While I am genuinely grateful for the attention paid to my book The Aftermath of Feminism (Books, 18 December), I am distressed and perplexed by the way in which I am portrayed as presenting a completely opposite argument to that which is actually developed in the text. This happens throughout the review.
As a sociologist, I would never suggest that women nowadays "have it all". In the book I dissect the ways in which young women become the focus of new gender-specific forms of power and social control that manage the lives of women by deploying a language of choice, empowerment and freedom.
This new language of femininity serves as a replacement for feminism. Where the reviewer has written that I draw on the work of Sylvia Walby to suggest that feminism has matured and mellowed, again quite the opposite is the case. I actually challenge Walby's account, proposing provocatively that she embodies the new Labour ideal of feminism as passe, no longer needed and out of date. I feel the need to state my case here.
Angela McRobbie, Professor of communications, Goldsmiths, University of London.
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to °Õ±á·¡¡¯²õ university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber? Login