Bad Feminism

“Pop-feminism,” as a movement, valorises feelings above reason, cynicism above hope. It has regressed to a point where anything at all, no matter how irrational or how narcissistic, can be celebrated as ‘feminist’. Articles such as: I Look Down On Young Women With Husbands And Kids And I’m Not Sorryor How Accepting Leggings as Pants Made Me a Better Feminist are shared wide and far on social media as feminist political statements.

Anyone can identify as a “feminist”. Even men who openly admit to domestic violence, such as Hugo Schwyzer. There are no boundaries, no benchmarks and no standards to which feminism will hold itself accountable.

It was not meant to be like this. In 1792, Mary Wollstonecraft published The Vindication of the Rights of Women. Her basic hypothesis was that women are capable of reason; just as men are. Yet because women are denied a rigorous education, this capability is rarely expressed.

Wollstonecraft’s achievement was to extend Enlightenment principles to women. Women were rational. Women were not innately ignorant, or naive, but socialised to be that way because their educations were neglected. She wrote that the more educated women became, the better off society would be.

Yet, despite the gains women have made in public life, the model of female empowerment held up by the media, today, is pop-feminism. In magazines and online news-sites, feminism and fashion intermingle. Humanities graduates, who specialize in snark, but not much else, now claim to speak on all women’s behalf.

In 1797, Thomas Gisborne wrote An Enquiry into the Duties of the Female SexStating the case for women to be confined to the home, he argued: The science of legislation, of jurisprudence, of political economy; the conduct of government in all its executive functions; the abstruse researches of erudition … the knowledge indispensable in the wide field of commercial enterprise … these, and other studies, pursuits and occupations, assigned chiefly or entirely to men, demand the efforts of a mind endued with the powers of close and comprehensive reasoning, and of intense and continued application. [emphasis mine].

Fast forward to 2014, and in the pages of ‘proudly female biased’ online news-sites, beauty is showcased over technology and business. Instead of evidence-based feminism, we get anecdote and science denialism.

In December last year, pop-feminist Amanda Marcotte, wrote a piece titled Are Men Hard-Wired to Show Off Around Women? written in response to a Wall Street Journal article about the Cheerleader Effect (the tendency of men to modify their behaviour in the presence of women). Typical of a pop-feminist anti-science piece, Marcotte provides zero links to any of the studies discussed.

Like most pop-feminists, she builds a murky picture of a body of “studies” with dubious outcomes and a sinister premise. We never found out the titles of the studies, authors, or journals from which they are sourced. She writes, “no doubt the data is accurate, but it does not follow that it’s necessarily hard-wired.

After a quick perusal of the studies (some of which can be found here, here and here) I found that the term “hard-wired” is absent from all of them; as one would expect. Psychologists tend not to talk about the brain’s wiring; that’s what neuroscientists do. Psychologists look at function. Neuroscientists look at structure. Despite this ignorance, Marcotte has the gall to “debunk” an entire body of scientific work. Work, it seems, she may not have even read. Work, she has also hidden from the reader.

Almost every time a pop-feminist critiques science or a scientific study, their argument is built on a strawman. In general, pop-feminists misrepresent published scientific work without providing links to primary sources. Pop-feminist articles (found here and here) are generally put-together wholly from second-hand material – stories about studies – not the studies themselves. Not only is this bad feminist critique; it is bad journalism.

It is ironic that in 2014, the women who confirm Thomas Gisborne’s eighteenth century sentiments are feminists who enjoy the most media privilege. (Academics in gender tucked away in universities all over the world, have used close application to develop nuanced ideas). Pop-feminists have not.

And it is sad that we have reached a point where to criticise anything labelled as “feminist” is to invite a slur on one’s character. Slurs of  “sexism” are ubiquitous. Any disagreement – no matter how sensible – is “trolling,” “abuse” a “backlash” or a “silencing”. Women like me, who simply call for feminism to rediscover Enlightenment principles, are labelled “female misogynists” on Twitter. But the slurs really must stop. Writers who wear their ignorance as a badge of honour are not models of empowerment. News outlets should not have to disrespect women’s intelligence to make their platforms viable.

Women should be respected for the originality of their thought – regardless of their conformity to media-sanctioned ideologies. And the feminist label should not protect ill-conceived ideas with impunity.

Mary-Wollstonecraft-002

115 Comments

  1. Dan Schmidt (@codeswish)

    You should start a youtube channel reading your articles into a camera like GrilWritesWhat. You would be very popular. Anyways, I agree with everything you’ve written and I look forward to reading some more of your blog.

  2. Nathan

    Since when do pop-feminists get close enough to science to misrepresent it? There’s no need – they know what’s sexist and what’s not, so the facts are already known to them. Most claims contradict existing studies and/or can’t be traced to any study since the references are dead links or just point to each others’ tumblr. Even anti-vaxxers and anti-climate nuts are better than them.

  3. florenciadisarli

    Thank you for this article. Feminism has been overrun with ridiculous values (or lack thereof) and squabbles over battles that don’t matter. A rebranding is in order, and soon.

  4. Mathew Toll

    I really enjoyed this article. I’ve been thinking about how important thinking like this is. I’m most convinced by feminist theory when it intelligently engages with criticism and shows empirically why it is a better account or a more equitable and just position. Often I read rebukes of criticism that reduce it to some kind of phobia to reject it without really engaging with the substance of the claims, or because of the social position of the person speaking invalidates their arguments ahead of time.

    If the discussion isn’t carried out according to the best social science, the most well founded and reasoned arguments, if it’s just a matter of an emotion or repeated mantra it just loses a lot of its power.

  5. OutmannedMommy

    I couldn’t agree more! I just wrote my own piece in response to a terrible article in the Huffington Post where the author makes these same mistakes: not reading the sources she cites, making completely unsubstantiated claims, and general sweeping statements that she has no evidence to support. What has happened to science these days when this type of writing gets published?!? Thank you for saying something about it. Here is my post if you’re interested: http://outmannedmommy.com/2014/03/10/children-and-technology-the-beginning-or-the-end/

  6. Rii the Wordsmith

    Thank you. So much. This is exactly my feelings on it, and why I avoid the term ‘feminism’ or ‘feminist’ like I would something unpleasant in the gutter…a wonderful and awesome movement – awesome in the original aspect of the word – has turned in many respects to something distasteful and more a platform for attack on women rather than uplifting them, which was only along the lines of its original purpose…
    Thank you, again, for this article.

  7. nativejedi

    It is sad that today’s media, which was supposed to make us more connected and better educated has actually contributed to a dumbing down of all, not just women. Today, everyone with a Twitter account, Facebook page, or blog is an “expert.” And when everyone is an expert, no one is, because the lay population cannot tell the difference between the ignorant and the educated. Thank you for being one of the educated voices.

  8. Droppin' Knowledge

    Today’s feminism is an absolute joke. Many of my blog posts dig in deeper to this shared sentiment that many amongst us have. It’d doing more harm then good, and at best is just a complete waste of time. It’s become an industry….just think about it. Clothing lines, companies, universities, degrees, websites and media, movies, books….feminism is just corporate america taking advantage of over privileged women with too much time on their hands and too much money to spend.

  9. balaam

    There are so many women self identifying as feminists saying contradictory things that feminism as a single concept does not really exist any more.

    Perhaps you need a new name for it.

  10. The Childlike Author

    Boy am I glad someone has written an article about this, with links to examples and studies.
    I wrote a recent rant… er, post… for my blog which ran in a similar vein. This, however, is so much better for multiple reasons, one of them simply being that a woman (not a man like me) is the author.

  11. politicallywag

    Sadly, when feminists such as yourself argue that women should pursue equality through education and achievement, consistent with those 18th century feminist principles to which you refer, they are called “female misogynists” because they are perceived as seeing women to be morally superior to men. When pop-feminists, however, speak of sexual liberation and promote hedonism, they are seen as “liberated”.

  12. totallyrandomgoodadvice

    I really enjoyed your essay! You know, most of the “feminists” I’ve seen on television I doubt actually look at data in any form. It kind of bugs me the view of women in history. One of the reasons I can’t read classic novels (beside the fact I find a lot of them written in a very slow style) is the fact that a lot of the “intelligent” women are not clever, but instead speak a lot of gibberish. Not that there were a lot of “intelligent” women described before 1850. I’m also a little curious; How would you define feminism? Personally, I feel that it is encouraging the equality between men and women so I guess I believe in menism, too 😀 But a friend of my believes that women should rule the world.

  13. Spinning For Difficulty

    A great post, but you do not go far enough. While some of the issues raised by feminists are valid (albeit twisted to suit the feminist agenda) the feminist movement today is completely devoid of rational principles or coherent thinking.

    Feminism today is basically just a ‘mob’ seeking to manipulate society by playing the victim card over and over again. This is both insulting and ultimately disempowering for women and hugely destructive to society as a whole. The only winner is the state which can use feminism to justify growing even bigger and increasing its interference in our lives even more. Feminism today is basically socialism.

    “…And it is sad that we have reached a point where to criticise anything labelled as “feminist” is to invite a slur on one’s character….”

    Here is he problem…. because feminism today is based on claiming victim status in order to make demands of society, any rational criticism of feminism is depicted as an ‘patriarchal’ attack so feminists can claim even more victim cred, and make even more demands.

    To criticise the claims or arguments of a feminist is rather like going up to someone in the street and saying, “excuse me, do you know where the train station is?” …… only for them to immediately collapse onto the pavement and start screaming “Please, take my purse, just don’t hit me!”

    Trying to debate rationally with feminists is becoming literally IMPOSSIBLE for this reason.

    The painful (for feminists) truth of the matter is that throughout history what oppressed women AND men AND children AND animals into their respective roles was not men, it was a lack of technology and very harsh environments where starvation, disease and general misery was a reality for everyone. In such harsh environments men and women had to play to their biological strengths and (shock horror!) work as a team.

    It was better technology which ultimately has liberated men and women from their rigid gender roles. The rapid change did require a period of social adjustment, but in general men have welcomed women into traditionally male roles and vice versa.

    But – contrary to the reason and evidence – feminism is based on patriarchy theory which claims a totally different story where men deliberately and successfully oppressed women and in doing so created a society which benefitted men. These evil patriarchal men oppressed women by chaining them to the kitchen sink and insisting on keeping all the best jobs for themselves (building roads by hand, working down mines, fishing the seas in wooden boats, working in dangerous non-mechanised factories and ship yards, going off to fight in some bloody war etc).

    Patriarchy theory is so ludicrous when examined rationally …. and women’s decision to wait until the workplace became a comfortable, safe, largely indoor experience before demanding to join in is so obvious ……. and society today is so full of equality ….. that all feminists can really do now to maintain their claim of victim status is depict rational criticism of feminist theory as oppression.

    Unfortunately, feminism makes a great trojan horse for big government (who’s aim is to replace men and become the ultimate ‘patriarchal’ alpha male) and so don’t expect feminism to get any rational treatment in the government controlled media or education system/ academia.

    It’s largely up to bloggers and youtubers to bring rationality and empathy to the table.

    By depicting women as helpless victims with no agency who require special treatment from ‘big daddy’ government, feminism advocates and demands the very ‘patriarchy’ it claims to be fighting against.

    Feminism is a very harmful and destructive ideology, which has used the (extremely vague) slogan of ‘equality’ to recruit a huge army of well meaning women (and men) who know next to nothing about the movement they are actually supporting…
    Girl Writes What rant : for the “nice” feminists

  14. Blended Family Chaos

    It’s refreshing to read something that intelligently challenges this insanity that seems to be overtaking even reasonably educated women.
    As an RN, MSN, I was taught in my undergrad research courses to first look at who is doing the research, who is funding the research, and how to read, dissect, and analyze the research. I was also taught how to do an extensive literature review to identify gaps, flaws, or need for additional research.
    Most of what is being disseminated as fact is rhetoric with a very biased and divisive agenda.
    I hope that this is widely read and that both women and men remove their rose-colored glasses and actually start thinking again. Spit out this spoon fed jargon and think for goodness sake!!!
    Tamara

  15. Cherrie Zell

    It hadn’t occurred to me before reading your post and the comments … has feminism been put through the sieve of individualism, and as a result all think their individual viewpoint is as valid as? Perhaps it is not that women with academic careers think their cohort to be morally superior to men but that individualism’s appetite seeks to ensure that all are driven to shun any sense of group solidarity? If individualism wins, who wins?

  16. vcalliso

    I really enjoyed this piece, not least because it was articulately written. Your argument brings to light a different, oft ignored aspect of feminism. I had not considered how the representation of biased, uninformed works of “pop-feminism” (a term I wasn’t aware of) influenced my opinion of the movement as a whole. I’ll certainly be looking at mass media feminism with new eyes. It is always good to be reminded that even in the things you love (books, social movements, etc.) there can be flaws and fallacies. Thanks for the great article!

  17. Glen Speering

    Well written and sums up many of my grievances that I see frequently on my social media feeds. Outrage is not progression and patriarchy is not an excuse to make dubious self-sabotaging decisions.

  18. Kate Burton

    My favorite is when critics (even feminist critics!) write about women’s erotic poetry—how women nature poets are really describing genitalia—it’s shameful

  19. robinobishop

    Oddly they have a similar disfunction to the GOP, in that the size of their base disables their politics, only in opposing extremes. The extreme feminist intimately hug the LGBT groups, while GOP leadership express disdain for the Middle Class.

  20. Britt

    Oh, I like you very, very much. Beautifully written. I’ve been lashing out at “pop-feminism” for years, but didn’t have this perfect tag for it. Pop feminism encourages thoughtful, sensitive people to shy away from true feminism, which remains the belief that we are all equal and deserving of equal rights and privileges. Now I want you to weigh in on the Bossy debates!

  21. Faisal Arshad

    The ‘bad’ word is implied in the term feminism so long as it runs as a movement rather than a scientific theory. May be it is time to discard the term or the concept altogether.

  22. susanbjourney

    “The rapid change did require a period of social adjustment, but in general men have welcomed women into traditionally male roles and vice versa.”

    This is a ridiculously obvious falsehood. I don’t see how you can demand better scholarship from feminist women when you yourself feel comfortable posting a completely baseless claim supported by zero scholarship of any kind. As a woman of a certain age, I can testify from personal experience that between the CONSTANT and egregious acts of sexual harassment (constant verbal attacks using sexually explicit language witnessed by laughing/amused groups of males including foremen and supervisors), physical intimidation (pinching, arm grabbing, pushing), threats of physical and sexual violence (“someone needs to teach you girls a lesson” while grabbing and shaking his crotch, blocking exit from a freezer and saying “I think if you want out of here you should be NICE to me first” while unzipping pants, etc.) women my age can put paid to any nonsense about males “welcoming women into traditionally male roles”.

    In one personal experience, I was on one side of a wooden table with the mayor of the small city where I worked AND my so-called union rep on the other side of the table, ganging up on me and insisting that we women needed to settle down and accept our constricted, low-paying place in the pecking order, not insist on equal pay for equal work nor fair consideration for promotion into “men’s jobs” or else the entire factory where we worked would have to be shut down.

    The intimidation was intense and the retaliation swift: moving me into a dangerous role where even an average-sized male over 30 would have been in physical danger and it had been the norm to only assign a very young, strong male to that role (think 19-year-old linebacker.) I went home every night exhausted and covered with bruises but I refused to give up because I knew if I couldn’t “hack it” in this punishing job then none of the women who had worked there for decades would ever be given a chance at a promotion into a “man’s job” – all of which paid between double and quadruple the highest “women’s” wage.

    Where do men come up with this nonsense that women were welcomed into “traditionally male roles”? Women have been writing and talking about our experiences for decades, participating in social science studies for decades, and I still encounter males (and some females) who claim that none of the things we have DIRECTLY EXPERIENCED ever happened! It’s as if your minds can’t wrap around the documented fact that women were intimidated, threatened, raped, beaten and outright KILLED for daring to challenge “traditionally male roles”. They still are in places as diverse as England, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, California or Germany. Every day there’s a new story about an “honor killing” or a woman being arrested for the “crime” of driving a car or a high-ranking military officer who sexually assaulted “his” female direct report. It’s not like the abuse is hidden from your sight!

  23. betternotbroken

    What can you do? I cannot even begin to list the ways the Women’s Right Movement has helped me, I mean I can try, being able to vote, the ability to make choices regarding my body and reproductive rights and then all of a sudden photoshop and clothing becomes the focus of people labeling themselves as feminist and then shame is fought with counter shame. I cannot go there, I will not go there no matter the title and I stop following you if you define feminism that way. Great post, thanks for the reminder about Wollstonecraft. Your piece shows the value of college education! You put it to good use.

  24. Spinning For Difficulty

    I don’t wish to downplay your experiences (they sound horrid) but from the perspective of history they are not significant or representative of the attitudes of men (or women) today. You just happened to have been caught in the middle of a period of extremely rapid and unprecedented social change.

    But looking at the timeline from a distance we see rigid and unchanging gender roles in place for centuries, if not millennia …… and then from the industrial revolution onwards a period of rapid technological advancement (still ongoing of course) which completely redefined work and family life for both genders in the space of just a few generations (again, still ongoing).

    The 20th century was probably the peak of that social change, at least as far as the workplace is concerned. Throughout the 20th century each generation was raised by their parents (mainly by their mothers) to accept an already out of date gender identity and strict set of gender roles and social expectations. But by the time each generation reached their middle age and were in positions of authority at work society had already moved on and those gender roles and expectations were completely out of date.

    The changes in the workplace were so rapid in the 20th century that having a 60 year old and a 20 year old working in the same company would have been like having someone born in he 12th century working alongside someone born in the 18th century. It’s no surprise there was friction, confusion, resentment, anger, fear and defensive or even vindictive behaviour.

    But to be fair you have to ask WHY this was so.

    Feminists will claim it is because of the ‘patriarchy’ where men have historically oppressed women, but this is – at best – a completely over simplistic explanation. The so called ‘patriarchy’ which defined men as ‘important’ was not about male dominance – it was about survival. Before modern technology came along families and communities relied on men to do a lot of really dangerous, unhealthy, unpleasant and exhausting jobs to gather resources to stop everyone from starving to death. Women were physically weaker, and pregnancy and child rearing meant women (and children) needed men to provide them with resources.

    It is no surprise that throughout history women (mothers) have always raised boys to define their masculinity in terms of their role in (and for) society, as providers and leaders and protectors. Even today a man’s self identity is largely defined by what resources he can gather – this is how women still judge men today and it is why men are driven to work longer hours and get into higher paid positions. They do it so that women will value them. It’s the same reason why women spend a fortune trying to look younger, healthier and more fertile – ie to impress men.

    In simple terms a man’s identity is defined by his role in, and service to women/ the family/ the community …… whereas a women’s identity is defined by her femaleness (her biology).

    Women have always trained men that to be a ‘real man’ means to sacrifice himself for his wife/ family/ community by protecting them, leading them and gathering resources for them. Mothers teach this to boys during his childhood and potential girlfriends reinforce this expectation to men in adulthood.

    And so if men are largely defined by their sacrifice/ leadership/ resource gathering roles to society if you strip these roles away from a man and he literally loses his identity!

    Now are you beginning to understand why men felt so threatened by women entering the workplace and filling up all these traditionally male roles?

    In keeping with their roles as protectors/ providers/ defenders, boys were trained that for them to desire comfort, safety, protection, fine clothes, individuality and self expression was ‘unmanly’….. in other words if you wanted to attract a woman and avoid social ostracism you had to suppress your emotions and your desire for a comfortable life. Boys were trained that fine clothes, comfort, self expression and vulnerability were the exclusive domain of women. It is *women* who trained boys to ‘look down’ on these attributes and desires and to regard aggression, lack of empathy, lack of self concern as ‘manly’ attributes. Again this was predominantly a SURVIVAL STRATEGY. In harsh environments with little technology and the real risk of starvation or pillaging, women made sure the men in the community were rugged, emotionally disconnected, thugs who not only were trained to not desire ‘feminine’ things, but were trained to actively look down on feminine things and consider them ‘beneath him’.

    So you have men being conditioned (by women) for centuries to (1) look down on femininity as ‘beneath them’ and (2) define their male identity in terms of their role as leaders and providers to society…. now is it any wonder they were hostile to the idea of women taking over their roles (taking over their identity) and turning it into a more feminine environment?

    For these men you were literally stripping them of their identity (an identity taught to them largely by their mothers)

    But as technology has continued to liberate men (and women) from manual labour, and we are no longer on the brink of starvation all the time, men have been able to embrace their ‘feminine’ side of feelings and emotions and empathy and self expression and individuality. And this is what men have done. And today men are happy to see women in the workplace because they do not define themselves quite so much in terms of being the leaders and resource gatherers of society. But that is still a big part of male identity which is why they are driven to work harder and earn more money (and die of a heart attack at 55).

    I’m sorry that you had some bad experiences, but if you look at society today it is really not like that anymore – or at least those attitudes are dying out with each generation. Each new generation views gender equality in the workplace as simply the norm. To have such a huge shift in attitudes over just a few generations is actually a very rapid change. The majority of humans throughout history experienced zero social change throughout their lives…. that’s unimaginable to us!

    The so called ‘privilege’, ‘importance’ and ‘status’ attributed to men was really a concession made by women to men in exchange for men doing all that gruelling and dangerous work before decent technology had been invented. You cannot have men building all roads, buildings, and infrastructure by hand without letting them also make town planning decisions as well. The equivalent would be men sticking their noses in and trying take over the delivery of babies, or managing all the household chores while women continued to actually do all the work in these areas.

    Men’s ‘importance’ in society was part of their incentive and reward for going out and breaking their backs each day and risking their lives down mines or in the oceans or in the shipyards. Women’s (relative) comfort, protection, security and self expression was part of her incentive and reward for maintaining the household, and giving birth to and raising children.

    Feminists today cannot (or choose not to) understand that it was very much a two-way partnership of give and take and that both men AND women were oppressed by the circumstances of the age (and not by evil men).

    Feminists focus ONLY on women’s hardships and ONLY on men’s apparent privilege, in order to create a distorted narrative of female victimisation. They then use this victim narrative to demand special treatment and free stuff from society today. If you dare to challenge that victim narrative with FACTS and REASON they call you a misogynist and claim they are being oppressed even more – which serves to increase their victim status even more.

    This manipulative and deceitful strategy only works so well because men – for all their faults – really do seem to like providing for women. And this makes the feminist fraud all the more objectionable.

  25. charles perkins

    it is a feminist world out there many women nowadays I trying to be the man in life. I never could understand the shift in today society I take everything with a grain of salt however I still can’t ignore everything that I see. Sometimes I wonder why I was put here on earth to witness this I am a man dominated by women yet so many women don’t feel that they’re getting fair treatment yes they have all the support groups that you can imagine man really have any because we’re too prideful to even ask anyone for help. If only I was born a hundred years ago to see things differently I would have then banana truly blessed full peaceful state of mind.

  26. ambroseanthonythompson

    I think this was proven the other day when the normal paparazzi questions the are blasted onto women were asked of a male actor who thought the questions so insane he swore. Women aren’t a different species of human.

  27. fireandair

    The most poisonous part of pop feminism to me is that it all seems to boil down to, “I want equality for me and my friends, but not for that bitch over there.” And aren’t we all “that bitch over there” to someone?

    Those idiot pop feminists, or whatever the hell they call themselves, have no idea how to disagree with other women in a civilized fashion. She’s either one of their clique or else it’s time-on-target, and they will unleash a hate-filled torrent of pure sexism. Ever heard a black politician from one side call another on the other side a “n*gger?” Of course not, and you never will. Black people are smart enough to know that that word lobbed against ANY black person damages all black people, whatever their political affiliation.

    And yet c*nt and wh*re are routinely slapped on women by women on the other side of any political fence. And watching them raise their voices when cute boys are around, so that the boys will hear them do it, is utterly sickening.

    Pop feminism is about equality for the speaker and her friends, and not at all for anyone else. They simply don’t seem to grasp that, like polio, sexism must be stamped out no matter who is in the cross-hairs, including women they don’t like. And that there are ways to disagree with a woman in a civilized and non-sexist fashion.

    Yet they think that that’s “going easy” on her
    “because she’s a woman,” which for some reason is the thing they fear being accused of more than anything. If they aren’t ripping that other bitch on the wrong side of the fence into bloody bits in the most sexist way possible, they are “going easy” on her. It’s insane. They have no clue how to deal with women outside their clique in a civilized way.

    People often say that if women were in charge of the world, there would be no war. Bullshit. Every war would last a total of two weeks, and all would culminate in a nuclear exchange.

    If you haven’t guessed by now, I am disgusted and depressed with the current state of feminism. Until “feminists” can learn, for example, to disagree with Sarah Palin’s pro-life stance with the same reasonable tone of voice that they would use for the equally pro-life Liberal Dream Boyfriend Jimmy Carter, we will get NOWHERE. Until “feminists” understand that the pro-choice, pro-gay, global-warming-is-real person who is making this comment can simultaneously:

    1) disagree with someone like Palin deeply, and yet
    2) refuse to engage in an orgy of c*nt and wh*re-laden language in saying so

    we will get precisely nowhere.

  28. kaiteking

    Great post! It isn’t just in the feminist arena that “activists” are using vague “studies” to prove their point. It blows my mind that people don’t understand (or care about) the importance of a simple little thing we learned about in high school, aka work cited. To be an expert of any subject all you have to do is post it to the internet – regardless of any real credibility. I see this happening in relation to medicine all the time. Medical journals and university studies are completely ignored in favor of whatever opinion the hottest celebrity is touting on social media.

  29. clearhaven

    This!!!!! God bless you for this post! Do you know how angry I get when a woman posts nude pics of herself on social media and then labels it as feminine empowerment?! How is that empowering when she is using it to get the attention of men? Thank you really, for bringing this up.

  30. Sandra Rawrs

    Thank you, finally someone says it! It bothers me that women like Lily Allen are heralded as feminists although they display little understanding of the concepts at hand. They give the entire movement a bad name.

  31. navigator1965

    The only criticism that I can make of this fine post is that it does not reflect the deeply entrenched influence of if not control over important aspects of society, which varied to some degree amongst the English speaking nations.

    The irrational behaviour of “pop” feminists (a.k.a. radical, ideological, gender, and gynocentric) can only be rationally explained via a forthcoming theory of gender narcissism.

  32. genderneutrallanguage

    Sexism is assigning traits to individuals based upon unrelated traits. A penis does not make you emotionally strong. A vagina does not make you weepy. A vagina doesn’t make you good at child care. A penis doesn’t make you a sexual predator.

    Who you are as a person is defined by what you DO as a person. Sexism ignores what you DO and defines people by their genitalia. This is a highly dysfunctional way of determining who people are and what they are capable of.

  33. robinobishop

    Agreed, The problem is that feminism has moved beyond its core goal (equal pay and opportunity in the workplace) without finishing the job. Now that we are in the third wave of feminism, N.O.W. specifically rejects a central goal of focus. The Third Wave chooses not to have a structured or specific definition of feminism because many feel it is best to challenge the universal belief of what femininity is by embracing transgender and gender non conforming youth.

  34. Eric

    Claire,

    Your premise is wrong. You’re judging pop feminism by a standard of critical, reasoned public discourse. Convincing people thoughtfully on the merits is not their intent. Their intent is propaganda, not consent. They’re trying to impose their preferred values as norms, stigmatize conflicting values, and disqualify proponents of politically incorrect ideas.

    The holders of political power are operating in accord with the pop feminists, so the practical incentives weigh toward propaganda over reason.

  35. Still Pool Monk

    I was going to write something with my WordPress app, but touched Reader and lost an hour!

    Great post; I really enjoyed reading it. I tend to chuck labels and ask anyone using one what they actually mean. Everything has become so complex, but the search for meaning brings wonderful closeness and understanding, don’t you think?

    Incidentally, when I’ve asked most of my women friends what they think of feminism the response has often been a smile and a shrug. ツ

  36. Spinning For Difficulty

    I think the feminist movement (and those who can benefit from its existence) choose not to have a ‘structured or specific definition’ because all the specific and legitimate goals of feminism have been already been achieved (equal rights in law etc) and the movement does not want to admit these successes and be forced to admit that feminism is no longer needed.

    Instead, those who profit from feminism (well funded feminist groups, feminist speakers and authors, the ever growing state etc) want to perpetuate feminism as a movement – now based on slogans rather than clearly defined principles – and and use it to line their own pockets and implement their own agendas.

    So the problem is what issues can feminism tackle now that equality has been achieved in all key areas?

    This is why feminism now claims to be fighting for ‘equality for all’ (an extremely vague cause which nobody can argue with!). Feminism has even opened its doors to men now and is basically claiming that you are a human being and if you want society to be better than it is you are a feminist.

    Feminism is infiltrating every other social/ political movement and recruiting people there, and it is also going to groups like the LGBT ‘community’ and offering to help them in return for their support of feminism.

    If I’m making modern feminism seem like a cancer spreading throughout society that’s because it is.

    Now that we have achieved equal (often more than equal) rights and privileges there is no logical / factual grounds to still claim women are oppressed by society – and so feminists in their desperation now depict rational and fact-based criticism of feminist theory as a form of oppression itself.

  37. muffyyy420

    Reblogged this on Modern Mommy and commented:
    As a student of gender at a post-secondary institution, we mainly studied feminism with regards to social construction of the gender. That is how we as females identify and learn our gender as women. It takes into the consideration that one can be born biologically male or female, but identify with the other “assigned” gender. Since our studies mainly focuessed on that theme of femenism I unfortunately never studied the link between Wolltonecraft’s work ad pop-feminism as you call.
    Personally I am appaulled that fashion and feminism share such a comfortable bond now. Why is it that all women care to voice their opinions about is clothing, make-up or hair styles.
    Mary Wollstonecraft’s opinion was that women were capable of reason just as men are. Is it possible that even given the power of reason we still fall back into our assigned gender roles? Those same roles we’ve been ingrained with since birth?

    Why is it that we, as feminists, can’t simply respect the fact that being a feminist is about being pro-choice. We are about fighting for women to have the right to choose their own destiny.

  38. Nergal

    “Why is it that all women care to voice their opinions about is clothing, make-up or hair styles.
    Mary Wollstonecraft’s opinion was that women were capable of reason just as men are. Is it possible that even given the power of reason we still fall back into our assigned gender roles? Those same roles we’ve been ingrained with since birth?”

    Because “gender”, as you call it, doesn’t exist. That is, the idea that one can be born with female genitalia and still be a man, is not only false, but very nearly psychotic. The reason women prefer hair,make-up, and fashion to mathematics and logic is because the only biological purpose of a woman is to give birth to children. Fashion facilitates this. You are not being psychologically programmed from birth, like a fleshy robot,by ANYBODY. That idea is STUPID.

    People are a total of their environment,which has little impact on their actions and capabilities, and their biology, which has a lot of impact on their actions and capabilities. If you think that I am wrong, simply try to convince anyone that their own feces is as good a snack as strawberry shortcake.

    You cannot do it. People evolved over millions of years to avoid their own feces because those who didn’t…DIED from infectious diseases.

    Similarly, those women who pursued the feminist lifestyle when mankind was evolving… DIED without producing many, or any, children.

    There are SOME women who are capable of reason,like men are, these women are statistical outliers.Freak mutations.There are some women who are capable of powerlifting on par with juvenile males. Same difference. Statistical outliers. Most of the world of men will forever be off-limits to women,not because men are oppressing you, but simply because YOU CAN’T HANDLE IT.

    “Why is it that we, as feminists, can’t simply respect the fact that being a feminist is about being pro-choice. We are about fighting for women to have the right to choose their own destiny.”

    You remind me of the People’s Front of Judea, fighting the Roman imperialist oppressors for a man’s right to have babies.

    That’s you feminists.

    You’re not fighting The Patriarchy. As usual, you’re fighting another woman. Mother Nature. And Mother Nature is not a feminist.

  39. Meredith Gillis

    Thanks for the critique of pop feminism and also for the reminder that I need to be including links to the studies I use as sources in my posts.

  40. neptune's Aura Astrology

    Personally i prefer the Pop Feminism to the Women are always victims and never perpetrator feminism – to me that is more harmful, it ignores the fact that women can be and are violent, that domestic abuse is domestic abuse no matter what sex perpetrates it and worse of all portrayal of women as weak defenseless victims reliant on their support, disables women it does not empower them.

  41. rabidya

    Feminism isn’t about equality. It’s about women’s liberation from men and patriarchy. Equal pay and opportunity in the workplace, while it is STILL a goal, was never the core goal. Also, what’s wrong with gender non-conformance?

  42. susanbjourney

    According to the FBI uniform crime statistics, 95% of rape victims are female and 98% of rapists are male. While recognizing that 5% of rape victims are male and 2% of rapists are female is appropriate, reality-based thinking, the whole “women are just as violent as men” meme is utter balderdash. Flinging it around simply obfuscates reality and makes it that much harder for us to solve problems and end the epidemic of sexual violence perpetrated against females by males within patriarchal cultures.

  43. neptune's Aura Astrology

    Rape is not the only violence and figures of women as abusers are often low because of the myth that women are maternal often men on the recieving end of domestic abuse from women are not taken seriously when it is reported. Children sexually abused by women also have a history of not being believed. To be counted in figures you need to be believed. Equality means equality we are equally capable of both good and bad!

  44. susanbjourney

    The goal of feminism has ALWAYS been: to liberate females from male oppression under patriarchy. Women are still being raped by males at a rate of 95% female victims to 5% male victims and 98% male perps to 2% female perps. Women are still in a tiny minority of leadership positions, e.g. there has never in 235+ years been a female President or Vice President of the United States. Women and girls are still subjected to alarming rates of domestic violence by male perps. Claiming that feminism is “over” now because it is “no longer needed” is utterly ignorant and frankly more than a little delusional. Women in Saudi Arabia still can’t even drive, much less say no when their husband wants to marry off their eight or nine-year-old daughter to a man in his 50’s. Women in Sudan are still having their external reproductive organs cut off with dirty broken glass. Women all over the Muslim world are still being brainwashed into thinking that it would be “immodest” and “shameful” for them to go outside and move their bodies in the fresh air without a black cloth sack covering them from head to toe. Women and girls from Bucharest to Hamburg to Hong Kong to Seattle to Mexico City are still being trafficked for rape for $$$ by criminal cartels. Feminism will be “done” when women as a class (especially girls) world-wide are no longer subjected to patriarchal oppression by males as a class.

  45. susanbjourney

    “Most of the world of men will forever be off-limits to women, not because men are oppressing you, but simply because YOU CAN’T HANDLE IT.”

    Thanks for the belly laugh!

    (Misogynist chest-thumpers are good for something after all: laughs!)

  46. susanbjourney

    “Equality means equality” – yes, but it does not mean vapid promotion of false equivalencies and wishful thinking. Your post reminds me of the whole “all lesbians must use dental dams or else they’ll spread AIDS far and wide, because: equality” warning women got in the 1980’s. Ooops. ONE proven case of lesbian-to-lesbian transmission of AIDS in decades? Yeah, I guess HIV is not an MRA fringe group member – it doesn’t understand “equality” the way you do.

  47. Spinning For Difficulty

    @ susanbjourney (there was no reply button)

    “…The goal of feminism has ALWAYS been: to liberate females from male oppression under patriarchy…”

    Patriarchy theory proposes men deliberately and successfully oppressed women (their mothers, sisters, daughters, wives, girlfriends etc) and created a society to benefit men at the expense of women. By definition it defines men as sociopaths. Not only is patriarchy theory an embarrassingly over simplistic theory with no evidence to back it up (and mountains of evidence to refute it), it is also hugely insulting to both men and women – defining men as sociopaths and rapists and women as weak, stupid, victims.

    Do you think it was a coincidence that women only started to desire working outside the home AFTER the workplace environment had become a largely indoor, non-manual, safe, comfortable, centrally heated, mechanised environment?

    Do you honestly believe women desperately wanted to exchange places with men working down mines, ploughing fields (although plenty of women did that too), fish in the freezing seas in open wooden sailing boats without GPS or proper waterproof clothing, or building roads by hand?

    Do you believe it was men’s ‘privilege’ to break their backs doing manual labour as most men have had to do throughout history? Would YOU have traded places with a male coal miner or a worker in a shipyard two hundred years ago….. or a road builder or stone mason 500 years ago?

    Or would you have chosen to stay at home and look after the household – which was hard graft enough before all those evil patriarchal men had invented all of the labour saving devices we are so privileged to have today?

    Women as a group have never been oppressed by men as a group… instead men AND women AND children AND animals were all oppressed by harsh living conditions, lack of technology and the ruling classes made up of men AND women (kings and queens).

    Feminism and its ‘patriarchy theory’ is basically a bunch of miserable women claiming a monopoly on suffering and being a victim (“poor me” syndrome), while blaming men for every real or imaginary problem in their lives and teaching their sons that they are genetically programmed to be rapists – which is a form of child abuse!

    Were the millions of men (and boys) sent out to die in the trenches privileged? The men who built the maintain sewage system? The men who do the majority of shitty jobs in society? 94% of workplace deaths are men – is that a privilege?

    Where are these privileged men? Do tell.

    “….Women are still being raped by males at a rate of 95% female victims to 5% male victims and 98% male perps to 2% female perps..”

    Utter rubbish. The figures for rape and domestic abuse victims are both split roughly 50/ 50. Some studies now put male rape above female rape in the US. Where on earth did you get your figures from? Are you aware some studies now classify drunken sex as rape for a woman… but ‘made to penetrate’ for a men is NOT classed as rape? You see it’s all about depicting women as victims in order to get free stuff and special treatment.

    If feminists really wanted to stop rape they would condemn the hitting of children. 99.9999% of rapists and will have been hit as a child. Even today 90% of mothers admit to hitting their children. Feminists can go on TV and talk about hitting their children and this is socially acceptable. Can you imagine men talking about hitting their girlfriends on TV?!

    “….Women are still in a tiny minority of leadership positions, e.g. there has never in 235+ years been a female President or Vice President of the United States….”

    Presidents are not ‘leaders’ they are violent rulers. The majority of voters are women. Feminists love to use the violence of the state to get special treatment and ‘free stuff’ (resources extracted from the general population at gunpoint). The state is the ultimate ‘alpha male’ and feminists feed it. The state loves feminism because the more men are driven out of the home, out of children’s lives and out of society as a whole the more the state can take the place of men… except that men WORK and produce things of VALUE to society and for their families…. whereas the state produces nothing of value and VIOLENTLY STEALS all the wealth it redistributes to feminists. Feminism replaces partnerships with loving men (boyfriends, husbands) with partnerships with violent rulers (welfare dependent single moms). No group in society does more to encourage a ‘patriarchal’ society than the feminist movement.

    “.. Women and girls are still subjected to alarming rates of domestic violence by male perps….”

    Domestic abuse is split 50/ 50 between men and women. Again, where on earth are you getting your ‘facts’ from?

    Men are much more likely to be the victim of assault in public. The majority of child abuse is perpetrated by women.

    “…. Claiming that feminism is “over” now because it is “no longer needed” is utterly ignorant and frankly more than a little delusional…..”

    The only legitimate cause feminism can have is equal rights. Men and women have equal rights by law in almost all areas. The law is not always equal, but the inequalities benefit women just as much as they benefit men. The criminal court system, for example, gives enormous quantifiable privilege to women. Do feminists fight for equality in this area. No, of course they don’t. To do so would give equality to men, and feminists are not interested in equality for men, or children for that matter (otherwise they would condemn hitting them).

    “… Women in Saudi Arabia still can’t even drive, much less say no when their husband wants to marry off their eight or nine-year-old daughter to a man in his 50′s. Women in Sudan are still having their external reproductive organs cut off with dirty broken glass. Women all over the Muslim world are still being brainwashed into thinking that it would be “immodest” and “shameful” for them to go outside and move their bodies in the fresh air without a black cloth sack covering them from head to toe. Women and girls from Bucharest to Hamburg to Hong Kong to Seattle to Mexico City are still being trafficked for rape for $$$ by criminal cartels….”

    These are all issues specific to other cultures. They have nothing to do with feminism in the west, nor does it justify feminist patriarchy theory. If you want to campaign for any of these issues, go for it. But let’s take female genital mutilation. If you try to stop that you will be fighting against just as many women as men, and probably far more women than men. If women opposed the practice it would not happen.

    NEWSFLASH: women can be just as backward, mean, barbaric, savage and primitive as men. As a mother, could YOU allow your newborn baby girl or boy to be genitally mutilated? I would happily whack someone in the face to stop them from violently assaulting my baby. So I’m sorry to have to inform you that men and women are EQUALLY responsible for such barbaric practices.

    But according to feminist theory women are poor, innocent, weak, ‘acted upon’, fragile, victims… and only men are capable of doing harm in society. That’s rubbish.

    “…. Feminism will be “done” when women as a class (especially girls) world-wide are no longer subjected to patriarchal oppression by males as a class…..”

    That is soooooooooooooooo offensive. Feminism has brainwashed you into viewing men as oppressors. As a result you now have lost the capacity to feel empathy towards men. And that means you can no longer see men as victims, which means you cannot even see your own discriminatory and hateful attitudes against men as discriminatory and hateful.

    Let’s swap ‘men’ for ‘blacks’ and expose just how full of hate feminism has made you. You might want to sit down for this…..

    What you are effectively doing is looking at crime figures, ignoring all the crimes committed by whites, and only recognising the crimes that are committed by blacks. Even if a crime is committed jointly by blacks and whites you only define the blacks as criminals. Then as if that wasn’t bad enough, you are labelling ALL blacks as criminals, even if they have never committed a crime. Then you are constructing a narrative where blacks as a ‘class’ oppress whites as a ‘class’ by committing crimes against them. And having defined blacks as the oppressive criminal class you feel justified and even proud to discriminate against blacks, because in your mind it is not discrimination, it is self defence.

    When you swap ‘men’ for ‘blacks’ your views are exposed as hideously racist and offensive. This proves how feminism is just another an ideology of hate, disguising itself under a fraudulent threat narrative.

    In times of black slavery black people were dehumanised so that we’d feel no empathy towards them – they were called savages, criminals and rapists…… just like men are today.

    Threat Narrative Tropes

    Please stop spreading ignorance and hate. Thanks.

  48. neptune's Aura Astrology

    Yeah its vapid and ignorant to claim that daughters who are sexually abused by their mothers are ignored because they fit the wrong stereotype of abuse. It ignorant to claim that there are no shelters for abused husbands. I’ve never made the above claims because one they’d be wrong two I’m not ignorant or uneducated. Because I’m educated and not American I don’t indulge in fantasies where the rights and protection of children are less important than those of an adult.

  49. allthedots

    I admit to being a “pop-culture feminist”, but I really like this article! The worst part is that that mainstream media exploits this watered down ‘pop feminism’ as a representative image for all feminists, making it another dimension for ridiculing women (in the form of straw feminist characters, along with the dumb blonde and mean chick and so on.)

  50. Healing Slowly

    I nearly stood up and applauded as I read this comment. As a logical, intelligent and articulate woman, I’m often astounded by the sheer levels of ignorance that abounds in what I call extreme feminism. I call females who are extreme feminists, feminazis, because that is how they come across to me. They are militant in their ways, but they can produce no reasonable justification for behaving that way. Not only are these feminazis attacking other women, they’re emasculating men at every turn. The sad part about this, is that it’s been going on so long, that men are starting to emasculate themselves, in the hope that they will be able to get a woman. I’m sorry, but I much prefer my men to be masculine, just like I prefer women to be feminine. The differences between the genders aren’t something to be ashamed of. They should be celebrated, because they are the cornerstones of the survival and propagation of the human species.

  51. samquigley

    Well, at least we know that no matter how bad pop feminism’s culture of victimhood gets, it’ll still have nothing on you, Charles. (Oh, who am I kidding? I think we all know he offed himself about ten minutes after writing this.)

  52. specificnorthwest

    Agreed. I hate the crap thats circulating around facebook that just trashes men in the name of feminism. No one understands feminism is about reaching equality. Not about women competing with men or vice versa.

  53. Norman Doering (@DoeringNorman)

    I agree with what you are saying. Do you have blog posts where you name the other pop feminists, beyond just Amanda Marcotte, instead of talking about them generally?

    I can name some others I think dangerous:

    Gail Dines (she lies about the pornography men watch)
    Anita Sarkeesian (she lies about video games young men play)
    Catharine MacKinnon (feminist legal scholar)

    I’d like to compile a list and compare their tactics. A demonization of men is common.

  54. beelzibubbles

    Only upper class white women didn’t have to work. Working was not some glorious privilege afforded to anyone with a certain set of genitals, it was hard, it was dirty and it was dangerous. The proportion of men who had any amount of power was less than 1%, the rest were far from being privileged oppressors. They were working down mines, in factories, in the streets, building the houses with many of the lower class women toiling alongside them just wishing they were “oppressed” like the poor upper class white women. Men were being shamed by suffragettes (who didn’t want lower class or non-white women to vote) into being slaughtered in wars they had no choice in, they had no vote and when they did earn it with their service (which some women did as well), women had no such obligation and still don’t.
    Women could always own property but when they married it would become the “family” property. Women had the right to their own earnings while her husband was obligated to support her and ensure that she never had to spend her own money on her own or her children’s upkeep, if she did he had to reimburse her or go to prison. What was hers was hers and what was his was theirs.
    What I dislike about all feminism (aside from the obvious man hating or ~patriarchy~ bullshit they invented in the last few decades and now history is being seen through that lens) is just how in denial they are that women have ever achieved a single damned thing in the entire history of the world before feminism came along and declared women existed. Queens were powerless oppressed victims, female scientists must have really been men because women were never educated (and governesses never existed either, obviously), those female doctors must have just dived in with their surgical blades and got consistently lucky, the ladies and their servants were somehow of equal status, and so on and on and on. In theatre, breaches roles were taken more seriously than drag roles. A drag king could be taken seriously while a drag queen was always comedic. Some claim this was because women emulating their superiors was good while men sinking to the level of women was bad. But consider this, if a slave emulated his master what would become of him? Would he be celebrated or severely punished?
    Feminism denies women’s power that they’ve always had. Queens had the power to grant women whatever they wanted if they saw fit, but the women did not want it. Women had major influence, they were never obligated to almost certain death in someone else’s wars, it has long been recognised (well, before the suppression of certain aspects of history but I live near a library of historical archives so yay) that wives of male leaders would have a lot of say in the decisions their husband made. Many would even seduce an enemy or potential ally, with or without her husband’s knowledge, for information, blackmail or in exchange for something. They knew exactly what they had and how to use it.
    We have an awesome history in our own right, why soil it with such demeaning and infantalising nonsense? We can be “strong and independent” or we can be a pampered and protected victim class, we can’t be both.

  55. Steersman

    Great looking post which I’ll have to delve into a little later in more depth. But I thought I’d respond to your “no boundaries, no benchmarks” with something from one of my fave books, Philip Wylie’s Generation of Vipers (highly recommended). He’s referring to Christianity, particularly the dogmatic & narrow-minded versions (which seems to encompass most of the 38,000 branches), but it seems rather analogous to modern day “feminism”:

    You have considered this [USA] a Christian nation, all your life. Our constitution implies as much. But a minute’s thought might have shown you years ago – decades ago – that the United States of America was not in any real sense a Christian nation at all. Numerically? Less than half the people had even a nominal church membership. There goes your sacred majority. Dogmatically? Those who belonged to churches belonged to so many different faiths at swords points with each other on matters of creed and technique that even the definition of Christianity crumples to absurdity. You laughed over the medieval theologians who argued about the number of angels who could dance on a pin-point – and then deliberated petulantly on whether or not proper baptism consisted of a sprinkling with Holy Water, a complete immersion in a small swimming pool with the preacher in rubber boots, or a mere symbolic laying on of a minister’s hand wet in something that came unblessed out of a faucet. …. Religion in our Christian land was mostly puerile fiddle-faddle before science kicked it apart. [pgs 9,10; my emphasis]

  56. Gary

    Excellent article, couldn’t have said it better myself.
    As soon as I saw a woman come forward at one of these social justice conferences and say that science and logic are white male supremacist concepts (and see her get applause), I knew this movement was fucked.
    The other day, I genuinely found myself thinking “oh well, when social liberals buckle under their own inability to create moral principles, at least we’ll be able to ally with the crazy christians. They’re bat shit crazy but at least they still actually believe in something.”
    That’s some dark shit!

  57. allthedots

    That being said, every social/political movement should be criticized and revised at all times. I support the feminists efforts to provide women with voting rights and access to education, but value claims should always be evaluated.

  58. Tarrou

    Sorry ladies, feminism is a poisoned well. Forty years of solipsism, misandry, silliness and partisan hackery have made the label toxic. If you stand for equality before the law for all people, regardless of race or sex, there’s humanism. Feminism is the fancy name for the hatred of men, the self-victimization of women, the exploitation and abuse of children, the denial of science, and the destruction of the family unit. And more of us learn that every day.

    The label has outlived its usefulness, it is time to let it go. Today, I react the same to feminists as I would to someone proudly proclaiming their KKK affiliation. You can claim it’s all really about equality, but your compatriots have given the lie to that protestation. Feminism is hate. Nothing more, nothing less.

  59. Robert

    Ever heard a black politician from one side call another on the other side a “n*gger?” Of course not, and you never will. Black people are smart enough to know that that word lobbed against ANY black person damages all black people, whatever their political affiliation.

    Yes, actually, I have. “Uncle Tom”, “House n***er”, “race traitor” and worse are generally thrown about as insults against black politicians who dare to disagree with the liberal orthodoxy. Just look at the vitriol spewed at Clarance Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, or any other conservative black politician. This is common in identity politics. Any rejection of one part of the dogma, no matter how well reasoned, is considered rejection of all of it, and for that the apostate must pay.

  60. wittewbit

    This is very interesting. “Modern day feminists” have given a bad look on what feminism originally derived from, and it’s disheartening. The worst, I believe, is when self proclaimed “feminists” of modern day continually post offensive content via social media clearly targeting males. You clearly have the right ideas. Thank you, for being one of few modern-day feminists with original and true feministic ideals.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s