Juli Farha
4/17/12
The 1990s and Third Wave Feminism
The decade of the 90s saw the emergence of new waves for social reform, spearheaded
largely by feminist youth groups. There were many radical groups working to change various
aspects of life, but the feminist movement in particular got a fresh start when 1990 rolled around.
The third wave of feminism began at this time, and it was wildly different from the previous two
waves, and was often not taken as seriously. The new generation was not only young but very
diverse, a trait which came as the result of increased effort to focus on the individual rather than
women as a whole. Much effort was also put into erasing symbols applied to feminists and
women by the media, either attempting to eradicate the symbol completely or to put it back in its
original context. Also, there was a significant amount of internal conflict between older and
younger generations of feminists, a result of the vast differences in this wave as contrasted with
previous feminist waves.
There were three major differences. For one, the feminist movement of the 1990s was
largely led by the youth, and for another, it included many women of different ethnicities.
Moreover, rather than having one or two specific goals as did waves one and two, feminism in
the 1990s generally aimed for a wide-spread change in the way people as a whole think of
women. Wave One sought equality on the political field, a quest which personified itself in
voting rights for women. Wave Two sought equality in the cultural field, seeking to achieve
places for women in the workforce. Wave Three decided that the two former goals, although
admirable, were shallow in that they killed only leaves of the plant while ignoring the roots,
leaving room for re-growth in the future. This criticism of previous endeavors actually caused
somewhat of a rift between the younger and older generations of feminists. More on this later. So
the new goal was to cut straight to the heart and change the way society viewed women in
general, not in one specific aspect.
The lack of specific goals prevented many from taking this movement seriously. They
said that without an organized purpose, it would get nowhere. Red Chidgey, in her essay entitled
‘Labors left unfinished: Third wave feminism,’ comments on the lack of purpose, asking her
audience, “Can we have a movement without goals?” In addition, Maria Buszek in her essay,
‘Waving not Drowning: Thinking about Third Wave Feminism in the U.S.’ states, “Some have
criticized the lack of cohesion (i.e. "sisterhood") in third wave culture—pointing to the brevity of
organizational attempts such as Riot Grrrl as third wave failures.”
However, with the lack of a specific goal came more flexibility. It left the movement
more open-ended, allowing a wider range of people to feel included, which made third-wave
feminism a more multi-faceted, all-encompassing idea, stretching beyond middle-class, white
women. Iris van der Tuin, in her essay called ‘Jumping Generations: On Second- and Third-wave
Feminist Epistemology’ states, “The problematic aspects of feminist empiricism and feminist
standpoint theory, namely their respective universalizing tendencies, are said to be solved by
feminist postmodernism’s focus on diversity rather than equality or difference,” meaning that
previously there was a tendency to ‘universalize’ or over-generalize, trying to give all feminists
the same face. Previous feminists tried to apply one universal definition of what a woman is,
does, and wants. In her book ‘Feminist Theory, from Margin to Center,’ Bell Hooks addresses
how white, middle class women primarily led the movement in the first and second waves, and it
was assumed that every feminist was white and middle-class. She writes, “(The white woman)
made her plight and the plight of white women like herself synonymous with a condition
affecting all American women.” This did not take into account that different women had
different circumstances and wanted different things. The new era embraced diversity by
accepting that there is no one definition that will fit everyone, which allowed a wider range of
people to identify with third wave feminism.
The third wave of feminism placed extra emphasis on the individual. It no longer tried to
give a universal definition of a woman, rather allowing each woman to define herself. This
kindly recognized that feminists came from very different backgrounds and often had no more in
common than gender, and sometimes not even that, as not all feminists were women. Naomi
Rockler-Gladen stated, “Third Wave feminists are encouraged to build their own identities from
the available buffet, and to not worry if the items on their plate are not served together
traditionally." This is the idea that third wave feminists used to replace the idea of a universal
definition of a woman.
The third wave of feminism also tried to erase the media’s representation of a feminist as
a ‘superwoman’ who could ‘have it all,’ successfully juggling a family, a career, and a life
(Hills). This left people with the impression that feminists were self-absorbed. Janny Scott stated,
“The superwoman then became the symbol and scapegoat for the culture's decline into
materialistic self-absorption, and the women's movement, instead of consumer culture, was
blamed.” The movement was trying to promote individualism, but not self-absorption, and yes,
there is a difference. Individualism advocates the rights of the individual, while self-absorption is
a preoccupation with oneself. The feminist movement was not designed to promote selfpreoccupation, rather to earn the rights and freedoms that women deserve.
The youthfulness of the new generation of feminists had its downsides, but also allowed
feminist ideals to be expressed through a variety of mediums, especially music. Much of the
music of the 90s was largely influenced by these feminist ideals, giving rise to many all-female
bands, including many falling under the category of ‘riot grrrl’ bands. Songs by these bands
often focused on issues related to women, like domestic abuse, female empowerment, male
dominance, and rape. Getting feminist ideas into popular culture helped spread the movement to
others who may have been scared off by the word ‘feminist,’ which is often associated with
radicals and fanatics. This made more people aware of the problems facing many women.
Fashion also changed along with the feminist movement. Previously, it was an unwritten
rule that things that seemed to represent women, such as makeup or high heels, were not worn by
feminists. In her essay ‘Heights of Madness,’ Sally Feldman states, “In the radical feminist
lexicon, wearing high heels has to stand out as the most pointed betrayal of all.” However, 90s
feminists chose to dress as sexy or un-sexy as they wanted. They emphasized their freedom of
choice, often wearing contrasting elements, such as a miniskirt with combat boots, and mixed
elements from different styles of the decade, such as grunge or punk.
They also endeavored to reclaim other female symbols, not only makeup and high heels,
but certain derogatory terms taken out of context and used in reference to women, or things like
knitting and other domestic pursuits. Elizabeth Groeneveld states*, “‘Occupation: Houseworker’
is a viable and respectable choice for anyone, male or female.” She argues that being a housewife
and a mother does not mean you can’t be a feminist as well. A feminist supports the right of
women to choose their own occupation, rather than men or society choosing for them.
As mentioned earlier, there was a significant division between the third wave of the
movement and the previous waves. Van der Tuin called this state, “internally conflictual,” saying
that the newer feminists “started to negate the work of” older feminists, claiming that their
“diversified feminist analyses were better than the ‘illusion’ of intuited sisterly universalism.”
Thus, newer feminists scorned the ideas of the older generation, including their singlemindedness and belief that all women stood in solidarity.
Words such as ‘solidarity’ imply bonds stretching across large groups of like-minded
people. Spreading this idea of ‘sisterhood’ thus implied that feminism was very widespread,
possibly more than it actually was at the time. This may have created more leverage for the
movement, but it implied that all feminists were more than just ‘like-minded,’ they were all
alike. And since the leading feminists of the time were middle-class white women, it seemed that
every feminist must be middle-class and white. This, of course, is untrue, as there were and are
feminists of all different backgrounds and cultures, including blacks, Hispanics, males, working
class citizens, and upper class citizens.
The newer generation rejected the notion of ‘sisterhood,’ instead reaching out to the
individual woman of any class or race. This broader appeal helped the movement grow, but the
inclusion of minorities made it seem less main-stream, causing the movement to lose some
leverage in society. It is partially this superficial appearance of insignificance that led many to
look at the third wave as ‘wave 2, part b,’ but in reality, the diversity of the third wave allowed
for the inclusion of feminists of any background regardless of class, race, ethnicity, or gender.
The third wave of feminism was characterized by the youth and ethnic diversity of its
followers. It emphasized the right of the individual to choose his or her own path without
unwanted pressure from society. It was much different from previous feminist waves, which
sometimes led to conflict between the generations with criticism from both sides. Feminism also
had a big impact on the 90s and its culture. Many claimed that third wave feminism did not have
a goal to reach for. This, however, is an extremely shallow perspective. Rather than being nonexistent, the goal of third wave feminism was, in fact, *(comma usage)* very admirable as well
as ambitious. The movement fought to change the way the world thinks, not only of women, not
only of other minorities, but of the importance of the individual, choices, and freedom.