is fourth wave feminism actually a thing?

i don't see the fundamental differences between the third and the so-called fourth that existed between the third and second, and the second and first. the characteristics that the fourth wants to present as defining are just the same ideas that defined the third. this apparent dawn of a new wave of feminism is also happening a lot sooner than it did in the past.

it rather strikes me as a way for capital to profit off of generational politics. the previous waves occurred over several generations. what is being referred to as a fourth wave really doesn't strike me as any different than the mainstreaming of a third wave - it's the process of a third wave becoming the status quo.

technology does not generate new ideas, but rather reinforces existing ones. there's no evolution of thought here.

i would rather react negatively to the premise of generational politics and suggest that a long-lasting feminism should rather seek to abolish generational divisions as arbitrary constructs of capitalism that have no place in an egalitarian society. this is something that entered the public consciousness as a way to define a market for baby boomers. it's about selling clothes and soda to kids, it's not about social change. all ideas need  to evolve, but if you're trying to define a new feminism every twenty years to generate new markets, you've lost the plot - you're just buying into the divide and conquer of capitalist control and upholding the broader system of exploitation.

i think the deeper criticism of the idea is an observation that late capitalism has turned feminism into a product, and i guess you could write some essays about how feminism is being co-opted in the broader neo-liberal agenda. maybe that's what people mean when they take about "fourth waves". but, you should force them to be more specific, and resist the co-option of the language. there's no wave, here. there's just the continued encroachment of neo-liberalism.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.