Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The emerging student development theory, The Feminist Identity Development Model
(FIDM), suggests a non-deficit based emphasis on identity. The Feminist Identity Development
Model (Downing & Roush, 1985) is comprised of a linear, five stage progression that supports the
idea of an individual adopting a positive feminist identity. The model is founded in a female
perspective and is based off of real life experiences of women in society that have faced
oppression and gender discrimination. Although this model provides a strong platform for the
development of a feminist identity, it contains flaws that must be addressed to align with current
feminism trends. The following discussion addresses the current Model of Feminist Identity
Development, provides context to explain why the theory must be altered, supporting literature
that indicates the flaws in the current theory, and proposes a new revised theory.
Downing and Roush introduced the Model of Feminist Identity Development in 1985 to
provide a feminist perspective on a woman’s identity development. Based off of Cross’s (1971)
Black Identity Development model (see Appendix A), the Model of Feminist Identity
Development (1985) provides a “heuristic value for the development of a model of positive
feminist identity” (Patton, Renn, Guido & Quaye, 2016, p. 271). The Feminist Identity
Development Model (1985) suggests that women progress through the model at different rates,
based on their surroundings and interactions with others. The linear progression of the five stages
of development eludes that individuals must begin their development at stage one, and are not
complete on their feminist journey until the final and fifth stage. Stage one, Passive Acceptance,
deems that women lack awareness of the structural and systematic ways in which women face
gender oppression and discrimination. Stage two, Revelation, is reached when an individual gains
FEMINIST THEORY PROPOSAL 3
consciousness of the injustice women face. Stage three, Embeddedness-emanation, suggests that
women in this stage “attempt to reconcile their deep desire for greater ‘gender consciousness’
while also negotiating their intricate connection to dominant culture through marriage,
motherhood, and career” (Patton et al., 2016, p. 272). Stage four, Synthesis, is reached by women
who positively view being a woman and begin to value the qualities that make them unique.
Finally, stage five, Active Commitment, suggests that women adopt a solid identity, which shapes
The millennial generation has transcended what it once was to be a feminist. Those that
identify as feminists today recognize and advocate for the “inequalities and inequities along the
intersectional lines of ability, class, gender, race, sex, and sexuality, and seek to effect change in
areas where these intersectional ties create power inequity” (Day, 2016, p. 2). Although the
emerging feminist theory was created in 1985, technically after the beginning of the millennial
generation, current statistics show that over 63% of self-identified feminists are of millennial age,
between the ages of 18 and 34 (Cai & Clement, 2016). With the majority of current feminists
being a part of the millennial generation, there is a shift beginning to take place in what it means
Men and women alike are self-proclaimed feminists, which contradicts the theory’s heavy
Washington Post and Kaiser Family Foundation finds six in ten women and one-third of men call
themselves a feminist or strong feminist, with roughly seven in ten of each saying the movement is
empowering” (Cai & Clement, 2016, p. 1). Being that the younger generation is reclaiming the
term feminist, the emerging Feminist Identity Development Model (1985) should be altered to
FEMINIST THEORY PROPOSAL 4
express that the model exists as a developmental journey an individual goes through to adopt a
feminist identity.
To begin the process of altering the Feminist Identity Development Model (1985), the
language associated with the theory must become inclusive of all genders. Downing and Roush
took an approach to the emerging theory that suggested blaming men for women’s inequality is a
part of the linear progression one undergoes before becoming a feminist. Stage 1, Passive
Acceptance, states that women in this stage embrace the idea that males are superior, and are
content with their roles as a women remaining traditional through time. Stage 2, Revelation, notes
that women in this stage adopt a dualistic perspective upon experiencing a conflict, where, as a
result, they place women on a pedestal and begin to view men negatively. Women entering stage
3, Embeddedness- Emanation, begin once again interacting with men, but exhibit apprehension
when doing so. Stage 4, Synthesis, states that women in this stage begin to formulate their own
opinions about men that are not grounded in research (Patton et. al., 2016, p. 271-273).
Presumably, individuals today can identify as feminists without necessarily moving through these
prescribed stages.
Research indicates that social movements shift overtime and as does the salience of
individuals’ identities. Females specifically identify as feminists often when an event occurs that
propels them into exploring their identity and the importance of being a female (Erchull, Liss,
Wilson, Bateman, Peterson & Sanchez, 2009). Often, the relevance of identities is time and
context bound and is heavily influenced by the societal and political climate. With these social
considerations in mind, the article, ‘The Feminist Identity Development Model: Relevant for
FEMINIST THEORY PROPOSAL 5
Young Women Today’ (Erchull, Liss, Wilson et al, 2009), addressed the practical application of
the 1985 model to women in the new millennium. After conducting a study of two- hundred
women who varied in their feminist identities, the literature supported the need for an alteration to
This analysis provides some support for the Downing and Roush model. “Revelation,
identified feminists, a finding that is consistent with previous research” (Erchull et al. 2009, p.
840). Research shows that age aligns with the stages females move through as they navigate the
model. This is consistent with the Downing and Roush model suggesting that, as women age, they
move from experiencing anger to focusing on activism (Moradi, Subich & Phillips, 2002).
Paradoxically, the lack of difference between feminists and non-feminists on the synthesis stage
supports the problematic nature of the stages in the current model (Liss, Crawford & Popp, 2004).
“Although Downing and Roush conceptualized this as being the penultimate stage of developing a
feminist identity, it appears that many women endorse items about being strong, independent, and
integrating their identity as a woman with their identity as a person without necessarily holding a
version of Downing and Roush’s Feminist Identity Development Model (1985), based off of
Cross’s Black Identity Development Model (1971). The model has been revised to reflect an
advocates for “equality and equity based on gender, gender expression, gender identity, sex, and
sexuality as understood through social theories and political activism” (Day, 2016, p. 1).
FEMINIST THEORY PROPOSAL 6
Individuals identifying as feminists may be members of any race, ethnicity, sex, gender, national
origin, or religion. The following revised model reflects the developmental process feminist
individuals undergo.
Phase 1, Pre-encounter. In this phase, individuals lack awareness of social and systematic
being unaware of the inequality and inequities women face. Possibly because the individual has
not yet encountered a crisis moment, or for lack of exposure, the individual is comfortable living
Phase 2, Revelation. In this phase, individuals experience a crisis that begins to inform
their sense of awareness about the inequality of women. The revelation phase effects individuals’
outlook on society, and leaves the individual feeling, emotional, confused, angry, and guilty. This
Phase 3, Immersion. This phase allows for individuals to surround themselves with
information and other people to build their knowledge about sexism and feminism. Individuals in
this stage begin forming their own perceptions, based off of their interactions with others and own
understanding. Individuals begin to transition into a new mindset and perspective that is fixated on
equality and equity for women. For men, this phase could result in male privilege guilt.
Phase 4, Synthesis. Individuals in this phase become comfortable in their feminist beliefs,
and are proud to identify as feminists. This phase represents the solidification of an individual’s
perception of society, and leads to greater self-awareness. Women in this stage are firm in their
beliefs of equality and equity for all, while being comfortable with themselves as women. Men in
this stage abandon male privilege guilt by becoming aware of how to use their privilege to
Phase 5, Commitment to Beliefs. This phase represents individuals’ transition into activism
of their beliefs. They practice commitment to educating others, furthering their personal
knowledge, and advocating for women’s equal and equitable rights. Individuals in phase 5 seek to
recruit others to advocate and continue challenging the system alongside them.
Aside from the revision of Downing and Roush’s Feminist Identity Development Model
(1985) to reflect inclusion, the new model also reflects fluidity. By changing the “stages” to
“phases,” the model represents the flexibility one may adopt in relation to their feminist identity.
The new model reflects the real transitions an individual may go through in their lives by allowing
the progression from one phase to another, or between phases multiple times before solidifying
their feminist identity. As previously stated, environment heavily influences one’s feminist
journey, and the new, fluid model reflects that (see figure 1.1).
Figure 1.1
Phase 1, Pre-encounter Phase 2, Revelation Phase 3, Immersion Phase 4, Synthesis Phase 5, Commitment
to Beliefs
Conclusion
As times change, so must society’s way of thinking. By adapting Downing and Roush’s
model to reflect current feminism in the United States, I believe I have refreshed an intentional
FEMINIST THEORY PROPOSAL 8
and purposeful student development model. As a future student affairs practitioner, I believe it is
important to note that while the Millennial Female Identity Development Model (2017) provides
an updated platform for feminists’ identity development, each individual will progress differently.
It is important to realized that like feminism and identities, each individual will form their own
perceptions differently throughout their lifetime, and those perceptions and identities have the
References
Cai, W., Clement, S. (2016). What Americans think about feminism today. The Washington Post.
Cross, W. E., Jr. (1971). Toward a psychology of Black liberation: The Negro-to-Black
Day, L. (2016). What Is Feminism?. Women & Gender Studies at Eastern Kentucky University.
Downing, N. E., & Roush, K. L. (1985). From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model
Erchull, M., Liss, M., Wilson, K., Bateman, L., Peterson, A., & Sanchez, C. (2009). The feminist
identity development model: Relevant for young women today?. Sex Roles, 60(11-12),
Liss, M., Crawford, M., & Popp, D. (2004). Predictors and correlates of collective action. Sex
Maniam, S., Smith, S. (2017). A wider partisan and ideological gap between younger, older
tank/2017/03/20/a-wider-partisan-and-ideological-gap-between-younger-older-generations/
Moradi, B., Subich, L. M., & Phillips, J. C. (2002). Revisiting feminist identity development
Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., & Quaye, S. J. (2016). Student development in college:
Appendix A