"Sisterhood" bound women together during the second wave of feminism in the 1970s.I couldn't agree more (and kinda wish she had cited my book or Courtney and my WaPo oped somewhere--oops--down ego, down) when Amy writes:
Fast-forward three decades, and it is time to start asking ourselves what happens when you try to stretch sisterhood across a generational divide and then push and pull it between the campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Answer: serious stretch marks.
Ten years from now we could look back on the arguments about Clinton v. Obama as the wedge that emphasized a generational divide, to the detriment of all women.
The Mother-Daughter dynamic illuminates a power differential. In many ways the Mothers have the upper hand. They control the largest established organizations, the purse strings of foundation grants. By excluding younger women's definitions of feminism, however, the Mothers are short-circuiting their power.
The Mothers need to remember that they need the Daughters as well.
Gen-Xers such as myself are no longer children; we're reaching our 40s now. Not only do we represent the future, we are the bridge to the millennial generation who will clean up after all of us.
And speaking of intergenerational, the WomenGirlsLadies crew can't wait til tomorrow, when we'll be conversing on this very topic and more over at Harvard, on the heels of that interesting conference on feminism over there the other week with Camille Paglia, Katie Roiphe, Christina Hoff Sommers and others. Perhaps we might all be together on a stage sometime cause that sure would be an interesting conversation.
(Thanks to Joanne over at PunditMom for the heads up on Amy's piece!)