"Of course" feminism

That "of course" feminism is gaining ground--

The implicit attitude of this kind of writing is: “Can you believe these bozos are still acting like this?” The tacit assumption is that we all take for granted a certain set of shared beliefs, and we should mock those few retrograde Neanderthals who do not agree with us. The tone is less urgent and more queenly. It contains the idea that feminism is cool, and that it will mock you like a cool and impressive girl at the lunch table if you are in violation of its principles. The idea is to make fun of your enemies, not preach at them.

--is one reason Naomi Wolf's latest book falls flat:

 In the new century, the mainstream culture had developed a taste for more sophisticated or nuanced kinds of feminism, for a sense of humor or irony or subtlety in politics that was not exactly Wolf’s forte. The hordes of impressionable young were losing interest, moving on.

Another reason is that people have a limited appetite for navel-gazing:

These moments could uncharitably be seen as grabs for attention by an exhibitionistic writer, or they could be seen as a symptom of a slightly dysfunctional news media, which is demanding personal revelation, memoirish moments of inspiration rather than a cool intellectual product. If we think of French feminists’ books, such as Elisabeth Badinter’s The Conflict, for instance, and their dry interpretations, their lack of interest in trafficking in personal revelation, we see a difference in the ways ideas work in our culture. We like our political points to have a character with a life story attached, and that hunger may be partially at fault in Wolf’s bizarre career trajectory. Wolf has always been a creature of public fantasy, a reflection of our desire for attractive victimhood, for outspoken reductionism, for easy answers with a “relatable” narrative.