That identity also stems from the way social media has transformed the feminist movement, reducing a complex body of work to a series of memes, hashtags, and Instagrammable pics. There is now a certain type of female solidarity—call it “pop feminism”—that addresses only topics we can safely agree on. (Viviane Fairbank)

This understanding is, to me, central to this piece. Although the piece is primarily about Solnit, it is just as much about “pop feminism,” which I think has been the dominant form of feminism since the split in the second wave. So many feminists then fled into psycho-therapy, Buddhism, and other New Age practices; while still others adopted sexual revolution, Queer, and gay male politics. All this and most everything that followed can be described as “pop feminism.” And what assured this was the rise of the internet and social media in the 1990s. The very nature of this media all but makes radical feminism impossible, because fragments based more on psychology than on politics, is not sexual politics, or a vision, or an understanding of male supremacy. Radical meant connections & unity stemming from a radical political platform, while pop means separate pieces, none of which are supposed to offend (oh my god) those in the sympathetic online bubbles, for fear of bumping heads with similars who tend to push dissimilars out. It’s a long story but I suspect that the comments to this piece will key on Solnit and less on the ground or lack of ground that produced her.