Feminism’s Frankensteins

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


“Feminism’s Frankensteins” is Courtney E. Martin‘s phrase, not mine. And she’s right.

Writing in TAP, she argues that, “The era of the singular feminist agenda is over. But that doesn’t mean gender-based activism is.”

If it’s Tuesday, that means the feminist movement has been declared DOA again. This time, though, the analysis is actually worthy. Usually what that means is that women are not, and perhaps never were, discriminated against; the movement is over because it is no longer, or never was, needed. In other words: Bitches, quit your bitching. The absolute worst of these ‘feminism is dead’ dirges are the ones written by young female wannabees with nothing to offer the world but their quest for unearned fame. Martin’s saying something quite different. Attending an old school feminist forum, she writes:

Now these women are older, many of them happily shifting into what Jane Fonda calls “the third act”—a stage of life when they don’t give a shit what anyone else thinks, and they want to see the world live up to its God damn potential, once and for all. They start dying their hair funky shades of red. They urge their husband to get a hobby as they head out for another expletive- and laughter-filled lunch with their friends—other women who are funding feminist causes, editing feminist publications, and leading local feminist efforts. In some ways, it’s a return to their earnest youth—a time less fraught with the compromises that come with juggling families and careers. They’re prioritizing changing the world again. And as such, they seem to experience an old hankering for an unapologetic women’s movement that they can see, hear, and touch.

I don’t blame them. All of their stories—about marching in the streets, about taking over offices, about riding around the country in vans, falling in love—not only sounds like they had a whole lot of fun, but also managed to make some profound political changes. But I also recognize that it is a time that has passed. Not only is the women’s movement—as it was known in the 1960s—over, but women my age don’t even agree on what a “woman” really is.

Sometimes I feel as if my generation—women in our 20s and 30s—are feminism’s Frankensteins…

We march in the streets when we’re called to (the March for Women’s Lives in 2004, Take Back the Night each year on most college campuses) but more as a matter of solidarity and fun than out of any real conviction that protesting still creates change. Many of us, myself included, believe that change is created through strategic communication, alliance-building, and a million little grass-roots movements all over the country that fight for justice and may or may not call themselves feminist (I don’t actually care much).

OK. I’m busted.

This is the argument I’ve been making about the future of the civil rights struggle for years, the argument that makes me a pariah on the black left—the time for protest is past, the maddest of props to those who made it happen. But the best way to honor their legacy, to deserve the name of civil rights activist, is by forging and wielding weapons suited to the present (like the Internet) and not the past (bullhorns), and certainly not for simple self-aggrandizement. Now is the time for mentoring, op-eding, doing O’Reilly, communicating strategically, and in particular, those million little grassroots movements. Damn.

I have no illusion that Martin had me in mind when she wrote this, but she might as well have. It was respectful, humble, clear-eyed, unapologetic, and spot on. I asked what young women were doing for the movement. This is a very good answer. Most of the responses to my two posts on abortion providers and feminism were so high school bitchy and self-righteous, all I could do was move on. I do my best to avoid the all too typical left-wing circular firing squad (and believe me, I got lots of calls to continue that “discussion”). But responses like this one were what I was after. And sorta dreaded getting.

I can assure that if any anonymous person who spent a year walking to and from work during the Montgomery bus boycott, or helped legalize abortion, wants to talk to me about my own race or gender activism, I’ll give an answer like Martin’s (and I have for the last dozen or so years in my work). I’ll give an answer that can’t be easily dismissed no matter how annoying grumpy oldsters—who worry themselves to death over you—can be.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate