Understanding Third Wave Feminisms

Abstract

The term ‘third wave feminism’ has been interpreted in multiple and often contradictory ways. It has been viewed as both a neoliberal brand of feminism (Wlodarczyk, 2010) and as a more explicit feminist engagement with global social justice agendas (Heywood and Drake, 1997). Some note that third wave feminism seeks to reclaim and subvert traditional notions of femininity (Groeneveld, 2009) whilst others consider it a polemical defence of girlieness (McRobbie, 2009). It is frequently associated with women of color and intersectionality (Labaton and Lundy Martin, 2004) and yet the dominance of white, middle-class heterosexual voices has also been observed (Henry, 2004). The anti-academic nature of the third wave (Hernández and Rehman, 2002; Bobel, 2010) is at odds with the obvious anti-essentialist influence of post-structuralism and post-colonialism (Hines, 2005; Dean, 2010; Budgeon, 2011). Finally, it has been used generally to describe post-1970s, or second wave, feminist activism (Zack, 2005; Redfern and Aune, 2010) and as a way of signalling a specific generation of feminist activists who constitute Generation X (Baumgardner and Richards, 2000; Shugart, 2001). The confusion surrounding what constitutes third wave feminism is in some respects its defining feature (Walker, 1995; Siegal, 2007; Finley and Reynolds Stringer, 2010); hence, the need to avoid presenting the third wave of feminism as monolithic.