What do you think?
Rate this book
The New Victorians: A Young Woman's Challenge to the Old Feminist Order
Journalist Rene Denfeld explains why her generation has become alienated from the women's movement, maintaining that the actions of the movement's current leadership have actually encouraged a return to the kind of sexual repression and political powerlessness challenged by feminists in the 1970s. Here she offers a practial battle plan which includes confronting the issues of child care and birth control, working for equal government representation, and treating sexual assault as a serious crime.
352 pages, Hardcover
First published March 14, 1995
5 people are currently reading
293 people want to read
About the author
Rene Denfeld
24 books2,490 followersRene Denfeld is the bestselling author of THE CHILD FINDER, THE ENCHANTED, THE BUTTERFLY GIRL, SLEEPING GIANTS, and the forthcoming THE TALKING BONE (Harper July 2026), which was inspired by her real life work exonerating innocents.
Rene's poetic fiction has won numerous awards including the French Prix, an ALA Medal for Excellence and an IMPAC listing. Rene works as a licensed investigator, including exonerating. In 2017 she was awarded the Break The Silence Award for her advocacy work, and the New York Times honored her for heroism.
By day Rene continues to work in justice, having worked hundreds of cases over the years, including exonerations, death row and helping trafficking victims.
She lives in Portland, Oregon, where she is a happy foster and adoptive mother.
Rene's poetic fiction has won numerous awards including the French Prix, an ALA Medal for Excellence and an IMPAC listing. Rene works as a licensed investigator, including exonerating. In 2017 she was awarded the Break The Silence Award for her advocacy work, and the New York Times honored her for heroism.
By day Rene continues to work in justice, having worked hundreds of cases over the years, including exonerations, death row and helping trafficking victims.
She lives in Portland, Oregon, where she is a happy foster and adoptive mother.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
November 25, 2008
Perhaps the single most important feminist tome I've read...mostly because I read it when I was seeking to put words to my staunchly feminist beliefs while seeking to distance myself from the Dworkinite-era 2nd wave that had been so prominent in the 80s. This book condemns the culture of victimhood, which was something that desperately needed to be said.
October 5, 2008
My first introduction to feminism at 14, it shaped my views for many years and probably continues to. Just as the title implies, Denfeld sees feminism in the 90s as a throwback to the Victorian idealization of women, an idealization that separated and oppressed women by positing them as morally superior to men. It's a convincing argument, and I took it to heart, maybe asking too few questions about what the author claimed. While rereading it at 18, a feminist friend of mine read it, too, and questioned the validity of Denfeld's position on patriarchy - that there wasn't one. Her criticism helped me to look at the work more skeptically, and I look forward to coming back to it in a few years, now that I've read more and grown up a little bit.
July 29, 2025
DOES A ‘NEW GENERATION OF WOMEN’ REJECT ‘FEMINISM’? SOME CONTROVERSIAL IDEAS
Author and journalist Rene Denfeld wrote in the Introduction to this 1995 book, “For women of my generation, feminism is our birthright… We are the first generation to grow up expecting equal opportunity and equal education, as well as the freedom to express our sexuality… Given, then, this huge debt we owe feminism, why do so many women my age refuse to join the women’s movement? Why do we adamantly reject the feminist label? While … American women of all ages overwhelmingly support feminist ideas… they largely avoid calling themselves feminists and in many ways have abandoned the movement---even though most feel that there is still work to be done.” (Pg. 1-2)
She argues, “The fact is that feminism has changed---dramatically… the movement for the most part has taken a radical change in direction. It has become bogged down in an extremist moral and spiritual crusade that has little to do with women’s lives… It has … substituted a worldview that speaks to the very few, while alienating the many.” (Pg. 5)
She continues, “There are, in essence, two different women’s movements alive today. One is a cultural movement… expressed in the independent actions of thousands of feminist-thinking women who fight for equality in their lives… But this movement lives primarily in the hearts and minds of women: It isn’t organized, and most of its members don’t call themselves feminists. That’s because that word refers to the OTHER women’s movement---the organized, ideological form of feminism represented by groups such as NOW, women’s studies courses, and feminist leaders. It is this organized women’s movement---which defines the feminist label---that is the focus of this book.” (Pg. 5-6)
She summarizes, “Today’s feminists are remarkably similar to Victorians in significant ways, and not only in their vision of sexuality… One of the most powerful trends in New Victorianism is what can be called the feminist antiphallic campaign. Today’s feminists have created an overarching theory that blames male sexuality for the world’s woes. In short, they believe that heterosexual intercourse---as an inherently invasive and oppressive act---is the root cause of all oppression. This theory is … taught to women’s studies students, and promoted in organizations such as local chapters of NOW. It is behind much of the antimale sentiment in the movement, and at its logical end calls for separatism---the cessation of all intercourse between women and men.” (Pg. 11)
She proposes, “We must … return to a movement that addresses women’s concerns while respecting their personal lives and empowering their choices; a movement that prioritizes issues as women themselves prioritize them: child care, political parity, economic opportunity, abortion rights, and birth control; a movement that espouses the feminist ideal that our mothers taught us: that women can and should be equal and in full partnership with men, working together, both free from restraining sex roles… We must return to a movement that, quite simply, represents the majority of women.” (Pg. 20-21)
She asserts, “manhating and antiheterosexuality are firmly entrenched and loudly espoused in today’s movement.” (Pg. 26) She states, “there are critical flaws in the argument that lesbian issues should be given top priority among feminists. For one, many lesbian rights center on issues of gay discrimination, not gender discrimination… many lesbian issues don’t intersect with women’s rights overall. For example, fighting for gay marriages benefits homosexuals, but fighting for equal job opportunities and health-care benefits BOTH gay and straight women… To make lesbian rights a major priority seems... similar to arguing that gay rights should be the top priority of the NAACP because some blacks are gay.” (Pg. 43)
She acknowledges, “Teaching women how to avoid assault is a good idea… But these valuable precautionary ideas are overshadowed by the current feminist agenda… Rarely is it acknowledged that women might WANT to have sex. In victim mythology, the idea alone is an affront. The assumption is that they don’t.” (Pg. 86)
She argues, “In the feminist definition of porn, it seems that anything that acknowledges women have sex---from lesbian erotica to pictures of pregnant women---is considered evil. Probably the ultimate irony in this is just how many of their own works qualify. Several of Andrea Dworkin’s books, for example, are extremely pornographic.” (Pg. 102) Later, she adds, “current feminists… want us to believe that the exposure of our bodies degrades us, and incites male lust; they want to censor expression of our sexuality because, once again, we are truly the sated wantons… who are to blame for rape. They want us to… ‘veil’ ourselves once more---in silence and shame.” (Pg. 123)
She observes, “The question is not whether goddess followers are entitled to worship what they please---of course they are. The question is whether feminism should be synonymous with a religious doctrine… [that] demands they partake in rituals and worship—many women decline to [do so].” (Pg. 133) Later, she adds, “The vision of a golden age is critical to the promotion of goddess worship by feminists: Put women in charge and the world will exist in peaceful harmony. But credible archaeologists beg to differ with the idealized past.” (Pg. 140)
She asserts, “Feminist scholarship on the patriarchy may not have originated as a conspiracy theory, but… it certainly sounds like one today… current feminists portray our world as one great spiderweb of interconnected plots, all threads held by a faceless enemy whose sole goal is to suppress women.’ (Pg. 156)
She states, “as it entered into the eighties, Ms. [magazine] became stuck in a rut… in 1989, Ms. was resurrected by Robin Morgan and Gloria Steinem. Today this once-inclusive mainstream magazine is a truly fringe publication, catering only to the most ideologically pure feminists… often obtuse with academic feminist jargon.” (Pg. 192)
She summarizes, “We still need a women’s movement… to achieve complete equality between the sexes. Feminists of the second wave did a tremendous service for … women of my generation… What we don’t need is what feminism stands for today.” (Pg. 211) She continues, “women in their thirties and older also name child care, parental leave, health care, job opportunities, and reproductive rights as feminist priorities. These are issues… that are going to shape our children’s world... None of the issues expounded by the New Victorians---from censoring porn to overthrowing a vague patriarchy---promise to improve society concretely for future generations. They are diversions.” (Pg. 252)
Denfeld identifies some problems with the ‘mainstream’ feminist movement that may contribute to its lack of appeal to some women. But much of her critiques are themselves expressed in rather ‘extreme’ language, which greatly lessens the impact of her book.
Author and journalist Rene Denfeld wrote in the Introduction to this 1995 book, “For women of my generation, feminism is our birthright… We are the first generation to grow up expecting equal opportunity and equal education, as well as the freedom to express our sexuality… Given, then, this huge debt we owe feminism, why do so many women my age refuse to join the women’s movement? Why do we adamantly reject the feminist label? While … American women of all ages overwhelmingly support feminist ideas… they largely avoid calling themselves feminists and in many ways have abandoned the movement---even though most feel that there is still work to be done.” (Pg. 1-2)
She argues, “The fact is that feminism has changed---dramatically… the movement for the most part has taken a radical change in direction. It has become bogged down in an extremist moral and spiritual crusade that has little to do with women’s lives… It has … substituted a worldview that speaks to the very few, while alienating the many.” (Pg. 5)
She continues, “There are, in essence, two different women’s movements alive today. One is a cultural movement… expressed in the independent actions of thousands of feminist-thinking women who fight for equality in their lives… But this movement lives primarily in the hearts and minds of women: It isn’t organized, and most of its members don’t call themselves feminists. That’s because that word refers to the OTHER women’s movement---the organized, ideological form of feminism represented by groups such as NOW, women’s studies courses, and feminist leaders. It is this organized women’s movement---which defines the feminist label---that is the focus of this book.” (Pg. 5-6)
She summarizes, “Today’s feminists are remarkably similar to Victorians in significant ways, and not only in their vision of sexuality… One of the most powerful trends in New Victorianism is what can be called the feminist antiphallic campaign. Today’s feminists have created an overarching theory that blames male sexuality for the world’s woes. In short, they believe that heterosexual intercourse---as an inherently invasive and oppressive act---is the root cause of all oppression. This theory is … taught to women’s studies students, and promoted in organizations such as local chapters of NOW. It is behind much of the antimale sentiment in the movement, and at its logical end calls for separatism---the cessation of all intercourse between women and men.” (Pg. 11)
She proposes, “We must … return to a movement that addresses women’s concerns while respecting their personal lives and empowering their choices; a movement that prioritizes issues as women themselves prioritize them: child care, political parity, economic opportunity, abortion rights, and birth control; a movement that espouses the feminist ideal that our mothers taught us: that women can and should be equal and in full partnership with men, working together, both free from restraining sex roles… We must return to a movement that, quite simply, represents the majority of women.” (Pg. 20-21)
She asserts, “manhating and antiheterosexuality are firmly entrenched and loudly espoused in today’s movement.” (Pg. 26) She states, “there are critical flaws in the argument that lesbian issues should be given top priority among feminists. For one, many lesbian rights center on issues of gay discrimination, not gender discrimination… many lesbian issues don’t intersect with women’s rights overall. For example, fighting for gay marriages benefits homosexuals, but fighting for equal job opportunities and health-care benefits BOTH gay and straight women… To make lesbian rights a major priority seems... similar to arguing that gay rights should be the top priority of the NAACP because some blacks are gay.” (Pg. 43)
She acknowledges, “Teaching women how to avoid assault is a good idea… But these valuable precautionary ideas are overshadowed by the current feminist agenda… Rarely is it acknowledged that women might WANT to have sex. In victim mythology, the idea alone is an affront. The assumption is that they don’t.” (Pg. 86)
She argues, “In the feminist definition of porn, it seems that anything that acknowledges women have sex---from lesbian erotica to pictures of pregnant women---is considered evil. Probably the ultimate irony in this is just how many of their own works qualify. Several of Andrea Dworkin’s books, for example, are extremely pornographic.” (Pg. 102) Later, she adds, “current feminists… want us to believe that the exposure of our bodies degrades us, and incites male lust; they want to censor expression of our sexuality because, once again, we are truly the sated wantons… who are to blame for rape. They want us to… ‘veil’ ourselves once more---in silence and shame.” (Pg. 123)
She observes, “The question is not whether goddess followers are entitled to worship what they please---of course they are. The question is whether feminism should be synonymous with a religious doctrine… [that] demands they partake in rituals and worship—many women decline to [do so].” (Pg. 133) Later, she adds, “The vision of a golden age is critical to the promotion of goddess worship by feminists: Put women in charge and the world will exist in peaceful harmony. But credible archaeologists beg to differ with the idealized past.” (Pg. 140)
She asserts, “Feminist scholarship on the patriarchy may not have originated as a conspiracy theory, but… it certainly sounds like one today… current feminists portray our world as one great spiderweb of interconnected plots, all threads held by a faceless enemy whose sole goal is to suppress women.’ (Pg. 156)
She states, “as it entered into the eighties, Ms. [magazine] became stuck in a rut… in 1989, Ms. was resurrected by Robin Morgan and Gloria Steinem. Today this once-inclusive mainstream magazine is a truly fringe publication, catering only to the most ideologically pure feminists… often obtuse with academic feminist jargon.” (Pg. 192)
She summarizes, “We still need a women’s movement… to achieve complete equality between the sexes. Feminists of the second wave did a tremendous service for … women of my generation… What we don’t need is what feminism stands for today.” (Pg. 211) She continues, “women in their thirties and older also name child care, parental leave, health care, job opportunities, and reproductive rights as feminist priorities. These are issues… that are going to shape our children’s world... None of the issues expounded by the New Victorians---from censoring porn to overthrowing a vague patriarchy---promise to improve society concretely for future generations. They are diversions.” (Pg. 252)
Denfeld identifies some problems with the ‘mainstream’ feminist movement that may contribute to its lack of appeal to some women. But much of her critiques are themselves expressed in rather ‘extreme’ language, which greatly lessens the impact of her book.
February 11, 2008
A brilliant lambasting of the excesses of 90's-style "difference" feminism from a refreshingly liberal point of view. Denfeld suggests that the failure to pass the Equal Rights Amendment in 1982 began a process that eventually led some feminists down a path of excess, and others out of the movement (and this largely left feminism to the extremists). Denfeld's main point is a compelling comparison between these radical feminists, (with their moral crusades against men, sex, and pornography, and their politicization of lesbianism and goddess worship), and the Victorians of the 19th Century.
A brave, gutsy (some would say nervy) little book.
A brave, gutsy (some would say nervy) little book.
August 30, 2011
A bit outdated (written in 1995, of course it would be), but informative and still somewhat relevant. I know even now that "feminism" is still a bit of a dirty word, and the sentiment about it is ignorant- "women have rights now, feminism isn't necessary." When women still make less than men for equal work, rape is still prevalent (and even made into a joke), and abortion remains a hot-button issue rather than being seen as a medical right (not to mention a personal choice), feminism is definitely still necessary- and I mean legitimate feminism that strives for equality, not "women are better" drivel.
April 7, 2022
Well-written early manifesto (1996) on the dangers of anti-sex hysteria on American college campuses.
July 2, 2016
I picked this up in '97 and despite my many book purges over the years, always kept it around. Back then I was turned off by women's studies classes and the misandrist/anti-phallic focus of feminism, and as a straight woman I felt unwelcome. I wanted something different from feminism and I saw no place for myself.
There's a lot I loved about this book, especially the window into the feminism of when I was first moving out on my own. I rejected calling myself a feminist for so long, for all the reasons noted in this book, and it was comforting to realize that my memories of how it was were not exaggerated.
I can see that women like Denfeld were the driving force behind why I can now proudly call myself a feminist. The fight is for equality, it's more intersectional and inclusive. We're celebrating each other more. We're not demonizing sex and sexuality.
That said, I'm not on board with everything Denfeld said. Her trivialization of the patriarchy and rape culture made me uncomfortable, but this was also written 20 years ago. That was before the internet took over popular culture and social interaction. and in that way it really is from another time. But I liked that.
It was definitely a worthy read, and I'm sorry I didn't read it earlier. I'm looking forward to contrasting this to more contemporary feminist writers and thinkers.
There's a lot I loved about this book, especially the window into the feminism of when I was first moving out on my own. I rejected calling myself a feminist for so long, for all the reasons noted in this book, and it was comforting to realize that my memories of how it was were not exaggerated.
I can see that women like Denfeld were the driving force behind why I can now proudly call myself a feminist. The fight is for equality, it's more intersectional and inclusive. We're celebrating each other more. We're not demonizing sex and sexuality.
That said, I'm not on board with everything Denfeld said. Her trivialization of the patriarchy and rape culture made me uncomfortable, but this was also written 20 years ago. That was before the internet took over popular culture and social interaction. and in that way it really is from another time. But I liked that.
It was definitely a worthy read, and I'm sorry I didn't read it earlier. I'm looking forward to contrasting this to more contemporary feminist writers and thinkers.
August 27, 2020
I read this about eight years ago when I was a teenager and, although it was dated even then, it has many virtues and is well-written. Denfield supplies clear and thought-provoking analyses of both first and second-wave feminism. She succinctly explains and expands on the short-comings of certain feminist ideals, and isn't afraid to harshly critique certain writings from popular feminist authors such as Dworkin and Greer. Well worth the read even now, and it's a shame this book hasn't been as widely read as it deserves.
July 16, 2015
Интересно е да се прочете какво е представлявало феминисткото движение преди двайсетина години (когато е писана книгата) и да се направят сравненията със сега - как откачените луди идеи тогава, са станали общоприетите феминистки идеи сега и са база за активизма на феминистките движения. Хубавото е, че пък някои мейнстрийм луди идеи от тогава са отмрели почти без следа сега (матриархалните религии и спиритуализъм примерно).
September 29, 2013
Bits were actually decent, but whenever I got optimistic, Denfeld would quote something wildly out of context, distort and simplify or at the least argue with an inexistent opponent. That said, I think some of her critique could have been useful at the time of writing (even if now it seems quite obvious).
August 10, 2012
informative is somewhat dated
August 20, 2016
It was a little repetitive at the 2/3s mark, but otherwise very well written and researched.
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews