Feminist Politics of the 2d\3d Wave

Waves Crashing Hampton Beach, 2011, ddensmore photographer

If you are a feminist over 40, you fall into the age group that younger feminists and historians refer to as "second wave." This group includes people like Hillary Rodham Clinton, Madeleine Albright, Gloria Steinem, etc. Age-wise, I certainly fall into this group.

Second wave beliefs tend to interlace the political and the cultural, seeing them as inextricably linked. For this reason, one of the current manifestations of the second wave is the idea that Hillary Clinton must break that ultimate glass ceiling to validate the dreams of any woman with political aspirations in America. Hillary  has arguably worked her whole life toward this goal, and many thought it was swept out from under her by Barack Obama. Now that she has a second opportunity to catch the brass ring, many second wave feminists are both frustrated and angry that the young feminists, especially the women, of the third wave aren't racing to Hillary's political bandwagon.

What does all this mean, though? Is that really what this is about? 

My 23 year old daughter and her friends are all third wave feminists. In discussing politics, a few of them have shared with me some of their thoughts from a third wave perspective. Though I don't claim to have heard the definitive answer, I do think these young adults may be representative of a larger group from the third wave. To me, it seems clear that the chastisement from the likes of Gloria Steinem and Madeleine Albright has not done much to endear the second wave paradigm to this newer cast of players. They seem convinced that these older feminists are totally not getting them, so it seemed important to ask how they see it, and do my best to listen to what they had to say.

So, these third wave feminists - what are they saying?

One of the things made the most clear in our discussion is that voting for a woman because she is a woman is not how these young people interpret feminism at all. One should vote for the candidate that most aligns with a personal paradigm, not allow the vote to become a knee-jerk response to the pain of history. The point of feminism is to make gender a non-issue, and the second wave insistence that the gender blindness has to come after a success story makes these young people give the "Oh, really?" look made popular on hundreds of Internet memes. That they think that feminism is about equality and neutrality is a success story, whether the woman comes out the winner or not. They shake their heads at the thought that we may not perceive it this way.

There is also the fact that these young people don't see Hillary as the feminist icon that many in the second wave do. They see the waffling on things that are important to them, the monies coming in from corporate special interests, and they don't see these things as positive. For example, she fought hard for universal health care in the 90's, and yet was quoted recently as saying that single payer will "never ever come to pass." Many young people see this, in conjunction with the large amount of money she has received for speaking to those in the health care industry, as a classic "sell out."

In spite of being younger than Bernie Sanders, Hillary is very much perceived as the establishment candidate. She represents a vision that many young people would rather not perpetuate. Would she be a good president? If asked, they will echo Robert Reich's comments from his January 17th post on Facebook:

"If you assume Washington is not changeable and that the vicious cycle of wealth and power dominating our politics and economics is unalterable, Hillary's experience is relevant; she will make a first-class president for the system we now have. But if you believe Washington must be changed, and that system can be altered for the benefit of the many and not the few, Bernie’s leadership is more relevant; he is heading up a political movement."

Hillary does not represent the highest dreams of these young feminists. If anything, she is like a parent trying to be cool and not quite making it. I made a point of asking about the anger question - you know, why is it that Bernie can speak angrily on the campaign trail, but Hillary can't? The response? Hillary doesn't sound authentic when she speaks. This generation craves authenticity at least as much as it craves the ubuntu message of social justice and unity ('I am because we are'). They will quickly point to Elizabeth Warren as an example of a woman politician who can speak with anger and be heard by all. Hers is an authentic righteous anger which is acknowledged, and even applauded.

For all these things (and probably more that we never discussed), the young people I know are all feeling the Bern. Youth always wants to change the world. Their champion just happens to have wild white hair and speak with a Brooklyn accent. When asked, they mostly indicated that they will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination. However, I did not get the impression that the enthusiasm would transfer. I can't help but wonder if, in a general election, they would pull as hard for Hillary as they seem determined to do for Bernie? What would that do to the end game leading to November, should she win?

Stay tuned, and we'll find out together how this all plays out.




Disclaimer: In the interest of full disclosure, I will be clear up front that I have never been a huge fan of Hillary Clinton. My reaction to her is with regard to her politics. I sit far to the left of the spot where Hillary Clinton apparently feels most comfortable. This would not prevent me from voting in her favor, but I would be voting against those even further to the right, not truly voting FOR her.