Homework for you

Feminism And The Media Essay Ideas

Category: Essay

Description

On Feminism and Postmodernism Essay - Feminist Sociology Essays

On Feminism and Postmodernism Essay

On Feminism and Postmodernism

It seems fitting that the 'marriage' of feminism and postmodernism is one fraught with both difference and argument. The fact that these disagreements occur within the realm of the intellectual undoubtedly puts a wry smile on the face of either party. While feminism and postmodernism share several characteristics, most notably the deconstruction of the masculinised western ideology, feminism chooses to place itself within the absolutism of the modernist movement. While feminism argues for the continuation of the subject/object dichotomy, aiming largely to reverse the feminine position of the latter to the former, postmodernism would have the modernist movement deconstructed in its entirety, including all such metanarratives.

Postmodernism also champions the fragmented self, the idea of a unitary 'whole' existing only within a fictitious reality. This idea is one which feminism has taken up in recent years. In this era of postfeminism, new avenues are being sought to spread the ideals of feminism and the potential of possible vehicles, such mass media, are being realised. However, when using mass media, such as television, in such a fashion, the intellectualizations of the highbrow modernist/feminist movements have been largely stripped away, leaving little but an easily digestible skeletal foundation.

The aim of such a method is to target a younger demographic than traditional critique would usually focus upon. The television program Buffy the Vampire Slayer is such a vehicle, presenting feminism in a postmodern form 'for the masses'. While this works to reveal an 'acceptable', albeit feminist, perspective of gender and identity, following such an avenue problematises both feminism and.


. middle of paper.


. "Vampires, Postmodernity and Postfeminism: Buffy the Vampire Slayer", Journal of Popular Film and Television, vol. 27, no. 2, Summer 1999, pp 24 - 31.

Vint, Sherryl, "'Killing us Softly?' A Feminist Search for the "Real" Buffy", Slayage, The On-line International Journey of Buffy Studies, http://www.slayage.tv/essays/vint.html, accessed 15/4/2002, 9.05 am.

Whedon, Joss, Audio Commentary: Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Season One, Welcome to the Hellmouth & The Harvest DVD, 2001.

Wilkinson, Sue ed. Feminist Social Psychologies: International Perspectives, Open Universities Press, Buckingham, 1996.

Smith, Charles Martin, Welcome to the Hellmouth, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Episode 1.1, 1997.

Kretchmer, John T. The Harvest, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Episode 1.2, 1997.

Whedon, Joss, The Gift, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Episode 5.22, 2001.

Click the button above to view the complete essay, speech, term paper, or research paper

Click the button above to view the complete essay, speech, term paper, or research paper

Feminism and Postmodernism Used to Describe Female Characters: Adrienne Rich’s “Snapshot of a Daughter-in-law” and Don DeLillo’s “End Zone” - Adrienne Rich’s “Snapshot of a Daughter-in-law” and Don DeLillo’s “End Zone” use negative diction and imagery to relate their thoughts on feminism and postmodernism. Rich uses negative diction and imagery to describe a woman who has adapted to the world’s opinion of what a woman should be. DeLillo uses negative diction to describe Myna after she conforms to social expectations of beauty. Rich brings in ideas of how domestic chores create a burden on women physically and emotionally, and DeLillo also uses Myna to portray what he thinks about the world’s view on beauty and notions for women. [tags: Negative Diction, Self Expression]
. 1 Works Cited

1008 words
(2.9 pages)

Feminist Social Theory Essay - Feminist social theory ought to challenge the ideals of Classical social theory embodied by the work of authors, such Marx, Durkheim, Weber and Simmel. Such traditional values tend to exclude women from their social analysis of the modern world, as women were considered non social agents. In support of this, Durkheim claim that men were product of society, whereas women belonged to nature, (Harrington: 2005, p.236). Thus, feminist social theory embrace post-enlightenment principles, focusing on values associated to “difference”,”particularism” and “specificity” (Harrington: 2005, p. [tags: Feminism, postmodernism, constructionism]
. 1 Works Cited

1976 words
(5.6 pages)

Assessment of Postmodernism Essay - ‘Modernity, on all its sides, may be defined in terms of an aspiration to reveal the essential truth of the world’ (Boyne and Rattansi, 1990). ‘[In postmodernism] philosophical pillars are brought down, the most notable of which are the ‘unities’ of meaning, theory and the self’ (Hassard and Parker, 1993). In my opinion the above quotes neatly summarise the motivational ideas behind modernism and postmodernism as thought processes. However different the inspiration, methodology, and conclusions of classical sociological ideas such as those of Marx, Durkheim and Weber it can be said that their documentation of society into meta-narratives indicates an inherent de. [tags: Postmodernism Essays]

1618 words
(4.6 pages)

Postmodernism and Social Praxis Essay - Postmodernism and Social Praxis Whereas the interpreter is obliged to go to the depth of things, like an excavator, the moment of interpretation [genealogy] is like an overview, from higher and higher up, which allows the depth to be laid out in front of him in a more and more profound visibility; depth is resituated as an absolutely superficial secret.(18) So those are the changes, and I try to show those changes. (19) In Communities of Resistance and Solidarity, as well as in A Feminist Ethic of Risk, Sharon D. [tags: Ethics Feminism Theology Essays]
. 10 Works Cited

4506 words
(12.9 pages)

Postmodernism: An Art Style Essay - Postmodernism is a style of art that first became popular in the late 20th century. When seeing the word postmodernism, it might have to do with any one medium of art-- literature, philosophy, history, economics, architecture, fiction, and literary criticism. Lyotard, a founder of postmodernism in philosophy, is quoted as saying, “Simplifying to the extreme, I define the postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives.” By saying this, Lyotard simply meant that, as a postmodernist, he was against the ways of thinking of modernists and wanted to see something new philosophically and artistically. [tags: literature, philosophy, history]
. 7 Works Cited

1312 words
(3.7 pages)

The Politics of Contemporary Approaches to Shakespeare Essays - Abstract Postmodern performance of Shakespeare, particularity in film, is characterized by a subjective experience within the play not an objective experience from the play. Under postmodernism, Shakespeare undergoes theorizing, deconstruction, displacement or death of the author, textual criticism, and cultural and political relativism but fails to produce solid answers. Postmodern Shakepseare does not offer new meanings but new and more possibilities for contemplating meaning. This fails both the traditionalist who relishes in reviving universal meaning, and the progressive who relishes propagating their political diatribe. [tags: Postmodernism and Shakespeare]
. 10 Works Cited

3167 words
(9 pages)

Feminism and how it enriches our IR theory Essay - The contribution of the feminist standpoint in IR theory definitely sparks discussion and debate bringing forth new perspectives which demand to be heard and considered from the more ‘orthodox’ IR theories, previously privileged assumptions and preconceived ideas. This grand entry for the feminists was towards the denouement of the Cold War in the 1980’s. Kirkpatrick; influential US ambassador of the UN during that period was noted to have said that she felt like a “mouse in a man’s world”. Is this still the case with women worldwide and particularly in the West. [tags: Military Contribution, Masculinist Bias]
. 12 Works Cited

1499 words
(4.3 pages)

Hemingway Essays - Hemingway [1] Postmodernist discourses are often exclusionary even when, having been accused of lacking concrete relevance, they call attention to and appropriate the experience of "difference" and "otherness" in order to provide themselves with oppositional political meaning, legitimacy, and immediacy. Very few African-American intellectuals have talked or written about postmodernism. Recently at a dinner party, I talked about trying to grapple with the significance of postmodernism for contemporary black experience. [tags: Hemingway Postmodernism Essays]

3510 words
(10 pages)

Postmodernism and the Fundamentalist Revival Essay - Postmodernism and the Fundamentalist Revival For contemporary Western—particularly American—thought, there have been two prevailing theories, at polar ends of the spectrum. There is the belief that there are absolute ethical forces, and there is the belief that there are no set standards of judgment. Both of these views seem extreme, attacking our sense of modernity and our sense of personal values. Consequently, most people find their place somewhere moderately between the two. As between belief and unbelief there is agnosticism, or between moralism and immoralism there is amoralism, between the belief in standards and the belief in no standards there is postmodernism. [tags: Postmodernism]
. 2 Works Cited

2534 words
(7.2 pages)

Essay on Postmodernism - Post-modernism noun a movement in the arts that takes many features of Modernism to new and more playful extremes, rejecting Modernism's tendency towards nihilistic pessimism and replacing it with a more comfortable acceptance of the solipsistic nature of life. There is also an inclination towards mishievous self-referentiality and witty intertextualizing. postmodernist noun, adj. A worldview characterized by the belief that truth doesn’t exist in any objective sense but is created rather than discovered.”… Truth is “created by the specific culture and exists only in that culture. [tags: Literature Postmodernism Movement]

1446 words
(4.1 pages)

Other articles

Articles about Feminism

If Eleanor Smeal really believes that feminism has no liabilities, then she ought to get out more often. In the real world, feminism does not bring to mind issues, but a personality type--a strident, man-hating zealot. It's discouraging to see a feminist leader who doesn't recognize the obstacles a potential convert faces. The media have certainly done their share to perpetuate this stereotype, but the inability of feminist leadership to manage its public image is troubling. ELENA SONG Manhattan Beach

ARTICLES BY DATE

April 3, 2014 | By Robin Abcarian

Has feminism made women miserable? Oh God, are we really having this discussion? Yes, we are. That, in fact, was the gist of an all-female panel discussion at the conservative Heritage Foundation which chose to "celebrate" Women's History Month last week by inviting a trio of professional women to trash the very movement to which they most assuredly owe their status in the workplace. Not to mention the respect they are accorded by formerly male-dominated political bastions like the, um, Heritage Foundation.

Shame on you, Home magazine, for the title you gave your coverage of Paris / Rome spring fashions (The New Feminist, March 24). Today's "new feminists" are struggling, not to re-feminize fashion but to achieve true justice in society, so that all may live, work and love as equal persons. By co-opting the words feminist and feminism you have joined in the trivialization of the women's movement by the mass media. Marilyn Almeida Santa Monica

December 30, 2013 | By Nardine Saad

Keira Knightley may be married, but she's still sounding the feminist horn for women in Hollywood. The English actress covers Harper's Bazaar UK's February issue and opened up about the male-dominated field she works in. The 28-year-old said she thinks "it's great that the discussions are finally being allowed to be had" about feminism. PHOTOS: 50 most beautiful female celebrities "Somehow, it [feminism] became a dirty word. I thought it was really weird for a long time, and I think it's great that we're coming out of that," the "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" star said.

November 9, 1997

Regarding "Throwing Nashville a Curve," by Elysa Gardner (Nov. 2): Singer Shania Twain was quoted as saying, "I wouldn't call myself a feminist, because I think there are differences between men and women." I am always saddened at the limited and erroneous definition people seem to have of "feminism." Feminists aren't trying to emulate or emasculate men; they don't all hate their mothers or resent their fathers. Just because I, as a feminist, want to be paid the equivalent wages to what a man earns, or be permitted to occupy a job heretofore restricted to men, does not mean that I believe men and women are exactly identical.

April 3, 2014 | By Robin Abcarian

Has feminism made women miserable? Oh God, are we really having this discussion? Yes, we are. That, in fact, was the gist of an all-female panel discussion at the conservative Heritage Foundation which chose to "celebrate" Women's History Month last week by inviting a trio of professional women to trash the very movement to which they most assuredly owe their status in the workplace. Not to mention the respect they are accorded by formerly male-dominated political bastions like the, um, Heritage Foundation.

March 29, 2011 | Jonah Goldberg

Feminism as a "movement" in America is largely played out. The work here is mostly done. At a time when education matters more than ever, more American women attend college than men. More women graduate, with better grades and get more advanced degrees. As Kay Hymowitz writes in her new book, "Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men Into Boys": "For the first time ever, and I do mean ever, young women are reaching their twenties with more achievements, more education, more property, and, arguably, more ambition than their male counterparts.

November 6, 2013 | By Carolyn Kellogg

Often witty, sometimes righteous, and occasionally furious, the blog Jezebel has been a high-profile platform for a new generation of feminists since 2007. Part of the Gawker media blog empire, Jezebel put feminist critiques of our still-very-critique-able culture smack into the center of the mainstream. Now it has moved into print, with "The Book of Jezebel. " The book's editor and website's founding editor Anna Holmes, who did her time working at glossy, non-feminist magazines before beginning Jezebel, will be at Barnes & Noble at the Grove on Wednesday night with current editor Jessica Coen and contributors Jill Soloway, Ann Friedman and Amanda Hess to talk about the book.

December 30, 2013 | By Nardine Saad

Keira Knightley may be married, but she's still sounding the feminist horn for women in Hollywood. The English actress covers Harper's Bazaar UK's February issue and opened up about the male-dominated field she works in. The 28-year-old said she thinks "it's great that the discussions are finally being allowed to be had" about feminism. PHOTOS: 50 most beautiful female celebrities "Somehow, it [feminism] became a dirty word. I thought it was really weird for a long time, and I think it's great that we're coming out of that," the "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" star said.

February 6, 1992

Feminists have indeed killed feminism. The truth is that people do think of the feminist movement as anti-male, anti-child, anti-family, and anti-feminine, therefore, the women who go out to the public with their obvious hypocrisy ruin the work that we women have slowly accomplished over the years, despite the stereotypes that people have about feminism. If women want to be housewives, be involved with other women or be celibate, they should have the freedom to do that, but they should keep their private lives to themselves.

December 16, 2013 | By Nardine Saad

Alessandra Ambrosio is having a pretty great year. Just after the broadcast of the annual Victoria's Secret Fashion Show last week, the supermodel has landed a feature interview in Net-a-Porter's The Edit. Yes, interview, with words. Not just photos of her enviable body. "I feel like my job is to be this beautiful girl who sells clothes," the 32-year-old told the e-magazine. "And there are good things about this career: You're inspiring people, making them feel good about themselves. Clothes are something that elevate every woman's mood.

November 6, 2013 | By Carolyn Kellogg

Often witty, sometimes righteous, and occasionally furious, the blog Jezebel has been a high-profile platform for a new generation of feminists since 2007. Part of the Gawker media blog empire, Jezebel put feminist critiques of our still-very-critique-able culture smack into the center of the mainstream. Now it has moved into print, with "The Book of Jezebel. " The book's editor and website's founding editor Anna Holmes, who did her time working at glossy, non-feminist magazines before beginning Jezebel, will be at Barnes & Noble at the Grove on Wednesday night with current editor Jessica Coen and contributors Jill Soloway, Ann Friedman and Amanda Hess to talk about the book.

August 13, 2013 | By August Brown

The two women of Deap Vally are really bummed out by the idea of a walk of shame. You know, the ritualistic morning skulk back home after hooking up with someone you probably won't call again. They're not torn up about the hookup part, though. It's the shame that seems dumb. "We always knew we wanted to write about that idea of a 'Walk of Shame,'" said drummer and co-vocalist Julie Edwards. "It always bugged me, that there's this neurosis that just turns on in your head afterwards.

March 20, 2013 | By Alexandra Le Tellier

New York magazine's article “ The Retro Wife ,” about how self-described feminists are bucking their NYC careers in favor of becoming stay-at-home moms, has ignited a fierce debate online. Is feminism the opportunity to make the choice between having career or becoming a SAHM? Or is feminism the pursuit of equality, in which both men and women have the same opportunities in the workplace? Or has the concept morphed into a hybrid of both? If a woman chooses to pursue a career, her gender shouldn't become an obstacle, whether she has children or not -- just like her male colleagues.

December 29, 2012 | By Elaine Woo, Los Angeles Times

Midge Turk Richardson, a former nun and parochial school principal in Los Angeles who cast off her habit for the world of New York publishing, where she reigned for nearly two decades as editor of Seventeen magazine, has died. She was 82. Richardson, who was found in her New York City home Dec. 17, appeared to have died in her sleep from natural causes, according to her stepson, Kevin Richardson. A Los Angeles native, Richardson spent 18 years as a nun in the order of the Sisters of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, including seven years as superintendent of Our Lady Queen of Angels High School.

September 2, 2012 | By Elaine Woo, Los Angeles Times

Shulamith Firestone, whose 1970 book "The Dialectic of Sex" became a feminist classic with its calls for a drastic rethinking of women's roles in the bearing and raising of children, was found dead Tuesday in her New York City apartment. She was 67. A recluse who struggled with mental illness in later years, the author apparently died of natural causes, said her sister, Miriam Tirzah Firestone. Only 25 when "The Dialectic of Sex" was published, Firestone vaulted to prominence as a leading theorist of the second wave of feminism that crested in the 1960s and '70s.

Feminism and the turn against Enlightenment

Feminism and the turn against Enlightenment

I n the first in a new series of spiked essays on the burning issues of our time, Brendan O’Neill explores the roaring success of the new feminism.

One of the most striking things of the 21st century so far has been the rise of feminism. No other movement enjoys as much political, cultural and media validation right now as feminism does. Things have gone so far that when British PM David Cameron refused to pose in a t-shirt that said ‘This is what a feminist looks like’, he got flak. So entrenched is the new feminism that, now, not being a feminist can land you in hot water.

The new feminism infuses political, cultural and media life. It’s good business. Pop stars shake their booties in front of massive backdrops of the word ‘FEMINIST’. Publishing houses fall over themselves to offer huge advances to feminists keen to write memoirs-cum-manifestos. A mix of sauciness and self-help, with titles like Hot Feminist and Do It Like A Woman. these femi-manuals often top bestseller lists. New-feminist blogs abound. Popular online mags like Buzzfeed and VICE promote new-feminist ideas. The Twitterati push the new feminism, too, and police deviations from it: witness the arrest of those who are foul about new feminists.

You can’t open a newspaper without reading a feminist critique of the justice system, the internet, mainstream politics, movies. Culture is now judged by its willingness to adhere to the values of the new feminism. From the outrage over the film version of Gone Girl. which was not new-feminist enough. to the global applauding of the rebooted Mad Max. which is apparently a feast of new-feminist ideas. even art and entertainment must now accord with the new-feminist outlook .

As for the world of politics, new feminism is dominant. Everyone might have laughed at the UK Labour Party’s pink bus. designed to get more women voting, but the idea that women do politics differently, and better, to men is now widely accepted. Hillary Clinton has promised to make women’s rights a key plank of her future dealings in the international sphere. UN bodies and NGOs already execute their global agendas in the language of the new feminism, using terms like ‘female empowerment’ to promote population-control measures and the policing of men in much of the global South. We’ve even had feminist wars: the occupation of Afghanistan was justified in part as a means of liberating women (with very little discussion of how it actually made Afghan women’s lives worse).

Must-reads from the past week

Five Revolting! reasons to fight for democracy today

Related categories

So in a very short period of time, feminism has gone from being viewed as the ideology of small groups of women to being the organising principle of vast swathes of Western public life. Politics, media, culture, international relations, global conflict — no area has been left untouched by it.

The rise of this new feminism in the West is strange, for two reasons. The first is that all the other political movements of which feminism was once considered a close cousin have withered. Student radicalism — of the progressive variety — is a thing of the past. Left-wing groups continue to shrink. The anti-war movement is a shadow of its former self. And yet feminism, which in its modern form emerged around the same time as those movements, is soaring, finding favour with everyone from Beyonce to the possible next president of the US.

The second reason the rise of the new feminism is weird is because, in the West at least, feminism has never been less necessary. Thankfully, life for women in the West has improved exponentially. There are now more women than men at university. in Central Europe, the EU, North America and Latin America. In school, too, girls are outperforming boys: the OECD found that, in developed countries, girls and boys are now equal in relation to science, and girls outperform boys in literacy. According to the OECD. the average gap between girls and boys is ‘equivalent to an extra year of schooling’.

This leap forward for women in education is reflected in the Western labour market. In the UK, the gender pay-gap is becoming history. Women in their 20s now earn around four per cent more than their male counterparts. These new levels of female independence have contributed to a decline in violence against women. Many women no longer have to stay put in situations that degrade them. Domestic violence rates in the UK are falling, from a ‘peak of more than one million incidents in 1993 to just under 400,000 [in 2011/2012]’. Very often, new-feminist discourse — with its claim that Western women face daily horrors, online and off — feels as detached from reality as it is possible to get.

So, political radicalism is on the wane, and life for Western women has vastly improved, and yet feminism has become the most fashionable political position of our time — what’s this all about?

In part, the new feminism can be seen as mission creep: an old movement looking for a new role now that its original aims have largely been achieved. This would explain why it is so obsessed with culture, with how people think and speak and with what words they use or images they view. Having achieved equality in the legal and work spheres, some feminists are now moving into the realms of culture and even thought, where their politics, or any politics for that matter, has no place. The end result is often intolerance, a demand not only that society remove all the barriers to women’s engagement in public life — which is a good demand — but also that people and art and culture think about and depict women in a particular, ‘correct’ way, which is an illiberal demand.

Feminists themselves claim the new feminism is on the up because women in the West still live in a ‘sea of misogyny’, which is simply not true. Men’s rights activists — the saddest creatures in the political firmament — claim the new feminism proves influential women are hellbent on making life hard for blokes, which is also unconvincing, and borders on a conspiracy theory. It also raises an immediate question, which very few of the discussants of the new feminism seem able to answer: How have these new feminists become so influential? What is it about society — rather than the new feminists themselves — which has seen new-feminist ideas being so fulsomely embraced by officialdom and elites? The issue is not the apparently terrifying influence of new feminists, but the receptiveness to their arguments and prejudices among those who oversee political, public and media life in the 21st-century West.

My view is that this new feminism is best understood, not as a fresh uprising or an independent movement, but as the gloss on Western society’s own collapse of faith in itself.

What we are witnessing is not the rise of a new ideology or any kind of grassroots upheaval, but the instinctive formulation of a cover, an explanation, for the modern West’s abandonment of the ideas of reason, order, autonomy and truth, and of the Enlightenment itself.

The new feminism, with its calling into question of what one feminist author refers to as ‘reason’s diktat’. of the apparently male belief that the world is knowable and changeable, has risen to the surface of public debate, not because of its newness or profundity, but because it is currently the best lick of paint that can be added to the West’s own jettisoning of its old values. This isn’t women vs men. It isn’t even feminists vs the authorities. No, the new feminism is simply the external expression of the internal corrosion of Western values, the acceptable face of what I think we should view as the unacceptable decommissioning of the ideas that created the modern, democratic world. And as such, it is bad for men and women.

War on the ‘male’ Enlightenment

Too many discussions of the new feminism take it at face value that this global phenomenon, this political, pop and publishing sensation, is just another wave of feminism. People wonder if it’s the heir to second- or third-wave feminism. Whether it is too influenced by the Dworkinite anti-sex feminism of the 1980s, and not enough by the more liberal feminism of 1960s thinkers and later feminists like Camille Paglia. Whether it echoes the pro-Prohibition feminism of some of the early Suffragettes, and whether it might do better to look to the more autonomous feminism of female explorers in the 1920s or radicals like Germaine Greer in the 1970s.

It’s undoubtedly true that all these earlier feminisms have impacted on the current discussion. And of course, as feminist writers never tire of telling us, there is no ‘one feminism’. Even today, when the consensus around feminism can feel suffocating — ‘wear the t-shirt or else’ — there are differences of opinion. ‘Choice feminists’, especially in the US. are doing a good job of standing up to the illiberal outlook of campus and broadsheet feminists, who think nothing of no-platforming those who do not bow before the new feminism or describing as ‘problematic’ (and possibly ban-worthy) every piece of culture that is not sufficiently new-feminist.

And yet there is something very new today. The new feminism is not merely a continuation of debates that have been raging for years — it’s the closest thing we currently have to a ruling-class ideology.

It has become the moral and political glue of the fractured, post-political elites of the West, a means for otherwise cut-off institutions both to promote a particular moral image of themselves and to interfere in more areas of life, thought and speech in a seemingly progressive way. The most fascinating thing about the new feminism is not the thing itself but its impact, especially among the West’s ruling classes, who have embraced it. Unlike all the feminisms that went before, the new feminism represents, not an external strike against the political system, but rather an internal outlook through which the elites hope to create a new political narrative and expand their influence in public and private life.

The new feminism is strikingly concerned with exposing what it — and the political and cultural elites more broadly — views as the folly of ‘male ideas’ and the limits to Enlightened thinking. This is spelled out explicitly by Jacqueline Rose, author of Women in Dark Times. ‘Feminism’, she says. ‘should alert us to the world’s unreason’. For too long, says Rose, we have believed that ‘the so-called reason or enlightenment of our modern world’ can deliver progress and liberate humanity. It’s a story of ‘light triumphing over darkness’, she says, and it’s outdated. What we need now is a political outlook which ‘confront[s] dark with dark’. Rose says the great thing about the new feminism is that it can intervene in that ‘murky, not easily graspable place somewhere between [biology and culture]. A place of unreason… that runs through the world.’

Rose captures the alarmingly interventionist urge of the new feminism, which wants to rearrange, not simply law and politics, but also ‘biology and culture’, our very minds and daily interactions. More importantly, she reveals the new feminism’s desire to expose the shortcomings of Enlightenment and show us the ‘world of unreason’, where ‘we all reside’.

This view of feminism not merely as the securer of equality for women but as exposer of the dangers of the industrialised, Enlightened worldview has been a theme for some years. The Stalinist feminist Beatrix Campbell takes aim at ‘modernity’s Faustian recklessness’, at ‘the sexism — and destructiveness — of modernity’.

She presents growth and progress as male values, which feminism has risen once again to question. ‘Macho, manic productionism relies on force’, she says. ‘It valorises conquest of nature and other humans.’ Feminism, by contrast, is concerned with creating a society that can ‘breathe, give birth, grow and rest, clean up’ — because that’s what women do, right? Have babies and clean up? ‘Male’ modernity wants to produce and grow and control nature, whereas ‘female’ thinking wants to force humanity, in Rose’s words. to ‘recognise the failure [of humankind’s] stiff-backed control, its ruthless belief in its own mastery, its doomed attempt to bring the uncertainty of the world to heel’.

This is fundamentally what the new feminism represents. It is the outward expression of the post-Enlightened West’s own, inner disdain for the idea of humankind’s mastery, the idea of our being reasoned, able to deploy our rational thinking in the name of taming the planet and expanding human wealth and comfort.

It is important to note that feminists did not destroy this idea, which is the idea of the Enlightenment. On the contrary, the West’s commitment to Enlightenment values has been flagging for decades, as expressed in everything from the rise of relativism in the academy, to the undermining of universal human values via multiculturalism, to the calling into question of the value of industry and growth through the politics of environmentalism. No, what the new feminism represents is the latest — and currently most influential — manifestation of the West’s own counter-Enlightenment thinking, of its loss of confidence in the modern mission to remake the world in man’s — and woman’s — image.

This is why the new feminism is most pronounced in areas in which the values of reason, autonomy and judgement are, or ought to be, paramount. It is here, in these zones of Enlightenment, where the new feminism is gaining most traction. Why? Because the new feminism is best seen as a progress-unravelling force green-lighted by Western societies themselves. within their own institutions. Let’s consider three areas of reason in which new-feminist thinking is growing.

The political class has been self-consciously promoting new-feminist thinking for many years, explicitly as a means of softening politics and replacing its focus on reason and judgement with a new focus on emotionalism and consensus.

As one academic study says, in the West ‘the contention that women practise politics in a different way to men is widely held’. Many argue that women ‘introduce a kinder, gentler politics’. Women politicians are said to create a politics ‘characterised by cooperation rather than conflict, collaboration rather than hierarchy’. In particular, the new feminism celebrates women’s supplanting of the supposedly self-interested judgements made by the old, adversarial political class with a new approach to public policy based more on emotion, and therefore they ‘bring a civilising influence’. This so-called feminisation of politics is likely to intensify if Hillary Clinton becomes American president. Promoting herself as ‘grandmother-in-chief’, and talking up how women politicians ‘help each other’ rather than fight with each other, Clinton has been hailed by the Washington Post as the person who could ‘reshape what leadership looks like’, and make 21st-century Western politics more ‘consensus-driven, compassionate, helpful, nurturing’.

The celebrated feminisation of politics is striking. Firstly because it demonstrates that the new feminism rehabilitates many of the old-fashioned ideas about women having particular, mothering values. And as such, as one critic points out, it could actually put women off politics: ‘This emphasis on a feminine consensual style may actually exclude women from politics by making them feel that they cannot participate successfully in adversarial contexts.’

And secondly, the ‘softening’ of politics calls into question the whole point of politics as it has been understood in the modern era. No longer to be a clash of conflicting visions, a marshalling of reasoned arguments in an effort to defeat one’s opponents in the competition to appeal to the public conscience, now politics is, in the words of the Washington Post. about ‘collaboration, consensus and warmth’. This represents, in essence, an unravelling of modern democratic politics in favour of the emotionalism and elitist offer to ‘care’ for the public of earlier, pre-Enlightenment eras. The modern West’s discomfort with politics as a tool of testy, rational debate, its discomfort with the idea of reason and judgement per se, is increasingly expressed through the adoption of a new-feminist approach to public life, in which intuition is elevated over thought and nurturing the public takes precedence over engaging with us as a reasoned entity and the source of democratic authority. And in the process we’re propelled back to a pre-modern era in which, likewise, politics was seen largely as a tool for repressing discussion and catering to people’s basic needs.

For many years now, feminists have called into question the Enlightenment ideal of rational discovery, even querying the very notion that the world can be measured and understood. In the 1990s, Sandra Harding, the American feminist philosopher, juxtaposed feminist ways of knowing with what she called ‘the tightly defended barricade [of] reason, rationality, scientific method [and] truth’. She described feminism as being ‘ambivalent about the Enlightenment faith in scientific method’. In 1989, the feminist writer Jane Flax critiqued ‘faulty Enlightenment assumptions’. including the ‘optimistic belief that people act rationally in their own interests and that reality has a structure that perfect reason… can discover’.

The new-feminist view that knowledge built on reason is somehow ‘male’, and what’s more wrong. infuses much of the Western academy and even schools today. In universities, the growing influence of new-feminist theories has seen overly male reading lists being called into question, the focus on great male writers of the past being casually described as ‘misogynistic’, and the rise of the notion that certain classic texts are harmful to women.

The trigger-warning phenomenon, whereby students demand that books which contain ‘disturbing’ content should come with a warning, is the logical conclusion to the new-feminist depiction of knowledge as something potentially harmful. Feminist students are often at the forefront of demanding trigger warnings. At Columbia University recently, they insisted that Ovid’s Metamorphoses should have a warning. arguing that exposing students to ‘the beauty of the language’ in this poem is not always a good idea, considering it also contains references to sexual assault.

It is tempting to write off as crackpots these students who see literature itself as a form of abuse, but they are only the outcome of an academy that for decades has embraced new-feminist notions about the folly of ‘male’ thought and the sexism of classic texts. Indeed, as far back as 1986, Sandra Harding described Newton’s Principia Mathematica — one of humanity’s key scientific texts — as a ‘rape manual’. on the basis that Newton and other modern scientific thinkers viewed nature as something to be plundered, controlled, ‘raped’. Inevitably, sixteenth-century scientific revolutionary Francis Bacon’s description of nature as a ‘she’, whose secrets we should ‘extract’, has been branded by new-feminist academics as misogynistic, evidence that ‘sexual and sexist imagery permeated the new scientific view of the world’. For years, new-feminist critics have depicted reasoned knowledge itself as invasive, as a kind of rape, of nature, of tradition, of alternative ways of thinking; and we wonder why today’s students view ideas as abusive and words as violence.

The redefinition of knowledge as something overly judgemental, even tyrannical, is increasingly reflected in schools. Across the West, schools are shifting from a top-down communication of knowledge towards a less structured ‘sharing of information’. One critic of this new, softer schooling says ‘the way classrooms are structured has been feminised’, so that ‘teachers no longer stand at the front of the room and children are expected to direct their own learning in open, mixed-ability classrooms’. And because, he says, boys need a ‘disciplined’ and ‘orderly classroom environment’, they inevitably fall behind.

With knowledge, as with politics, the key dynamic is not some sinister invasion of educational institutions by gangs of feminists, as men’s rights activists would have us believe. Rather, these institutions are embracing new-feminist thinking as a progressive-seeming veneer for their own estrangement from the values of reason and the ideal of knowledge, for their already-existing feeling of distance from the gains of modernity, the arrogance of science, and the humancentricity of knowing and maybe even transforming nature.

‘The law is reason, free from passion’, said Aristotle. In modern times in particular, the view of justice as something necessarily cool, ideally free from rashness or prejudice, has been a central tenet of democratic societies. Yet this is changing, too, again as a consequence of the rise of new-feminist theories. Everything from openness in the law, especially the idea that the public should have access to all information about a criminal court case, to the principle of tough, rationalist cross-examination of witnesses in order to establish the truth is now being called into question under the guise of establishing a new, more women-friendly approach.

Cross-examination in cases of sexual assault has been described as feeling like being ‘raped all over again’. In Britain, a recent Court of Appeal case established that when there is a ‘vulnerable’ witness, especially in cases of sexual assault, ‘ground rules’ regarding cross-examination must be set in advance — described by spiked ’s legal editor Luke Gittos as ‘deference to the victim’ which serves to ‘obstruct the process of justice, objectivity and truth in our courts’. Anonymity in rape trials, ruthlessly guarded from criticism by new-feminist thinkers, sets a dangerous precedent, undermining the openness of modern justice by denying the public the opportunity to see justice being done in an important area of criminal law.

Recent moves to ‘feminise’ justice, such as by allowing victims more say and even the right to issue therapeutic statements at the end of trials, directly challenge the ideal of law as ‘reason, free from passion’. And yet they’re celebrated by new-feminist observers. According to the authors of Gender and Judging. a more feminised approach to justice challenges the ‘ideology of the impersonal neutral judge’. Karima Bennoune, an American professor of law, cheers how feminised international law challenges the very ‘contours of justice’. through making ‘victims the central focus’ and elevating empathy over cold analytics.

Yet the ‘ideology’ of court neutrality was a key component of universal justice, going some way to ensuring fairness in the unfair clash between the state and the accused individual. The ‘contours of justice’ that demanded that accusers be treated with respect but also with scepticism, rather than being given a hallowed role in the trial, were designed to ensure that their every claim and accusation was tested thoroughly before the accused could be robbed of his or her liberty. A society that takes freedom seriously will want to ensure that criminal trials are as dispassionate and rigorous as possible, because there is an individual who risks losing something incredibly important: his liberty. No longer. The feministic pushing of the law into a new era in which judge neutrality is treated as a bad thing, and alleged victims are protected from tough cross-examination, gives the justice system a pre-Enlightened, even vengeful feel. Consider the words of the influential British new feminist Caitlin Moran, in a piece titled ‘The limits of redemption’. Even men who have served their sentences for sexual assault should see their lives ‘reduced to ash’, made ‘publicly, endlessly awful, unrelentingly humiliating, without prospect of absolution’, says Moran. Behind the ‘feminisation’ of law lurks a powerful pre-modern, irrational urge for revenge in place of Aristotle’s ‘reason, free from passion’.

New feminism, new misanthropy

In all the areas listed above — politics, knowledge, justice — the problem is not any Invasion of the Feminists; it is modern Western society’s discomfort with the values upon which it was built: reason, truth and freedom.

But our rulers, our cultural elites, our academies, cannot simply say, ‘We are against those things; we are over the Enlightenment’. And so they instinctively reach for a new set of values, a means of expressing their alienation from the ideals of modernity in a way that appears progressive rather than regressive. Enter the new feminism, which has moulded itself around the decay of Enlightened thinking, and which is embraced by those one-time guardians of the Western way of life who are now keen to shelve key elements of that way of life. Rational politics becomes cold maleness; the pursuit of knowledge, especially in the scientific realm, becomes tantamount to rape of nature; and rigour and reason in the world of justice are redefined as an ‘ideology of neutrality’ that demeans victims.

The new feminism is the clothing being worn by an Emperor who is shaking off old progressive ideas, but who wants to make this shaking-off look like something forward-looking and women-friendly rather than what it is: anti-human, a rewinding of the gains of modernity, which is harmful to both men and women.

The end result? The new feminism — or rather its embrace by relativistic, illiberal elites — has nurtured a new misanthropy. Today, feminism promotes distrust of humanity more thoroughly than almost any other movement. With its scaremongering about rape and sexual assault, its unhinged depiction of campuses as hotbeds of male abuse, its description of the West as a ‘sea of misogyny’, its presentation of the internet as a site of foul commentary, its claim that the streets are unsafe, and its view even of the home — that heart in a heartless world — as a place of violence against women and children, the new feminism gives the impression that humanity is rotten, untrustworthy, requiring closer policing and censorship in order to keep his passions and madnesses in check. Here, too, we are really witnessing modern society’s own distrust of humankind coming to the fore, once again dressed in new-feminist garb rather than revealing its true essence: which is that, as the values of the Enlightenment are unravelled, so the public comes increasingly to be seen as a problem in need of management rather than as a sentient demos capable of freedom and greatness.

The new feminism, this global franchise, this pop and political phenomenon, is not really a movement. Nor is it, as men’s rights complainers argue, a feministic conspiracy to do down men. Rather, it is but the keenest expression of the mainstream misanthropy and turn against Enlightenment thought of the modern West itself. The ‘male’ values being attacked are really the universal values of reason, autonomy, progress and truth — values that both men and women need, and deserve. Forget the ‘sex wars’. We don’t need new feminism, nor do we need a new men’s rights movement. We need men and women to come together to challenge the illiberalism and backwardness of the modern West, which is so often expressed in new-feminist terminology. That is, we need humanism.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked .

For permission to republish spiked articles, please contact Viv Regan .