Denying Their Roots
There can certainly be more than one valid paradigm for describing the history of feminism. But I recently encountered a new phenomenon among Fourth Wavers: not content to use a new paradigm of their own device, they've decided to completely reject the Waves paradigm.
This smacks of historic revisionism - an attempt to brush the shortcomings of the Third Wave under the carpet. Perhaps they forget that "Second Wave" and "Third Wave" are not just dry historic descriptions; they were, and are, living self-descriptions. Basically, the Fourth Wave wants to tell people who identify as Second Wave or Third Wave that their self-identification is invalid.
Add this to their rejection of good science and their vehement denial of their own patent bigotry, and you come to an inescapable conclusion: the Fourth Wave is the liberal counterpart of Teabaggers.
This smacks of historic revisionism - an attempt to brush the shortcomings of the Third Wave under the carpet. Perhaps they forget that "Second Wave" and "Third Wave" are not just dry historic descriptions; they were, and are, living self-descriptions. Basically, the Fourth Wave wants to tell people who identify as Second Wave or Third Wave that their self-identification is invalid.
Add this to their rejection of good science and their vehement denial of their own patent bigotry, and you come to an inescapable conclusion: the Fourth Wave is the liberal counterpart of Teabaggers.