Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe!

Feminism: : the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities : organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

This would make Feminism a religion by definition. Religion: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group. Feminism is not based on science. It is based on belief.

Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe.

Dangerous: : involving possible injury, harm, or death

Feminist books like the "SCUM Manifesto" claim that men have destroyed the world and that women have to correct it by fixing men, i.e. eliminating them. This book has been published commercially.*

There have been "Women Against Feminism." [1] And they have been attacked and threatened by Feminists who mock them for bringing to light attributes of Feminism:

"But they also say that modern Western feminism has become a divisive and sometimes hateful force, a movement that dramatically exaggerates female woes while ignoring men’s problems, stifles dissenting views, and dwells obsessively on men’s misbehavior and women’s personal wrongs." [2]

Dogmatic: : expressing personal opinions or beliefs as if they are certainly correct and cannot be doubted

Feminists are against the "patriarchy".* But the entirety of human-kind has essentially been a collection of patriarchies even when there were women heads of state including: Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar, Queen Mary I, and Elizabeth I.

Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe!

It's also interesting to note that even some Atheists, whom are interested in science but are still belief driven, have a problem with Feminism:

"Atheists should be Feminists because of the inherent levels of misogyny in religious texts and how religion often attempts to perpetuate the traditional Male-Female dynamic." I found this logic flawed and felt compelled to write a rather lengthy reply, explaining exactly why I believe that Feminism is equally worthy of my disdain as religion. [8]

There has never been a human matriarchy anywhere ever. [5] It's untested. Also, bonobos are an anamoly and they are rarely found if ever in the wild so to say that this consitutes a viable matriachry is a stretch. Feminism also often combats science fundamentally.* [3a][3b]

Antiquated: : very old-fashioned or obsolete

Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe!

Feminism has accomplished its original goals in the western world. Yet Feminists now seek to erase gender roles and identities which causes people to end up being and looking more neutral rather than distinctly different. This is evidenced in at least some women's studies programs.* [10]

They also fail to recognize the variance in brain chemistry between men and women. [6] Feminism appears to be chasing phantoms, i.e. creating problems to attempt to stay relevant. [7] Feminists also claim to support equality but fundamentally and by definition Feminism is a women's advocate movement and nothing more.*

Feminists have often called Women's Studies the "academic arm of the women's movement." But Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge charge that the attempt to make Women's Studies serve a political agenda has led to deeply problematic results: dubious scholarship, pedagogical practices that resemble indoctrination more than education, and the alienation of countless potential supporters. [10]

Can Feminism be dangerous, dogmatic, and antiquated? It certainly seems possible. No Feminist's opinion is any more or less valid than another because their views of Feminism are only their opinions based on its definition.*

If people want Feminism to go away they should probably stop reproducing with Feminists, marginalize/demonize their views, and bring forth the truth. This, in theory, would accomplish their goal by not perpetuating the cycle.

*No True Scotsman Fallacy: No true Scotsman is an informal fallacy, an ad hoc attempt to retain an unreasoned assertion. When faced with a counterexample to a universal claim ("no Scotsman would do such a thing"), rather than denying the counterexample or rejecting the original universal claim, this fallacy modifies the subject of the assertion to exclude the specific case or others like it by rhetoric, without reference to any specific objective rule ("no true Scotsman would do such a thing")

Whenever Feminists attempt to deny that Feminism is the things above it falls under that fallacy due to Feminism ultimately being open-ended by definition.

Feminism: organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

I'm furious about the women's liberationists. They keep getting up on soapboxes and proclaiming that women are brighter than men. That's true, but it should be kept very quiet or it ruins the whole racket. - Anita Loos

Bibliography: [1] [2] [3a] [3b] [4] [5] [d6] [7] [8] [9] [10]


Is Feminism Dangerous, Dogmatic, and Antiquated? Maybe!
Post Opinion