Why Would a Woman Go Against Feminism?

What is it all about? Why would a woman go against feminism? When I was younger I had a very rough life.I was tossed back and forth between warring parents and was never truly accepted by most of my family (the family I actually saw, anyways). I found it very difficult to make friends again when I would move. I was generally used as a pawn by my dad to control my mother and when I was with my mother she was so emotionally distressed over our current situation and her other family problems from remarriage that I never truly got the love and nurturing I always craved from her. Although my life certainly could have been worse when I was younger, I still would never want my own child or anyone else to have the childhood that I did.

As I got older I began to listen to the feminists as my personal experiences had left me very dissatisfied with life in general. It left me with a feeling of displacement and sometimes even a disdain for men. I went to college and began studying history and law. It was while doing some routine homework one night that the real truth of feminism was actually revealed to me. I felt such anger and shock that I had been lied to all of my life. After all, any girl who had to endure my father’s reinterpretations of history, without knowing any better, would immediately become a hard-core feminist probably even to the point of lesbianism. Before this point I was even beginning to develop all around hatred for men. I saw how my father treated my mother. I saw what other men were doing and how they were treating women. Before I became educated about history and law I thought feminism was the only way. After all, my father had assured me of women’s inferiority throughout history and reinforced to me that women had no rights.

But turning to feminism just didn’t feel right. I wanted to like men and trust them, but how could any woman when she feels men are just out to sexually and financially exploit her and shun their responsibilities? How could any woman not turn to man hatred when we have a society of absent “baby daddies” and breadwinner mothers? I went forward with the plan society laid out for women- college education and ultimately a dependable job because in my mind it would be divorce insurance (at that time I had no way of knowing that was precisely the women’s movement’s goal). I never did take a job as the insight I received revealed to me the truth about feminism and I knew that things have not always been this way. I instead returned my goals to being a housewife.

When I found out what feminists had really done to women I was more than spiteful of them and I still am. What they have wanted to do to women for the past few decades is unforgivable in the eyes of any traditional man or woman. I did not want to be subject to a military draft like a man nor did I want to ever give up custody of my young children or be forced to assume a breadwinner role like a man. The thought of actually supporting a man is even more sickening, and rightly so.

I was called a “feminazi” by a man once because I said “men need to do something.” In other words, what I meant was that men need to take on their responsibilities as men. Even though I have been accused of “man hating” by the increasingly Testosterone deprived, modern males in society (otherwise known as MRAs), I was not wrong with what I said. In fact I was right on target. Men do need to take on their traditional responsibilities. In practically every human society that has ever existed it has been considered the husband’s responsibility to support the family. Even in matrilineal societies like the Tuareg the husband is expected to pay the bills, even though the women own the property and inheritance is passed through the mother’s line. Similarly, with the Na of China the men bring fine gifts to the women they wish to mate with, even though there are no equivalent words in their native language for the words “father” or “fatherhood.”

In countless human societies throughout history the father was only an occasional visitor to the family, if paternity was ever even acknowledged at all. In many cases the father didn’t have any particular obligation to support the children nor any real claim to them. Since women conceive, bear, nurse and nurture the children societies that brought fathers into the family always regarded that he must do his part and provide for the women and children. The woman fulfills all the biological functions to give the child life and care for it, so what will the father bring in return?

In the classic and forever relevant “Men and Marriage” George Gilder rightly states that “the prime fact of life is the sexual superiority of women.” He goes on to say

“The nominally equivalent role of father is in fact a product of marriage and other cultural contrivances. There is no biological need for the father to be anywhere around when the baby is born and nurtured. In many societies the father has no special responsibility to support the specific children he sires. In some societies, paternity is not even acknowledged. The father is neither inherently equal to the mother within the family, nor necessarily inclined to remain with it. In one way or another, the man must be made equal by society.”

Few women today have probably ever heard such an assertion, for nobody has ever even suggested that women might actually be the superior sex. Feminists said we were inferior. They told us we had no rights and our biological roles were degrading and that for thousands of years we have had absolutely no rights or social status other than being the property of our husbands. But they could not have been more wrong. MRAs, on the other hand, know that women have always been sexually superior. This is why they will go to any lengths to sever maternal ties with her children and tell women that a uterus does not make us special (they have almighty sperm after all!). Feminists have long enabled this as well by proclaiming that women are in no way any more nurturing than men and that a father is an adequate replacement for a mother in the home. I don’t know about most women, but I have never -especially when nursing an infant at my breast- been too satisfied with that assertion.

Understanding feminism has helped me reject it and fight against it. I feel that this “men’s movement” will disappear when the annoyance that is feminism is dismantled and destroyed. If it wasn’t for feminism men who talk the way they do about women and shunning their responsibilities and so forth would have probably gotten their butts kicked up and down Mainstreet long ago.

As much as women have lost their way, men have too. Although fatherhood is ultimately a cultural invention, the father can be made of equal importance in the family by assuming the role of provider. His role as provider is essential and necessary, for his wife and children are fatally dependent upon what he brings to them. As provider the man can know that he is necessary (instead of feeling expendable) and that he has achieved success. It is a peace of mind to a woman when she can depend upon the father of her child and trust in him. She can revel in the delights of bearing and nurturing children and men can be directed in appropriate roles that benefit society.

Understanding what has gone wrong and the truth about history gives a great peace of mind to me. My writing is sometimes harsh and I intend it to be. Women need to hear the truth and men need to start being men again. Only then will things be set right.



© 2013 What’s Wrong With Equal Rights. Reproduction in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.

Feminism and Female Preciousness

“Why does this always happen to me? Things are going great for like a week and a half then all of a sudden it’s over and I’m mystified! Seriously I am mystified because it always starts out so well! Mike and I had such a connection! The first time we had sex, it was so beautiful; I cried…

“You cried?”


“You mean like one glistening tear on your cheek right?”

“No. I was really emotional. I even told him that I loved him”

“After how many days?”


The above scene is from the movie How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days. We all know the movie, right girls? We’ve all seen it and laughed along with it. Glamorous, young, beautiful career women working for a popular women’s fashion magazine. Casual sex with marriage and children put on hold for a glamorous career that maybe less than one percent of women will ever hope to have. The thought that a woman might not be able to hold up to to male standards of casual, no strings attached sex and casual relationships(we might move in together later, maybe, but marriage is just so obsolete these days) is a foreign notion to these ladies. To think that a woman might get emotional during sex, even to the point of crying, is plain heresy to the liberation ladies. If a woman cannot be fungible with men and join in on the sexual revolution without becoming attached to the man, there must be something terribly wrong with her. After all, to conclude that men and women are truly different from each other (besides the obvious anatomy that not even the most hard-core liberal can deny) runs contrary to the feminist agenda.

Of course, this movie came out when I was younger and at that time I had no way of knowing I was being indoctrinated by feminist beliefs and ideals for women (what is feminism anyways? Wasn’t it that movement I briefly read about in Social Studies that gave us women rights?) At the time, it was just normal. Us women are supposed to finish our school and go straight into college so that we can “do something” with our lives. At the ages of 15 and 16 we are told by our parents that being sexually active is OK, as long as we visit the gynecologist regularly and be sure to remember to take the pill every morning. And, of course, remember that the pill does not protect against STDs or AIDS so be sure when you change sexual partners to make him wear a condom! Pregnancy before the age of 25 is not allowed because that would jeopardize college and career prospects!

So young women go out with boys. They may not necessarily want sex, but if we don’t give it to him, won’t he leave or think us a prude? Won’t the other girls and everyone think there is something wrong with me and outcast me if I confess I’m a virgin or don’t like sex? And if we have sex and it isn’t good, isn’t that because there’s something wrong with me?

This is the legacy of the feminist movement. Our society has become so blind to the differences between the sexes that they cannot even possibly imagine why women might need to be protected differently than men. To speak of unequal treatment of the sexes in any way is heresy and is cause for severe backlash and hatred against the brave sole who dares speak up.

But the fact is that women are not men. The sexes are neither mentally nor physically the same and when it comes to sex, our needs and desires are so vastly different from each other. But to speak of these differences is not allowed, as feminists have worked endlessly to gender-neutralize all of society so that women are not perceived in any way as weak or nurturing. This is also why women in combat doesn’t even spark backlash among conservatives anymore, because they too have adopted feminist ideals for their daughters. Feminists said that a young woman’s remains in a body bag should be perceived no differently than a mans and all of society has taken their argument seriously.

“Women’s increased sexual promiscuity and the high rates at which they have exercised their unlimited abortion rights have well served feminism’s goal of defeminizing women so as to make them androgynous male equivalents. Dramatically illustrating this commitment to promoting fungibility of the sexes, the women’s movement rejected changes to the proposed Equal Rights Amendment that would have lessened opposition to the amendment by forbidding military drafting of women or, at least, their service in combat. Since combat service would validate their consistent denial of female preciousness, feminists have always favored placing women in combat… Even if only relatively few women could meet the physical requirements of combat service, denying women exemption from that service serves feminism’s need to confute any perception of females as soft, yielding, potential mothers”[1]

So society has taken this message to heart. MRAs, and increasingly many men these days, are losing their caring and belief of treating women any differently than another man, and many are now simply saying if women are wanting “equality,” let’s let them have it. As one blogger stated:

“Sad to say but IMHO most men these days really DON”T like women ! That’s how much damage feminism has done !
Many men won’t speak out because they don’t care anymore what women want or if they live or die. It’s all a part of the “Men’s rights movement”. If women want true “equality” there are many that are determined to give it to them.”[2]

This was all apart of the feminist goal. Women’s sexuality is the most undeniable thing that separates women from men. The feminist theory was that if only men stopped being chivalrous to women and protecting women, then women would finally have to stop depending on men and putting their trust in them. Then they would finally achieve independence and stop relying on those alimony and child support checks!

Women, as opposed to men, have an extended sexual role that goes far beyond intercourse. This extended sexual role makes women precious, as women are the only ones who can bear children. This extended sexual role also causes women to perceive sex differently than what men do. It is not uncommon at all for a woman to become emotional over sex. Sex ties directly into women’s extend sexual roles of conceiving, carrying, bearing and nursing infant children. All of these sexual roles entail deep emotions. The nurturing hormone Oxytocin surges both in childbirth and in orgasm for women. In the aforementioned How To Lose a Guy in 10 Days, Michelle is assailed by her female co-workers for having cried after sex and become attached to the male. She is told that the most beautiful woman on the planet would drive a guy away with that sort of behavior. Crying, then calling him multiple times wondering why he won’t talk to her? What is wrong with this woman? Doesn’t she know she should just take it like a man and move on? It was only sex, after all. There are plenty of fish in the sea and she’s got a fashionable career and girlfriends to cry with over a fine glass of wine.

And because of the sexual revolution, many indeed may not care that a woman’s needs are different than a man’s. And as well, many men will also not care when women are shipped overseas to put their lives on the line in combat. In their view, women are not precious but instead androgynous male equivalents.

“Benefits accrue from this arrangement: for both, higher income; for him, freedom from the breadwinner’s responsibility; for her, status in the public arena, divorce insurance, and whatever pleasure she derives from market production. To the man, she is precisely what contemporary feminism demanded that she must be: a financially independent roommate who is a full-time market producer, much like himself. These ministrations are not designed to embody an individual who delights in developing her feminine role to its fullest dimensions, but to embody one who must narrow that feminine role sufficiently to become fungible with, and thus more closely resemble, her husband. This is why, in so using her, the man can be said to demonstrate despite of femininity. Women have thus harvested what feminism sowed; for some, the fruit has turned to ashes on their lips.”[3]

But, women must be independent, says mainstream society and the feminists. Traditional women are also assailed for depending on husbands. They act as if a woman has no clue of the “risks” involved in such a decision. But, if there is one thing that women *know* above all other knowledge today, it is that men are not dependable. That is, after all, the message we have received all of our lives. If there is one thing that women understand today, it would be that they must not trust in men. Of course, women’s dependency (when and where it actually existed in civilizations throughout history) has always been a common concern. Life is not always fair to us. The one we thought we trusted and loved could very well leave us or possibly die. Yet the feminists refuse to take accountability for their movement that liberated men from responsibility and caused women to understand that a career must be their first ambition in life. Their argument for forgoing alimony, for instance, is the same argument they still use today regarding women in combat. They will probably say “but, most men never paid their support” and likewise, “but, women are already in combat.” Feminists have always used the women who were in the workforce, without support or who had died as soldiers to officially demolish the laws that protected women.

A young woman might very well wonder then if she could ever trust in a man. Casual sex isn’t the glorious thing the media and the feminists constantly hold it out to be. Feminism has created a society full of Michelles. She has no power or hold over a guy that she sleeps with, yet he probably wouldn’t ever even consider her if she refuses sex. What is a girl to do or believe in her case? What is any woman to do? Women have deep emotional needs and the women’s movement has robbed women of their sexual bargaining power.

“Instead of deploring this development, women have been urged to become just as promiscuous and irresponsible as the men. Somehow, if we all descend to the lowest common denominator, we’ll find happiness in the mess we’ve created. “There isn’t a venerable history of women celebrating promiscuity;” writes columnist Frederica Mathewes-Green. “[I]f anything, women’s wisdom over the ages taught that emotional security was the precondition for sex being fun, and a wedding ring was the best aphrodisiac. But again, what did stupid old housewives know? Men called them prudish, so that’s what they were. Thirty years later women are still going morosely out into the night in dutiful pursuit of fun. And if it’s not fun, she presumes, it must be because something is wrong with her.” So now those of us who reject the doctrines of the sexual revolution (which had their roots in the “free love” movement of Marxism in the 1840s and in Margaret Sanger’s writings in the early 20th century) are expected to just go along with the “brave new world” the radical feminists created in the name of all women.”[4]

And, since men and women- in the view of modern society- are so fungible with each other, a woman must have sexual experience in order to be “good.” If the sex isn’t good, then there must be something wrong with her. If she is dissatisfied with casual sex then there must be something wrong with her. You will never hear anyone confess the truth of the matter. The conventional wisdom that feminists rejected at every turn is undoubtedly what can truly make a woman happy. Deep down women have a need to be able to depend on the man she mates with. This may also be why we are seeing the rise of such diversifications as BDSM. Increasingly I have been researching and seeing many women engage in DD (often with a side of BDSM) and feminists insisting that it is all about “exploring their sexuality.” They insist that it has nothing to do with actually needing to depend upon a dominant male and continue on with these games (for that is all they truly are). Yet while a traditional woman might find some aspects of BDSM erotic, she is already fulfilled by her dependency and trust in her husband. While men may have been disciplining their wives for thousands of years (not as often as we are led to believe, however) I cannot honestly see how women could actually want to engage in such a thing just for fun. But these games, much like casual sex, has been the feminist prescription for millions of women. The Michelles of the world continuously wonder how they can ever find a man they can trust in or a man that will stick around, yet feminism has no answers for these women. After all, they know very well how men lie and play women for their own benefit, right? How does a woman know she is truly special to the man? Surely not because he says so.

“As Zora Neale Hurston’s John Pearson so well put it: ‘You know better’n tuh b’lieve anything uh man tell yuh after ten o’clock at night.’ A woman can only know through the life the man constructs with her, through how he makes her feel as a female, through what he is to her and does for her compared to what she does for him by bearing his children. It is easy for a man to give these assurances to Brünhilde by assuming the traditional provider role, for that’s what she wants from him. But what can a man do to assure the spiritual virgin? She largely does it all for herself.” [5]



[1] Graglia, F.C. “Domestic Tranquility: a brief against feminism,” p. 191. Spence, 1998.
[2] “Do Men Like Women?” by Judithann Campbell, quote in comments section.
[3] Graglia, “Domestic Tranquility,” p. 349
[4] http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml
[5] Graglia, “Domestic Tranquility,” p. 144.


© 2013 What’s Wrong With Equal Rights. Reproduction in whole or in part is strictly prohibited.