European Journal of Women's Studies

The article considers the changing position of women and the family from the Second World War until today using the UK as its example. It offers a theoretical perspective by setting out to examine the possibility that the rise of second-wave feminism both reflected and spearheaded an aspect of demographic transition to non-replacement populations. It considers the tension between the formation of ‘sexual difference’ to enable reproduction and what it calls the ‘engendering of gender’ in lateral relations which are indifferent to procreation. With the achievements of feminism as a political vanguard and the demographic transition as its socioeconomic base, women were no longer defined by the family; their definition ceased to depend on procreation. The article proposes that the new use of the term ‘gender’ entered the political arena to become a key concept of feminism to indicate non-procreative sexuality and sexual relations that need not be heterosexual or biologically procreative. Judith Butler’s well-known suggestion that ‘gender’ troubles the status quo in a revolutionary manner cannot be sustained. Rather than disturbing the universe, the advent of ‘gender’ reflects the transition to a new demographic order.

As has been widely observed, histories of feminism have often been conceived via notions of generation where feminism is positioned as a kind of familial property, a form of inheritance and legacy which is transmitted through generations. Thus feminism and its history have been imagined as following a familial mode of social reproduction. Despite the dominance of this model, it has nonetheless been subject to critique, not least because of its reliance on teleological and progressive notions of history. Judith Roof, for example, has called for new conceptualizations of temporality in an attempt to decouple histories of feminism from a generational model. This need to move away from a generational model is also underscored by what commentators such as Angela McRobbie have identified as a dispersal of feminism – a broad-scale circulation of feminist values in popular culture – as well as by the emergence of a certain kind of reflexivity whereby past and current feminist practices are increasingly subject to critique. For McRobbie such developments are understood as part of the articulation of a post-feminism in which feminism can no longer be passed on as it is positioned as having already passed away. However, in this article via an exploration of recent accounts of the passing of feminism it is suggested that what allows for a declaration of this passing is an attachment to feminism as a particular way of knowing as well as to a particular arrangement of the social. Indeed, it will be suggested that recent histories of feminism and commentaries on the state of contemporary feminism are driven not only by generational logics but also by these attachments – attachments which lose and fix both feminism and women in time.

This article argues that present (Italian) feminism has been translating its practical principles into a cultural and theoretical phenomenon. Drawing on her own genealogical achievement of freedom, the author discusses the main issues concerning present feminism – ranging from the intergenerational shift, feminist production and the control of its texts and practices – in order to construct her own understanding and doing feminism. Against a feminine feminist revival of traditional culture, the article focuses on creative and humanitarian agency. After having discussed the relationships between second-wave and present feminism, the contradictions and misunderstanding of feminist ideas, the relevance of a rhizomatic assimilation of feminism by both feminists and not feminists, the article examines the dynamics that have led to a present static separatism, and proposes, as a line of flight, international feminist humanitarianism. It also suggests a way of rethinking a possible materialization of feminism into (feminist) women activists and lay missionaries.

The article addresses the tempting questions around feminist cross-mainstreaming, keeping in mind that the feminist movement and feminist critical studies are deeply challenged by globalized marketing, boundary changes and displacements, and ‘over-genderization’. Taking feminist cross-mainstreaming into consideration not only as a concept and/or ‘act of normality’ at the threshold of the 21st century but also as a provocative stand for claiming authority across diverse worlds and boundaries, the author explores this through the problem of the globality of feminism in its contextualization and complexity; the status of feminism from a postsocialist perspective; and implications and potential obstacles of gender mainstreaming.

The author argues for passing on a particular brand of feminism to next generations. The cultural archive (after Said) to be passed on should be transnational, intersectional, interdisciplinary, relational and reflexive. In particular, the author focuses on processes and practices of racialization as they impact on and are practised within the discipline. In the current backlash against feminism and women’s studies in different parts of Europe, frequently divisionary tactics are deployed, by which women are pitted against each other, based on assumed immutable differences which are conceived of as either ‘raciological’ (after Gilroy), ethnicized or as cultural, in such a way that ‘race’ enters again through the back door. The author argues that we need a European brand of feminism that is not complicit with the legacies of modernity, which continue to construct ‘race’. That is, we should be deeply concerned with thinking through the parameters of a viable anti-racist European women’s studies. By analysing various case studies, taken from the everyday Dutch reality at the beginning of this new millennium, the author shows the necessity and inescapability of the feminism she advocates.