Changes

Most feminists:

Most feminists:

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike.  We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to dress immodestly. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."

* want to remove significant distinctions between how men and women dress, such as preferring that women wear pantsuits rather than dresses,<ref>"[T]he wearing of pantsuits is often a useful feminism signifier, depending on the culture of the law firm." [http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=2640]</ref><ref>"I was part of a growing tribe of pesky women called feminists by friends and enemies alike.  We women stormed out the door in our imitation men's suits ...." [http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref> even though many feminists also want women to be able dress immodestly without harassment. In some cases, most infamously during the Miss America protests in 1968, feminists have even gone as far as to indicate that female products such as makeup, bras, and heels were "instruments of oppression."

* do not want gender equality; they want power for the female Left.<ref>[http://www.eagleforum.org/column/2011/feb11/11-02-11.html Phyllis Schlafly, "Feminism Has Become a Hot Topic"]</ref>

* want gender equality

* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).

* in movies and television, portray the men, in particular, the white heterosexual men, as inherently evil, dumb or incompetent, and the women, in particular those that adhere to the feminist agenda, as inherently good, smart or competent (note that this conflicts with gender equality).

** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).

** on that note, some movies and television programs, in addition to depicting men as inherently evil, dumb, or incompetent, can sometimes depict women who adhere to more traditional femininity, including promoting traditional family values and traditional marriage (see below), as well as expressing more traditional gender roles and natures, in an extremely demeaning manner, usually implying that they are at best brainless bimbos and at worst gold-diggers (women who only marry someone for their wealth), often with the implication that traditional femininity is considered inherently bad (which goes against the concept of women having free choices regarding how to pursue their life).

* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).

* oppose [[chivalry]] and even feign insult at harmless displays of it (see battle between the sexes).

* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".

* view traditional [[marriage]] as unacceptably "patriarchal".

* belittle and mock other women who desire to have children or raise a family<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of  [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml        "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>

* belittle and mock other women who follow traditional gender roles<ref>[https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/03261992.html Nightline Transcripts, "Making Hillary Clinton an Issue"], [[PBS]]</ref><ref>"Being a [[housewife]] is an illegitimate profession... The choice to serve and be protected and plan towards being a family-maker is a choice that shouldn't be. The heart of  [[radical feminism]] is to change that." - Vivian Gornick, University of Illinois, "The Daily Illini," April 25, 1981. [http://www.ladiesagainstfeminism.com/artman/publish/LAF_Theme_Articles_13/You_Don_t_Know_Feminism_744100744.shtml        "You Don't Know Feminism"]</ref>

* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>

* shirk traditional gender activities, like baking.<ref>"But sometime between the Ides of March and Canada Day, I remembered that I'd given up baking cookies as a political act in 1975. ... No self-respecting feminist could be found in the company of cookie dough." [https://web.archive.org/web/20071204191342/http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/arts/story.html?k=60432&id=3b3c71f6-0d7d-4e1a-b8fb-cf8d5b1af478]</ref>

* support [[affirmative action]] for women.

* support [[affirmative action]] for women.

* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.

* advocate for [[women in combat]] in the military just like men, and coed submarines.

* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/  Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>

* refuse to take her husband's last name when marrying.<ref>[https://www.salon.com/2003/10/16/names_2/  Mrs. Feminist ]: "(Almost half the married women in the Harvard-Radcliffe class of 1990 kept or hyphenated their names.) If you read the New York Times wedding pages, and shut up, you do, the phrase 'the bride, who is keeping her name' seems like the norm, unless his name is Rockefeller.</ref>

* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)

* distort historical focus onto female figures, often overshadowing important events (E.g.: Henry VIII's wives take precedence in common knowledge to his actual reign.)

* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].

* often condemn the God-given order of gender roles, as laid out in the Holy [[Bible]].

* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".

* object to being addressed as "ma'am," or feminine nicknames such as "sweetheart" or "honey";<ref>[http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-06-19/news/0906180620_1_sen-barbara-boxer-ma-am-state-condoleezza-rice Sen. Barbara Boxer: No ma'am references, please], [[Chicago Tribune]]</ref> object to other female-only names, such as "temptress".

* take offense at grammatical rules of the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'

* take offense needless gendering in the English language, like using the pronoun "he" when referring to a hypothetical/anonymous person, or phrases like 'fireman' and 'stewardess.'

* support the [[homosexual agenda]].

* support the [[homosexual agenda]].

* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>

* push propaganda that implies that women weren't allowed to be granted an education until the 1960s, and all education beforehand was granted solely to "rich white males."<ref>https://www.mediafire.com/folder/e02pmeur6q4yb/World_History_up_to_the_1500s</ref>

* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".

* criticize music such as [[heavy metal music|heavy metal]], [[rock and roll]], and [[country music|country]] for being "sexist".

* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].

* object to anyone describing [[Northern Europe|Northern]] and [[Western Europe]]an women being [[modesty|demure]] or [[Southern Europe|Southern]] and [[Eastern Europe]]an women as [[seduction|seductive]].

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

Note that women who have to take over the family business due to their parents not having a son and the parents themselves being unable to continue working at the area is not considered feminist due to the circumstances involved. Some feminists want to do away with masculinity.<ref>Ernst, Douglas (October 30, 2017). [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/30/occidental-college-professor-attack-masculinity-di/ Professor pushes need to ‘attack masculinity directly’ to survive Trump era]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved October 31, 2017.</ref>

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.  

Leading political commentator [[Rush Limbaugh]] to coin the term "Feminazis" to refer to extreme feminist activists.  

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being sex objects, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

One of the major features of feminism prior to the 1990s was opposition to women being treated as [[sex objects]]. However, some feminists today support women being more sexual, viewing it as a means of empowerment over the traditional [[Judeo-Christian]] family structure and [[conservative values]]. While there is a push for sex-positive feminism (seen in works like ''The Vagina Monologues''), it is not necessarily a push for the objectification of women. Largely, feminists fight against this objectification of women. The opposite of sex-positive is sex-negative, which is predominately used as a snarl word to label criticizers of the porn industry. Ultimately, however, it continues on the same promotion of [[liberalism]] and [[anti-Christian]] values, as feminists today treat [[Women's rights and Islam|Islam's cruel treatment of women]] as a matter of "personal choice". Similarly, the National Organization for Women proceeded to list the likes of [[Hugh Hefner]], the founder of the infamous porn rag ''Playboy'', as a "defender of women."<ref>http://worthy-magazine.com/hugh-hefner-defender-of-women-says-republicans-at-war-with-sex/</ref><ref>http://rosemarycounter.com/hugh-hefner-dirty-old-man-or-radical-feminist/</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

During the administration of [[Bill Clinton]], feminism made a partial resurgence, although feminist leadership was criticized by people such as Christina Odone and Candice E. Jackson for largely failing to criticize President Clinton's [[sexist]] behavior toward female employees as both Arkansas Governor and U.S. president.<ref>Odone, Christina [http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article528875.ece ''Left-wing misogyny is alive and well: The party’s feminist agenda allows Labour men to get away with sexist behaviour''] (2 June 2005) [[The Times]]</ref><ref>Jackson, Candice E. ''"Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine"'' (World Ahead Publishing; 2005) ISBN 0-9746-7013-8</ref>

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

''See also:'' [[Liberals and reason]]

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

{{quotebox|"Our culture, including all that we are taught in schools and universities, is so infused with patriarchal thinking that it must be torn up root and branch if genuine change is to occur. Everything must go - even the allegedly universal disciplines of logic, mathematics and science, and the intellectual values of objectivity, clarity and precision on which the former depend." — Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, (New York Basic Books, 1994), p.116 [http://endofmen.wordpress.com/2007/11/08/why-feminism-is-a-fraud/] }}

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

If present trends continue, the societies in which the movement towards women’s equality is strongest are simply doomed to disappear.<ref>Martin van Creveld, ''Equality: The Impossible Quest'' (p. 165-166, 174). Castalia House. Kindle Edition</ref>}}

==Quotations==

==Quotations==

== Intersectionality==

== Intersectionality==

As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing  "identity groups."  In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress.  For example, should the alleged social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender?  Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity.  Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

As women attain a majority in society and a significant portion of the workforce, including leadership positions, the predicate of "disadvantage" was overtaken by competing  "identity groups."  In fact, many women identify with these other groups, and a theory was needed to sort out conflicting claims for social redress.  For example, should the social handicap of being a black deaf woman be addressed in terms of 1) race, 2) hearing impairment or 3) gender?  Under the [[intersectionality]] theory, such people should receive accommodations from society for all of their identities and a hierarchy of identify groups governs how much claim each group has to social capital based upon identity.  Without intersectionality, the comparative privilege held by women in Western societies would be overshadowed by and put into competition with the claims of other identity groups.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref>  Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.

"Intersectionality" was coined by [[Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw]] in 1989.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | title=Kimberlé Crenshaw on Intersectionality, More than Two Decades Later | accessd-date=9 March 2019 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190223111809/https://www.law.columbia.edu/pt-br/news/2017/06/kimberle-crenshaw-intersectionality | archive-date=23 February 2019 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |title=Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex: A Black Feminist Critique of Antidiscrimination Doctrine, Feminist Theory and Antiracist Politics |author=Kimberlé Krenshaw |publisher=University of Chicago Legal Forum |date=1989 |accessdate=7 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180513141436/https://philpapers.org/archive/CREDTI.pdf |archive-date=13 May 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref>  Without intersectionality, feminism and its advocates would be regarded as out-of-date by social justice warriors.