| dc.description.abstract | Summary
‘Difference’ is a widely disputed topic within contemporary feminism: differences between women in a range of aspects such as class, ethnicity and sexuality are discussed in order to illustrate different feminist perspectives. This thesis scrutinizes the issue of ‘difference’ and how Opzij, the biggest Dutch feminist magazine, treats it. Every year, this magazine highlights its top 100 most powerful women. The profile of a powerful woman, according to Opzij, is analysed in this thesis in order to find out how the magazine handles differences between women. Opzij has been heavily criticized for its exclusive feminism, and it seemed to be aware of its critics when it published Feminism for Everyone, an article that proudly introduces Feminism 3.0. With Feminism for Everyone, Opzij calls for a new feminism with reference to third-wave feminism, which, in turn, is more open towards differences between women. But this Feminism 3.0 seemed to be soon forgotten as only a month later Opzij published its top 100 for the first time. An intersectional analysis on gender, ethnicity, age and educational background shows a highly static profile of a powerful woman as the vast majority of the women listed are white, Western, middle-aged and academically educated. With its top 100, Opzij excludes the majority of Dutch women, as well as displaying a one-sided understanding of power. Power is equated with emancipation, as the women listed are selected according to their profession. However, terms like power and emancipation can mean different things to different people. By constructing a static norm of what a powerful woman entails, Opzij leaves no room for differences between women. Iris van der Tuin and her methodology in Jumping Generations could help as a productive and affirmative tool if Opzij truly seeks to be attentive towards ‘differences’ in an adequate way. Van der Tuin argues third-wave feminists should not reject earlier forms of feminism, as Opzij does with Feminism for Everyone. Third-wave feminists should, instead, move beyond classifications and apply parts of former feminists generations that still prove to be relevant. But even if the methodology in Jumping Generations causes for a more inclusive feminism, I still suggest Opzij should renounce the top 100 as a highlight of the magazine, as it is this feature that seemingly perpetuates a biased perspective on power and emancipation. | |
