Opting out of oppositionality : toward an informed and engaged "third wave" feminism

I begin by citing a definition of "third wave" from the glossary in Turbo Chicks: Talking Young Feminisms at length because it communicates several key issues that I develop in this project. The definition introduces a tension within "third wave" feminism of building and differentiating itself from second wave feminism, the newness of the term "third wave," its association with "young" women, complexity of contemporary feminisms, and attention to multiple identities and oppressions. Uncovering explanations of "third wave" feminism that go beyond, like this one, generational associations, is not an easy task. Authors consistently group new feminist voices together by age under the label "third wave" feminists without questioning the accuracy of the designation. Most explorations of "third wave" feminism overlook the complexities and distinctions that abound among "young" feminists ; not all young feminists espouse similar ideas, tactics, and actions; and for various reasons, not all young feminists identify with a "third wave" of feminism. Less than a year after I began to learn about feminism I discovered Barbara Findlen's Listen Up: Voices From the Next Feminist Generation. Although the collection nor its contributors declare association with "third wave" feminism, consequent reviews and citations in articles identify it, along with Rebecca Walker's To Be Real: Telling the Truth and Changing the Voice of Feminism, as a major text of "third wave" feminism. Re-reading Listen Up since beginning to research "third wave" feminism, I now understand its fundamental influence on my research questions as a starting point for assessing persistent exclusion in contemporary feminism, rather than as a revolutionary text (as it is claimed to be in many reviews). Findlen begins the introduction with the bold claim, "My feminism wasn't shaped by antiwar or civil rights activism ..." (xi). Framing the collection with a disavowal of the influence women of color's organizational efforts negates, for me, the project's proclaimed commitment to multivocality. Though several contributions examine persistent exclusion within contemporary feminist movement, the larger project seems to rely on these essays to reflect this commitment, suggesting that Listen Up does not go beyond the "add and stir" approach to "diversity." Interestingly, this statement does not appear in the new edition of Listen Up published in 2001. And the content has changed with this new edition, including several more Latina contributors and other "corrective" additions.

Intent and Method: A Study of Female Characters in Aeschylean and Euripidean Drama

Aeschylus and Euripides used tragic female characters to help fulfill the purpose of religious celebration and to achieve the motivation of public reaction. The playwrights, revising myths about tragic woman and redefining the Greek definition of appropriate femininity, supported or questioned the very customs which they changed. Originally composed as part of a religious festival for Dionysus, the god of wine, revelry and fertility, the tragedies of Aeschylus and Euripides were evaluated by Aristotle. He favored Aeschylus over Euripides, but it appears as if his stipulations for tragic characterization do not apply to Aeschylean and Euripidean women. Modem critics question both Aristotle's analysis in the Poetics as well as the tragedies which he evaluated. As part of the assessment of Aeschylus, the character of the Persian Queen, Atossa, appears as a conradiction the images that Greeks maintain of non-Greeks. The Persians is discussed in relation to modem criticisms and as on its function as a warning against radical changes in Athenian domestic life. The Oresteia, a trilogy, also charts the importance of an atypical woman in Aeschylean tragedy, and how this role, Clytaemnestra, represents an extreme example of the natural and necessary evolution of families, households and kingdoms. In contrast to Aeschylus' plea to retain nomoi (traditional custom and law), EUripides' tragedy, the Medea, demonstrates the importance of a family and a country to provide security, especially for women. Medea's abandonment by Jason and subsequent desperation drives her to commit murder in the hope of revenge. Ultimately, Euripides advocates changes in social convention away from the alienation of non-Greek, non-citizens, and females. Euripides is, unfortunately, tagged a misogynist by some in this tragedy and another example-the Hippolytus. Euripides' Phaedra becomes entangled in a scheme of divine vengeance and ultimately commits suicide in an attempt to avoid societal shame. Far from treatises of hate, Euripidean women take advantage of the little power they possess within a constrictive social system. While both Aeschylus and Euripides revise customary images and expectations of women in the context of religiously-motivated drama, one playwright intends to maintain civic order and the other intends to challenge the secular norm.