nothing. Women's history month has drawn to yet another close and there does not seem to have been much discussion beyond coverage of Hillary. There was also the interesting article on sexist vegans by the New York Times. Not that there wasn't ample opportunity. All of Spitzer's transgressions, as well as the weird love triangle in New Jersey offered plenty of opportunity for discussion, yet I'm not bothered. I have the feeling that most other people weren't.
In the discussion concerning which women will vote for Hillary, what has been noted repeatedly is that the age of the shoulder pad feminist has ended. Apparently women nowadays do not want to come off as the crazy feminist or as they're often lovingly called, the "feminazi."
Additionally, feminism probably has had the most issues with inter-sectionality out of any movement. Females of a variety of faiths have expressed issues with the movement. Additionally when it comes to capturing women of different races there seems to be a tension. No doubt, there are powerful pro-women women of every race, and history proves that as well...however, where they fall in the feminist movement is questionable. I wonder how well Susan B. and Ida B. really got along. (Note: I dont even know if they knew each other and I'm too tired to check..but they had similar goals).
While I don't particularly miss the coverage (and maybe there was more and I was just more concerned with Jamie Lynn's engagement) it would be nice for some publication to revisit the issue and look at whats left tooday. Really, there's so many shades of this movement that I've always been a little confused. Feminism vs. Womanism? Sexuality and Gender? Body issues?
What falls in and what doesnt?
Oh well, at least April isnt assigned. And best believe THROWBACK THURSDAYS are coming back (but not this Thursday..Ill be in Paris and most likely internetless).