2nd-Wave and 3rd-Wave Feminism: Can the two co-exist?
“2nd Wave: Second-wave feminism largely succeeded in reducing the hyper-sexual objectification of women, particularly in the workplace, popular culture, & mass media. This can be seen in current day Body Positive, Dove Real Beauty, Lean In messaging, etc.
3rd Wave: Third-wave feminism has largely succeeded in arguing for people’s right (especially women’s) to utilize their sexuality for personal, monetary, or otherwise utilitarian gain. This can be seen in current day [insert literally any social media platform], Vlogging, Youtube Beauty Tutorials, Only Fans, etc.
Question: The juxtaposition of these 2 successes is crystal clear. Is it a problematic duality that requires a resolution? Should Postfeminist scholars/ 4th Wave Feminists argue for a specific endgoal in favor of one of these two outcomes, or can the two coexist?”
In an ideal world, the goal of second-wave feminism to reduce the hypersexualization of women and the goal of third-wave feminism to usher in an era of female sexual liberation could coexist. This is because both goals are meant to improve the same fundamental issue: the sexual objectification of women. While the objective of the former is self-explanatory, the objective of the latter encourages women to express their sexual identities as freely as men are allowed to. Together, both goals share a common purpose: to teach women that they should not abide by the passive and oppressive sexual role that society has given them. Women should learn and know that they can feel desirable as respected and dignified persons rather than as objects meant to satisfy the male gaze. So, while second-wave feminism teaches people to stop seeing women as mere sexual objects and instead as whole, complex beings, third-wave feminism teaches women that they can still feel empowered by their sexuality because it is a part of their complex beings. Put this way, both movements exist in accord.
But we do not live in an ideal world. As society stands today, it is apparent that these movements cannot coexist because majority of men continue to sexually objectify women, and perhaps some women continue to objectify themselves. If it weren’t so, then women would be able to showcase their sexuality through any way they wanted — be it through fitness vlogging, Youtube beauty tutorials, or simple bikini Instagram posts — and it wouldn’t be considered problematic because all would understand that they aren’t spreading the message that they are “ready and available for sex”, but instead are showing that they simply feel “confident and sexy”. If people saw that a man had posted a shirtless picture of himself on Instagram, for example, most wouldn’t think that he was sexually objectifying himself, but instead, that he simply “felt confident and attractive”. Even though we are unlearning the sexual objectification of women, the stereotypes that establish them as weak, passive, slutty, and emasculating are so deeply rooted in society that the habit still manifests. As a result, the outcomes of the sexual liberation movement appear counterproductive: women are judged as sexually objectifying themselves, and what was supposed to be their liberation instead becomes the continued liberation of sexual male desires, which ultimately hurts women more. If we do not do better to teach society that women are not sexual objects then the aspiration to achieve sexual equality will remain unattainable. There is still more unlearning to do.
Therefore, post-feminist scholars and fourth-wave feminists do not need to resolve these two movements because they aren’t a juxtaposition at all. Instead, feminists should continue to shed light on the biases that we as people still hold against women.
