In the wake of violent events such as the 9/11 tragedy, the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, massacres on university campuses, and the ongoing war in Iraq, touting fictional television characters such as Carrie Bradshaw from HBO’s Sex in the City, or even real life pop icons like Paris Hilton or Britney Spears, as symbols of Third Wave feminism is, at best, ridiculous and, at worst, destructive to the reputation of the feminist endeavor. While making sexy connections between feminism and media personalities might be an effective way to market the image of economically powerful women in American society, such ploys fail to repair the cracked foundation of today’s feminist movement. As Pythia Peay notes in her article “Feminism’s Fourth Wave, “as feminism allows more women to reach positions of power in American culture, increasing numbers have discovered that material success does not satisfy their hunger for meaning and connection” (60). It is necessary to take a moment to reconnect feminism to its historical roots as a means of recreating identity, healing misunderstandings among classes, ethnicities and generations, as well as redefining the movement in terms of three authentic values which feminism’s nineteenth century foremothers embraced: peace, community, and spirituality. Contemporary frameworks available through multicultural incorporation theory might mend an essentialized, public projection of feminism with the core values of the movement.

Emily Hoeflinger’s essay explores the problems inherent in conceptualizing the feminist endeavor in terms of waves. Hoeflinger aptly points out that the wave paradigm “assume[s] a common cultural history” among the various movements, which could be a factor in the reluctance of many women today to reconnect with feminist history, further distancing ourselves from nineteenth century women’s feminist projects, and adding to the fragmentation of current feminist identity. However, as Stacy Gillis and Rebecca Munford argue in their article, “Politics and Praxis of Third Wave Feminism,” “[the] competitive generational model does not allow for a collective memory of female-based thought, empowerment and activism” (176). The tendency for women to isolate the ‘waves’ or generation-based descriptions of feminism as punctuated moments of change instead of successive movements that build one upon one another, de-historicizes the narrative of women’s efforts to bring greater equality to their lives. In her research on young women’s attitudes toward feminism, Pamela Aronson concludes that while more women have adopted feminist worldviews than ever before, they are resistant to identifying themselves as feminists (906). Knowing the challenges and difficulties which previous generations of women encountered legitimates and contextualizes present feminist projects, creating a synergistic power beyond the individual, forges connections across generations, outside the confines of time.

Just as feminists struggle with issues of representation today, previous generations of women’s rights reformers concerned themselves with the image of their membership and the public representation of their mission, struggling to balance the tension between beauty and brains. In her 1893 novel, A Sex Revolution, American women’s rights reformer Lois Waisbrooker’s protagonist, Lovella, represents the ideal woman of strength and dignity, whose voice inspires a resounding female movement against patriarchy. While at the time a radical notion, Waisbrooker’s idea that a beautiful woman can voice a powerful message, and that powerful messages yield a sort of feminine beauty, answers contemporary feminists’ quest for an appropriate image. The image that Waisbrooker projects to the world as beautiful and pleasing is the woman who finds voice.

Waisbrooker and many of her contemporaries fought against women’s passivity in political and social activism by reclaiming and constructing the feminist image in terms women’s abilities, not their material value. However, despite the work of first wave women’s rights reformers, women’s social and political apathy remains a problem even today. Claire Knoche Fulenwider in her article “Feminist Ideology and the Political Attitudes and Participation of White and Minority Women” claims that women in the United States “persistently are taught not only to feel a certain way toward the political system (i.e. passive, nurturant, dependent, etc.), but also, and perhaps more importantly, to act in that way” (17). While modern sensibilities may cringe at the utopian discussions of female supremacy Americans such as Charlotte Perkins Gilman engaged in during the first wave of women’s rights activism, what American and British Victorian feminists did accomplish in their work as writers, journalists, and public speakers was to create a culture where change and creative thinking were possible. Certainly, this is where the disconnect lies in media portrayals of feminists as glamorous figures whose public accomplishment resides in material wealth or as mysterious academics emotionally detached from the kinds ofworkplace and family issues which women from all socio-economic classes face. Incomplete images of feminist membership cloud the substance of feminist ideas.

The authentic representation of women’s work and the cultivation of social responsibility was also a serious concern for British journalist Frances Power Cobbe in the late Victorian era. In her numerous articles and books on women’s liberation, Cobbe insistentlyaffirms that women who had access to real political power, yet nonetheless remained apathetic to the feminist cause, were exhibiting the worse kind of immoral behavior. In failing to connect to women in other social spheres, the powerful yet apathetic woman, Cobbe argued, perpetuated the social oppression of the women most in need:

Victorian women writers were quick to call for action to change the state of female oppression. However, much like our own time, these same women were unsure of what that action should be, beyond instilling an optimistic spirit that change is always possible. This is the spiritual aspect of first wave feminism that I suggest might be helpful in reinvigorating efforts for change within contemporary feminism. If the feminist movement shakes off its activist inertia, women who have distanced themselves from feminism may no longer find the movement passé, and may actually view feminism as dynamic and concerned with issues that affect all women.

I do not wish to romanticize the first wave feminist movement. Some of the lessons we can learn in evaluating our feminist heritage are not positive or affirming in nature but are, for that very reason, all the more important to remember. As Sojourner Truth and Sarah Grimké made clear during their careers as participants in the women’s rights movement, minority voices have been, and often continue to b,e marginalized within the feminist movement. However, contemporary multicultural models of creating communities might provide the modern reinterpretation of feminism essential to generating an inclusive movement, that allows for the space of the individual. Sociologist Peter Kivisto stresses the importance of sharing a core set of values in diverse communities in order to maintain healthful plurality, citing Kymlicka and Taylor’s notions of “public spiritedness,” “a sense of justice,” “civility and tolerance,” and “a shared sense of solidarity or loyalty” as essential to building a cohesive yet diverse group (22). With new intellectual tools and the lessons of history in hand, today’s feminists can continue the work which other previous generations began, by promoting equality while acknowledging and valuing difference.

Revisiting the values of our first wave foremothers and seeking to understand the complex history of feminism can help contemporary feminists to redefine and revise the feminist movement. Emphasizing peace, community, and spiritual connection are answers to the hostile and soulless social context in which we live. By reclaiming the feminist public image as a meaningful portrayal of female social power, representative of the diversity in background and thought that feminism welcomes, current feminist projects can redefine their missions based on the gaps between the past and the present. What has been left undone, incomplete, or unsatisfactory from past efforts can be redressed by present-day feminists. Moving away from the material enjoyment of feminist achievement and refocusing on feminist values will not only positively affect social perceptions of the feminist endeavor, but will also reinvigorate activist initiatives.