Home/ Culture/ The Rise and Fall of the Girlboss

The Rise and Fall of the Girlboss

A word that started as one woman's scrappy origin story got absorbed by venture capital, millennial pink, and a version of feminism that was built to collapse.

Updated April 5, 2026

In 2014, the word “girlboss” entered the vocabulary and, for a moment, it felt radical: a woman who was ambitious and unapologetic about it, who didn’t need permission or polish, who built something real from nothing at all. The word came from Sophia Amoruso’s memoir #GIRLBOSS, which sold over 500,000 copies and carried a simple promise: women can be ambitious, unapologetic, and in charge of their own thing.

By 2023, the same word had become a punchline. “Gaslight, Gatekeep, Girlboss,” a Tumblr parody of “Live, Laugh, Love,” racked up 43,500 notes in a month, and TikTok’s “lazy girl jobs” trend, coined by Gabrielle Judge in May 2023, accumulated 47 million views as an explicit rejection of everything the girlboss had stood for. Amoruso herself told Elle in 2024 that she would “prefer never to utter the word girlboss again.”

What happened between the book and the backlash is a story about a version of feminism that was built to collapse.

A word that outgrew its author

What makes the girlboss story strange is where it actually started. Amoruso was dumpster diving, shoplifting books to resell, hitchhiking the West Coast, and couch surfing through her late teens, and she only took a security guard job at the Academy of Art University in San Francisco because it came with health insurance she needed for hernia surgery. In 2006, she started an eBay store called Nasty Gal Vintage, styling thrift-store clothes, photographing them on herself, and shipping every order from her bedroom, and revenue hit $223,000 in 2008, $23 million by 2011, and over $100 million by 2012.

She wrote a memoir about that specific experience, and the culture received a manifesto.

By 2016, “girlboss” had detached from thrift-store hustling and become shorthand for any woman building anything, which meant it quickly became shorthand for a very specific kind of woman building a very specific kind of thing. The Girlboss Rally in 2017 drew hundreds of women to Los Angeles for panels and Instagrammable moments, and by 2018 the New York edition featured tattoo stations, tarot readings, branded merchandise, and 1,100 attendees paying to be in the room.

The Wing, a women’s co-working space charging $185 to $250 per month, opened with $117.5 million in venture capital and a $365 million valuation. The aesthetic crystallized into millennial pink, “boss babe” mugs, and motivational tote bags, and multi-level marketing companies co-opted the language so aggressively that “girlboss” started showing up in recruitment pitches for legging schemes. None of this had anything to do with a woman buying vintage clothes with no money and figuring it out, because the word had become a brand, and the brand attracted people with access, safety nets, and existing platforms who repackaged their advantages as rebellion.

Why girlboss became a joke

The backlash hit from three directions at once in 2020.

The first was hypocrisy, because the companies that had built their identities around women supporting women turned out to be failing the women who worked for them. At The Wing, 26 employees cited low pay, mistreatment of Black staff, and casual racism from members, staging a digital walkout that ended with CEO Audrey Gelman’s resignation on June 11, 2020. At Away, a Verge investigation had already exposed CEO Steph Korey publicly shaming employees on Slack, calling one “brain dead” and sending 3 AM messages about “the career skill of accountability.”

At Outdoor Voices, founder Ty Haney had her CEO title stripped while on maternity leave after burning through $64 million in venture funding at roughly $2 million per month, and she resigned via a 9:14 AM Slack message. The pattern was the same across all of them: brands that sold feminist empowerment externally while running workplace cultures that contradicted every word of it.

The second was race. The 2020 reckoning, inseparable from the George Floyd protests, exposed that the girlboss movement was overwhelmingly white, wealthy, and coastal. Former Wing employees described being “the only Black women in the room” at events, and at Refinery29, co-founder Christene Barberich stepped down after employees described a culture where “white women’s egos ruled” and Black women were underpaid by as much as $15,000 compared to white coworkers in the same role. Women of color had been building businesses without safety nets, venture capital, or Forbes profiles for decades, and watching a word that described their reality long before 2014 get repackaged as a white woman’s lifestyle brand was its own kind of insult.

The third was exhaustion, because the girlboss had turned ambition into a personality you performed around the clock: the 5 AM routines, the “building my empire” captions, the implication that rest meant failure. After the pandemic crushed working women hardest, with 2.3 million women leaving the US workforce in the first year of COVID alone, the last thing anyone wanted was another framework demanding they do more. Gabrielle Judge knew “lazy girl jobs” had negative connotations when she posted the term on TikTok, and she used it anyway, because the provocation was the point. “It’s a rejection of hustle culture,” she said. “It’s a rejection of the toxic corporate feminism.”

It had no endgame

The girlboss told women to build empires without ever defining what success looked like beyond getting bigger. There was no version of the narrative that celebrated a woman who built a small, profitable business that gave her freedom and called it done, because the only story the culture wanted was the hockey stick: more revenue, more funding, more scale. The girlboss inherited Silicon Valley’s growth-at-all-costs framework and painted it pink, which meant the women who chased scale burned out or blew up, and the women who built something sustainable were invisible because their story didn’t make for a good conference keynote.

Even Amoruso’s own trajectory shows this pattern. When Urban Outfitters reportedly offered over $400 million for Nasty Gal, her investors had “underwritten a minimum billion-dollar exit” and pushed her to hold, so she turned it down. Two years later, Nasty Gal filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and sold to Boohoo for approximately $20 million, brand and IP only, a 95% destruction of value driven by the same grow-or-die logic that the narrative never questioned.

The movement also competed with motherhood instead of including it. The girlboss aesthetic was aggressively childless, or at least child-invisible, built on travel, laptops, wine, and hustle, and women with kids didn’t see themselves in it while women without kids felt pressure to choose. It never figured out how to talk about ambition alongside caregiving, which excluded most women over 35 and the majority of women who most needed the economic agency it claimed to offer.

The girlboss was also individual feminism at its core: “be a boss” instead of “change why most women can’t be.” It never challenged the fact that female-only founding teams received just 2.3% of all venture capital funding in 2024, or that childcare infrastructure in the US remains functionally broken, or that the systems keeping most women out of business ownership have nothing to do with ambition and everything to do with access. It put the burden on individual women to perform their way out of systemic problems, and when those women hit the same walls, the narrative framed it as personal failure rather than predictable outcome.

The word survived. The movement didn’t.

“Girlboss” made it into the Merriam-Webster dictionary, where it lives on as a meme, a punchline, and a shorthand for a particular kind of 2010s feminism that people have complicated feelings about. Amoruso has been open about how strange the whole thing became. “It’s strange to have created something that is entirely out of your control,” she wrote. “Maybe even stranger when that thing has now come to mean the exact opposite of the message you set out to deliver.”

What women rebelled against was never ambition itself, but ambition being sold back to them as a brand identity that blamed them when it didn’t work out. The girlboss promised that individual women could perform their way past systemic barriers, and when that turned out not to be true, the narrative had no one to blame except the women who believed it.

What you can learn

A word you create will mean what other people decide it means. Amoruso coined “girlboss” to describe her specific, scrappy path, and within three years it described something she didn’t recognize. If your brand or message gains traction, the meaning will evolve beyond your control, and the further it drifts from the original, the harder it is to course-correct.

Growth is not the only measure of success. The girlboss narrative had no room for women who bootstrapped a profitable business and stopped scaling, which is a flaw in the narrative, not in those women. Defining your own endgame, before investors, customers, or culture does it for you, is the most underrated decision a founder can make.

Representation without systemic change is decoration. Women-owned branding, feminist co-working spaces, and “boss babe” merchandise didn’t move the needle on the 2.3% venture capital funding rate or the childcare crisis. Visibility matters, but when it substitutes for the harder work of changing systems, it eventually collapses under the weight of its own promises.

Frequently asked questions

What does “girlboss” actually mean?

The term was coined by Sophia Amoruso in her 2014 memoir #GIRLBOSS to describe a woman who takes control of her life and builds something of her own, and it was later added to the Merriam-Webster dictionary. It broadly came to describe ambitious, entrepreneurial women, though by the early 2020s it had become associated with performative feminism and hustle culture.

Why did women turn against the girlboss?

Three reasons converged in 2020: prominent girlboss-branded companies were exposed for toxic workplace cultures, the racial justice reckoning revealed the movement was overwhelmingly white and exclusionary, and pandemic-era burnout made the relentless ambition narrative feel suffocating rather than empowering.

What replaced the girlboss?

The cultural pendulum swung toward anti-ambition content, including TikTok’s “lazy girl jobs” trend (47 million views), “quiet quitting,” and a broader rejection of work-as-identity. Whether this is a correction or an overcorrection depends on who you ask.

Sources

See Also

Related entries

Venture Capital

Valuation

Bootstrapping