Over time feminism has been defined by different movements, goals, peoples, intentions and waves. More recently, mainstream Western feminism has come under criticism for advancing consumer culture, neoliberal politics and the interests of a select group of elite women. This form of feminism has been called commodity feminism and consumer feminism, but Molly Stambaugh argues they all fit under the "rationality of neoliberal feminism" [1].

While the term neoliberalism has undergone its own transformations over time, it is more recently mainly used as a pejorative term. Supporters of neoliberalism who understand it as its original economic definition argue that women have gained greater agency and choice in the neoliberal climate. It was supposed that labor market deregulation would bring women more flexibility to negotiate their time so that their careers would not negatively impact their household roles[2].

Feminist critics of neoliberalism transpose their critique on the impact it has had on feminism. The critical difference between neoliberalism's impact compared to that of liberalism is its extended global reach. According to critics, this has the potential of compounding the forms of oppression as they intersect and exacerbate across international inequalities[3]. Neoliberalism is considered more dangerous by some because it has evolved into a whole culture, invading the political and social spheres in a more extensive way than liberalism did[4].





Overview

Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism refers to both a political stance and a theory of economic policies. As a theory It is associated with neoclassical economic polices aimed at decreasing government spending and control, reducing deficit spending, limiting protectionism and expanding free trade[5]. Such policies are predicated on the presupposition that liberated markets and private property laws free individual entrepreneurship and consequently well being[6].

While neoliberalism emerged in the 1940s, it regained traction in the United States in the 1970s as a backlash to the social welfare programs and the ‘managed capitalism' of classical liberalism. This reaction involved tax cuts, industry deregulation (including that of the financial industry), privatization, increased military spending and a general rolling back of the welfare state. In the United States this neoliberal agenda began with Jimmy Carter and then taken up more fervently by the Reagan administration, known as Reaganomics.

Current use

In more recent years its use has changed as scholars began to use the term more broadly and asymmetrically[7]. It has been described as a critics’ term[8], commonly associated with the injustices of globalization. David Harvey situates neoliberalism in the context of the revolutionary movements of the 1970s[9]. Harvey understands neoliberalism to be a reaction from the corporate capitalist class and a political project aiming to restore power to economic elites and provide the economic structures for the continuation of unequal capital accumulation[10]..

Neoliberalism and feminism

Advocates of neoliberalism argue that free market systems offer economic freedom that lead to greater choice and agency for each individual [11][12], including women. Supporters believe that one of the central ideological tenants of neoliberalism - the maximization of individual freedom - helps to undermine patriarchal and sexist norms[13].

Cornwall et. al summarize a conference on neoliberalism and gender and point to the complex relationship between the two. They point out how the rhetoric of empowerment creates potential for symbiosis. In quoting Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay they write[14]

Microcredit company: "Micro Credit As The Way To Financial Independence For Women In Developing Countries"





‘[N]eoliberalism in its pristine form has destabilised an order context of patriarchy and has stressed choice’; indeed it is this ‘shared pursuit of choice’ that characterises one of the points of convergence between feminism and neoliberalism.

Neoliberalism's globalized industries and microfinancing programs have created more labor and entrepreneur opportunities for women worldwide. These have been linked to women's increase in self-esteem and participation in household decision-making in India and Bangladesh[15]. However, not all microfinancing programs have resulted in statistically significant impacts, and critics argue it can lead borrowers into debt traps.

Choice Feminism

In North America, the modern feminist movement has been noted to focus on individual empowerment and market-driven solutions[16]. Publications like Lean In and Leave Your Mark offer women advice on how to get ahead in their careers through personal development and courage[17][18]. Oprah Winfrey’s show and magazine offer self-esteem building ‘tools’ and encouragement to help women take ownership of and overcome various social forms of oppression[19][20]. These kinds of works and along with the media promise social mobility, strength and solutions to social problems through merit and hard work.

The neoliberal philosophy of personal ownership, self-investment and individual empowerment is supposed to enable a meritocratic climate where women can work independently of social pressures and structures. This has caused some women to denounce feminism’s relevance in modern society[21].

Criticism

Like liberal feminism, neoliberal feminism has predominately been a white, middle and upper income class female movement that has failed to address racialized, low-income and marginalized females in their struggles[22]. Neoliberal discourse discards the complex interactions of various oppressions that determine the experience of sexism for each person by placing the responsibility of success and well-being on the individual’s personal merit and work. Neoliberal discourse does not account for the reality of intersectionality.

Critics argue that understanding female liberation as an individualist struggle leads to a competitive environment where the terms of success are determined by the existing elite and are inaccessible to the majority of the female population [23]. Homogenous standards of beauty in North American society[24][25] are one example of this phenomenon at work.

Critics argued the T-shirts worn by these four white women celebrities promoted a film that white washed the women suffrage movement

Angela McRobbie argues that the individualizing ethos presented to women through neoliberal cultural means construct an ideal female subject. The mass of self-help guides and promotion of self-improvement targeting women in the context of hyper-individualism and subsequent competition creates enormous pressure and high, unrealistic expectations of excellence. This female ideal is characterized as “having it all”: a successful domesticity and sexuality, an ambitious career and a perfect body[26].

While neoliberal institutions like the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation adopted an interest in empowering women in the global South by offering micro-loans and micro-credits, Elizabeth Prügl points out that they are still ideologically committed to "rationalism, heteronormativity and genderless economic structures" [27].

Colusion

Some scholars, most notably Nancy Fraser, have situated second-wave feminism in the historical evolution of neoliberalism and capitalist economics[28]. The burgeoning of neoliberalism in the 1970s coincided with the flourishing of second-wave feminism. Like neoliberalism, second-wave feminism stood in opposition to state-managed capitalism. The state was associated with a paternalism that subjugated women[29]. Eisenstein argues that capitalist processes seduced second-wave feminism with its critique of the paternalistic state, but in doing so it created a hegemonic liberal feminist movement that colluded with ideas of the global elite[30].

Appropriation

Angela McRobbie has written extensively on how feminism has been appropriated and shaped by capitalist cultural currents. In one lecture, Angela McRobbie explains how feminist critiques of the state were endogenized by contemporary capitalism in its effort to revive itself[31]. Unlike Fraser, who argues feminism allowed itself to collude with neoliberal capitalism, McRobbie argues it's "undoing" was actively pursued by capitalism.

While Catherine Rottenberg does not believe that second-wave feminism was responsible for the rise of neoliberalism, she maintains that the emergence of neoliberal feminism serves a specific historical purpose[32]. In her article, The Rise of Neoliberal Feminism, Rottenberg examines two “feminist manifestos,” Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In and Anne-Marie Slaughter’s ‘Why Women Still Can’t Have It All’ to explain how neoliberal feminism is outpacing and replacing liberal feminism.

Sheryl Sandberg, author of Lean In, on the cover of Time

Neoliberal feminism differs from liberal feminism in that it lacks a critique of systemic factors that lead to gender inequality. Rottenberg points out how Sandberg’s call for women to “internalize the revolution” speaks to the kind of individuation of neoliberal politics. Sandberg’s writing holds women responsible for their success, citing personal insecurities as their impediments. Rottenberg quotes Sandberg saying that women too often ‘hold [themselves] back in ways both big and small, by lacking self-confidence, by not raising [their] hands, and by pulling back when [they] should be leaning in’ [33]. This kind of discourse replaces critical social analysis of unequal power dynamics with personal responsibility. Unlike feminists who seek to challenge the social pressures that oppress women and create the insecurities that hold them back, this neoliberal discourse shifts the blame on the individual.

According to Rottenberg, Slaughter’s work also defines well-being and success as "having it all" - personal entrepreneurial success and a female domesticity. Slaughter's writing returns to a classic femininity where family values are affirmed. But she affirms this in the context of women maintaining their career aspirations. The institutional changes she recommends are aimed at high powered women, or those who are already in the elite. This excludes a majority of the female population from participating from decision-making process that will directly affect them.

See Also