The perception of feminism changes as representatives of the movement change their goals and ideals. Originally, feminism predominately fought for women's rights in terms of social equality and suffrage. In Western countries, women now have a political voice, so issues concerning women's rights continually shifts as the movement makes accomplishments. As the movement constantly changes, the ideas surrounding the movement become multifaceted. Improved communication through technology causes the spread and perpetual creation of new ideas to change the face of feminism. Originally feminism began as a respectable movement, but in present times it has become misrepresented. Feminism is losing core foundations through the negative identity of "a diverse and dynamic movement." Feminism initially started to simply fight for women's rights where women lacked rights. Now, neo-liberal feminist fight to change the identification of what a woman is and should do, thus changing the face of feminism. This transformation has lead to questions of whether feminism should include these new ideas and be defined by them. Western countries still have a gender gap in employment causing an economic gap as well. In her article Feminism, interrupted?, Sydney Calkin of the University of Durham concludes that feminism's inclusion of neoliberal ideas causes a falsification leading to challenges for feminists advocating for the intersection of gender and economic rights. Calkin achieves making this argument with using the rhetoric tool logos.  Through logos, Sydney Calkin enhances her argument through providing historical support, using modern day examples, and deductive reasoning.

Calkin utilizes historical support to show the transition of feminist's ideas and the impact on the movement. In this article, Calkin sets up her argument to exemplify the change from a unified movement to multifaceted and intricate in theory. Within the first paragraph of the article, she indicates a shift in the history of feminism by stating "women and girls are now the preeminent public faces of global development." Selection of this wording shows the importance in showing the before and after for the movement. Women are now at a point where basic rights are given, however, economically there is distinction between men and women. Furthermore, the economic gap gives women a lot of weight in global development because half of the population may not be used to the fullest capacity. Continuing in the introduction, logos gives reasoning why this article is "particularly relevant" for modern day readers to encapsulate the reader. By making this statement, she implies the importance in history building up to this point of debate, "the current moment by a post-global financial crisis dialogue." Logos strengthens the argument by showing the flaws through the years to bring economic loss. Calkin shows the transition in influential feminist organizations Women in Development (WID) and Gender in Development (GAD). Women first began to advocate on the development agenda in the mid-1970s through WID. Advocates for WID saw a need to integrate women into development policy frameworks to enhance productivity from increased participation. GAD formed from those against WID, "mostly of socialist and Third World feminists" because of WID's capitalist centered arguments. Through the formation of these two organization, two feminist's approaches formed. Thus, WID became more liberal from Western influences and GAD became traditional from advocating for basic women right's. Logos shows how history caused a divide leading to the deductive reasoning that today the divide roots from the divide of WID and GAD. Furthermore, Calkin provides the impact of the divide on policy. In response, policy simply focused on only helping women from a lower socio-economic background out of fear to get in-between the two ideas. Through historical reference, logos proves how modern-day feminism is directly influenced by the historical divide.

Modern-day companies' efforts also help the reader to relate to the logos. Calkin mentions "the Nike Foundation's partnership with the World Bank (the Adolescent Girl Initiative), the UN Women partnership with Coca Cola (the 5by20 Strategic Partnership), [and] the United Nations Foundation's partnership with Exxon Mobile (the Roadmap for Women's Empowerment)." The article primarily focuses on Nike's efforts to empower women. By using a modern-day company, readers first identify with the name then follow the logos from the relatability. In 2008, the Nike Foundation started the Girl Effect campaign. The goal of the campaign is to "'make the case for girls' and raise awareness among the public that investment in girls can 'stop poverty before it starts'." Furthermore, public figures like Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Michele Bachelet, and Sheryl Sandberg, all support the campaign giving the campaign strength from the association with big names. Through mention of the big names, not only does Calkin provide logos, she also utilizes ethos, credibility. The logos in this argument is that the organization was successful because of the support from successful women. This could also be seen as the conclusion as a result of deductive reasoning. Through discussing Girl Effect, Calkin shows the impact of taking a "stand for a set of powerful and politically resonant discourses about the dividends of investing in girls and the power of girls to become development." Because of modern-day companies, Calkin proves empowering women in corporations only leads to development, and does not necessarily have to follow neoliberal ideals.

Lastly, underlying deductive reasoning solidifies the argument to prove the need for women empowerment in economics. As previously stated, Calkin uses the company Nike to show the impact of female empowerment. This article begins by addressing the counterargument that companies do not wanting to deal with creating new gender policies because of the neoliberal ideas entering feminism's scene. Nike established the Girl Effect campaign fights for girls to decrease the likelihood of girls falling under poverty. This supports the claim that female empowerment benefits women. This statement is also the major premise of the deductive reasoning. The minor premise is companies play a role in female empowerment. Leading to the conclusion that female empowerment needs companies to play a role. The logos of this argument strengthens the article by proving companies are not radical neoliberals by empowering women. 

As time proceeds, society rapidly embodies changing ideas from the instant communication from modern technology. Likewise, feminism feels the heat of changing ideas causing dispute on how far changing ideas embody the foundation of the movement. In Feminism, interrupted?, Sydney Calkin proves neoliberal ideas should not be association with feminism because it creates a negative perception. Calkin predominantly makes this argument with logos.  Historical support, modern day examples, and deductive reasoning enhances her argument to successfully prove the power of female empowerment in companies.

