry what sexist language did I use?

I was talking about generalization that the Right-wing uses.

Did I miss something and if I did I am willing to apologize.

[Selwynn]

17. I challenge that they were *gross* generalizations

I think there was enough of a true pattern of this, especially through the voice of some of the most outspoken activists of the day, that it precipitated a backlash.

I honestly don't feel like it is a "duping" by some other group as much as it is a fairly honest correction to the percieved over-compensation of large streams of feminism in earlier decades.

But what do I know... :D
Cheers!
Sel

[tishaLA]

21. I don't know any "third wave" feminist

who says any of those things. (And I happen to teach feminist theory at the university level.)

[Kanary]

20. Having been in Bezerkley at the begining of the "second wave"

I'll stick in my two-cents worth here, as I saw what was happening from the beginning.

It started with the now-famous books, yes, but it also started with women in the anti-Vietnam war efforts being marginalized and discounted by the men in the "movement". Given that, there was a LOT of acceptance of each other and our differences, and our various goals and views and needs. One pervasive aspect that is now derided by the younger women is that "Sisterhood" was real and tangible and dependable. We were *there* for each other, without dictacting to each other the "shoulds". We'd had enough of "shoulds" from the men, and had no need to perpetuate that. That was *precisely* what we were getting away from.

You said:

"this movement did have one negative consequence of tending to be all or
nothing: if you're a woman who stays at home, or wears make up or a bra, you are hurting woman and
capitulating to a patriarchal society, etc. etc. "

This is the correction I"d like to make..... this was NOT at all the stance of the movement when we began.... much the opposite, actually. This is what happened years later, as other women entered and wanted the goodies, but didn't want to do the hard work to get there. They brought with them the male "do as I say" model, and it all went down hill from there.

It was at that point that many of us sadly felt that the movement was dying..... feminism was being codified into one more set of rules, and it couldnt' withstand that. It was at that point where I saw, and said, that the only real femisism left was in some of te orders of nuns..... they knew how to live in community (with SISterhood!) because they *HAD* to. They were involved in actions for the betterment of women, but they also worked on their skills of living with each other, and creating peace in their communities. That is the antitithis of what you are reporting (rightly) about the mistakes of the later comers to the movement.. and I don't consider those later comers to be "feminists".... just more law makers.

Obviously, not all of the Nun Orders are like what I describe... some are quite dictatorial. But, the ones I was around were quite feminist and egalitarian, and embodied "Sisterhood".

And, as has already been noted here, but needs to be repeated endlessly to combat the media stereotype... bra-burning never occurred. Just a fignewton of the media imagination.

Kanary

[Selwynn]

25. Thank you for those clarifications!

And I was just using bra-burning metaphorically.. :)

[Selwynn]

10. Ok, curse10's post in the other thread is better and shorter than mine.

Just read that one. :)

11. Noticed your edit

Did you just put in the part about asking me to help or was that there before?

I think you're doing a good job so far, nothing I disagree with.

[Selwynn]

12. I edited like 20 times... one of those times I put that in there.. :D

[Skittles]

18. geez Magic Rat, could you BE any more stupid?

Oh wait - I don't know either. :o