I felt myself agreeing with everything the Amy Alexander called for in the piece.
I was mildly surprised by how contemporary feminism was defined.Today's iteration of feminism might gain wider credibility by recognizing and adopting core aspects of women of color's experiences: Resilience, self-love, and fundamental understanding that one's self-worth is not defined by the same markers of success that have defined white male status since the beginning of time in America.
I can admit to being in a bit of a bubble, no longer living in the U.S., and getting my contemporary feminist sources from here and places like Everyday Feminism, which I find to be devoted to intersectionality as opposed to merely paying lip service.At this moment, whether expressed by the second-wave, Gloria Steinem wing, or the third-wave corporatist Sheryl Sandberg arm, or the rowdy, genitalia-obsessed Lena Dunham arm, it seems that 'feminism' in 2017 is more concerned with promoting superficial trappings of genuine equality than with doing the tough work required to address the hard, cold facts of gender and racial inequality.
Amy Alexander points out that a Day Without Women, while having great symbolic meaning, is something that only women with power have the ability to participate in without losing their livelihood. Other things recently brought to my attention like problems with the Women's march and the article on Bourgeois Feminism mentioned earlier have been jogging me out of my Feminism-is-for-Everybody-bubble to suggest that people are rallying behind a feminism that is a disconnect from the intersectional feminism to which I came and found home.
How do we get the people carrying the banner of feminism in the upper classes to carry the banner for the lower classes? How do we get white feminists to carry the banner for people of color? What do we do to get people to care about people they aren't? How do we make true intersectional feminism mainstream feminism?