Really Confident Girl

The Fearless Girl is a powerful embodiment of the feminist movement. The young brave girl is a stark representation of the courage it takes to stand up for equal rights. However, the sole purpose of the girl was to serve as a counterpart to the Charging Bull, which is an "aggressive threat to women and girls - a symbol of patriarchal oppression”. If Di Modica really wanted to move his expensive masterpiece away from the attention-drawing girl, Fearless Girl would then become “really confident girl” as one author notices. But honestly, what’s wrong with that? Feminists have had to consistently prove themselves over and over throughout history. Wave after wave of feminists with slightly different agendas have had to take tiny yet monumental steps for women in order to be taken seriously. Now, in the 21st century, the role of feminism is already well established and very widespread. Feminists are making real change happen. So why do they feel the need to prove that they are brave enough over and over with symbols such as the Fearless Girl standing up to the Charging Bull? Are women only brave in the face of adversity? What about prospering times for feminists? The bull and the girl serve as perpetual reminders that women will always have challenges ahead of them, which doesn’t wholly serve their purpose. Why won’t a single powerful and confident young female suffice? I ask these questions not in defiance of the Fearless Girl, but rather suggesting a reasonable solution to keep all artists, feminists, and those interested pleased.