How Feminism Became Marketing: The Commodification of a Movement

By Dr. Wil Rodríguez, TOCSIN Magazine

A T-Shirt in the Window

On a bright Saturday morning in a bustling city mall, a group of young women stop in front of a window display. Hanging on the mannequin is a sleek T-shirt stamped with bold letters: “The Future is Female.” The price tag reads $49.99. Inside, racks of similar “empowerment merchandise” are neatly folded, sold by one of the world’s largest fast-fashion corporations.

Outside the same store, across oceans, women in Bangladesh or Cambodia labor in factories, sewing these very shirts under exploitative conditions, earning less than a living wage. The irony is impossible to ignore: feminism, once a radical movement of resistance, has been absorbed into the very economic structures it once sought to dismantle.

From Movement to Marketplace

Feminism began as a demand for justice: the right to vote, to work, to be safe, to live free from violence, to be recognized as equals. Its fire came from collective struggle, not individual branding. Yet by the late 20th century, corporations discovered that feminism could be more than a political threat—it could be a profitable brand.

What followed was a transformation: slogans once painted on protest banners migrated to coffee mugs, cosmetics campaigns, and Super Bowl ads. The rallying cry of “the personal is political” was reframed as “the personal is consumer choice.”

As feminist scholar Nancy Fraser has argued, the radical critique of patriarchy was gradually “co-opted by neoliberalism,” turning calls for justice into mantras of personal empowerment that neatly aligned with market ideology.

Case Studies in “Market Feminism”

The commodification of feminism is most visible in the advertising industry, where corporations use feminist aesthetics while avoiding structural commitments.

• Dove’s “Real Beauty” Campaign (2004): Celebrated “all women” and diverse body types, while its parent company, Unilever, simultaneously profited from skin-lightening creams in Asia.

• Nike’s “Dream Crazier” (2019): Featured Serena Williams narrating a message of female empowerment—yet investigative reports revealed exploitative working conditions for women in Nike’s overseas factories.

• Pepsi’s Kendall Jenner Protest Ad (2017): Commercialized the imagery of social movements, trivializing protest culture by suggesting that handing a soda could resolve systemic injustice.

• Barbie’s Reinvention (2010s–2020s): Marketed as a feminist icon after decades of perpetuating impossible body standards, the doll now comes with a career wardrobe—yet the company profits from both “empowerment dolls” and princess fantasies.

Each case demonstrates a similar pattern: the radical becomes aesthetic, the collective becomes individual, and feminism is transformed into a “brand strategy.”

Academic Perspectives on Popular Feminism

Cultural critic Sarah Banet-Weiser calls this phenomenon “popular feminism”—the way feminist ideas circulate in mainstream culture, stripped of their radical edges and sold back as consumer identity. In her book Empowered: Popular Feminism and Popular Misogyny (2018), she notes that empowerment is now marketed as a lifestyle choice, achievable through consumption rather than political engagement.

Angela McRobbie, in The Aftermath of Feminism (2009), speaks of a “postfeminist masquerade,” where the language of liberation masks continued structural oppression. Women are told they are already empowered, provided they look, dress, and buy accordingly.

This critical lens reveals how feminism has been reframed not as collective action but as “confidence culture,” where empowerment is synonymous with self-improvement—and conveniently, self-purchasing.

Feminism in the Digital Age: Hashtags for Sale

The commodification of feminism accelerated in the digital era. Platforms like Instagram and TikTok are saturated with influencers selling “empowerment aesthetics” alongside sponsored products. Hashtags such as #GirlBoss, #SheEO, and #Empowerment blur the lines between activism and advertising.

Brands now build entire campaigns around feminist hashtags, using the language of solidarity to boost visibility while carefully avoiding controversial issues like reproductive rights, gender-based violence, or wage equity. Online feminism becomes not a call for justice, but a curated lifestyle—color-coded, monetized, and easily consumed.

The Intersections Left Behind

Market feminism is not just shallow; it is exclusionary. The glossy image of empowerment typically centers middle-class white women in the Global North, leaving behind the realities of migrant workers, women of color, queer communities, and those in precarious labor conditions.

A $50 empowerment T-shirt marketed to Western consumers often erases the exploited women who made it. This echoes bell hooks’ warning: “Feminism is for everybody”—but only if it refuses to exclude or commodify the most vulnerable.

True feminism must be intersectional, acknowledging that liberation is not universal until it is collective. Market feminism, however, thrives by ignoring these complexities.

The Price of Commodification

The consequences of reducing feminism to marketing are profound:

• Hollowed Politics: Brands sell empowerment without addressing systemic inequality.

• Activism as Aesthetic: Marches become Instagrammable backdrops; slogans become merchandise.

• Neutralized Radicalism: Corporate feminism pacifies movements by absorbing their language while leaving power structures intact.

As Nancy Fraser warns, the neoliberal turn transformed feminism from a movement of structural resistance into one that often “legitimates” the very inequalities it sought to dismantle.

Toward a Reclaiming of Feminism

Yet, this is not the end of feminism—it is a challenge to return to its roots. To reclaim the radical spirit of the movement, several steps are necessary:

1. Hold Brands Accountable: Demand transparency in supply chains, labor practices, and gender equality within corporations that use feminist slogans.

2. Reinvest in Collective Action: Move beyond consumer choices toward policy change, grassroots organizing, and solidarity networks.

3. Center the Marginalized: Elevate voices of women most affected by inequality—migrant workers, women of color, LGBTQ+ communities—rather than erasing them.

4. Recognize the Difference Between Branding and Belief: Feminism is not found in a slogan on a mug, but in the lived fight for justice.

Conclusion: Beyond the Hashtag

The commodification of feminism shows us both the resilience and vulnerability of social movements. Resilience, because its language was powerful enough to be co-opted. Vulnerability, because once absorbed into the marketplace, its radical demands can be neutralized.

But history is not fixed. Feminism does not belong to brands; it belongs to people. It is not a product, but a practice. It is not a marketing strategy, but a movement.

As Audre Lorde wrote, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” In the same way, empowerment sold by corporations will never liberate. True liberation requires collective struggle, not consumer loyalty.

Reflection Box

Feminism was never meant to be for sale. Its commodification is a reminder of how easily revolutionary movements can be neutralized by the market. But it is also a wake-up call—to rebuild feminism as a force for systemic justice, not aesthetic consumption.

👉 Join the dialogue at TOCSIN Magazine — tocsinmag.com