Great collection of writing on the negative side of feminism. What's facinating is to see just how much power women have and yet how much can go wrong when they don't realize this power. It makes sense that the ancients considered the feminine as chaos and the masculine as order. Together they can create antifragile systems but ripped apart they create problems.
You’ve provoked so many thoughts in this wonderful piece. Here are the top ones:
- regarding feminists who refuse to admit women can be villains as can men, you seem to have hit upon the split representation of objects, per Kernberg (I believe). This happens not only at the individual level, but at the collective level of feminism as a social movement.
The author argues covert/vulnerable-sensitive narcissism is a feminine form and would theoretically explain Munchausen by proxy being primarily a female-perpetrated form of child abuse (mirroring maternal grandiosity). If we go full Christopher Lasch/The Culture of Narcissism and upscale this concept, we might draw an analogy between this and how Democrats have exploited and suppressed the black segment of US population to mirror the collective Democrat maternal/caring grandiosity. It’s a fascinating parallel.
- In terms of chasing the same ladder that men built, consider the shame etiological component of narcissism. If a woman (feminist) was unconsciously ashamed of her femine biology, she would thus unconsciously want to be… a man. There is no other choice, really.
I think that's what mutating feminism is getting to...its desire to be male due to rejection of self. The transhumanist feminism movement is trying to take us down that path.
As a victim of my ex’s…“Munchausen by proxy being primarily a female-perpetrated form of child abuse (mirroring maternal grandiosity)”, I tried with the help of a Court-ordered psychological evaluation of the WHOLE family (including all three sons) to prove her Munchausen-by-proxy which I was able to demonstrate to the female Judge. All to no avail since she was allowed to move to Colorado with them in tow. Needless to say, a gut- wrenching outcome, post-divorce, in fact, I had to force her back to Court to tell the Judge her plans to take my kids away from our home state. I learned of her plans from my sons cos she was going to sneak them out without informing me or the Court.
Similar. Expert-confirmed, severe parental alienation. Feminist and other women judges, lawyers, and child protection workers/social workers all tacitly coordinated to ensure mother didn’t lose out on HER child support payments. Expert A/Prof of Psychiatry (court appointed) couldn’t also confirm MBP, but expressed concerns regarding this. Tens of thousands $$$ to both fund (via forced child support) and fight de facto court-ordered child abuse, driven way into debt. All three children now adults. Saved relationships with two sons, haven’t had contact with daughter since 2008.
Bureaucracies were gruesome to deal with. Canada is a feminazi Matriarchy.
Thank you! This compilation of articles has given me hope for a societal return to rationality.
But while it may prove enlightening as to Who, Where, What, How and When ... it fails to answer the "Why" of it all.
Radical feminist "Woke" ideology was created and bankrolled by well-heeled elitist women of the ruling class ... because it was the only way that they could somehow imagine themselves to be oppressed. Period.
It emanated from ivory towers on the campuses of exclusive Ivy League colleges and universities that cater to the needs of the rich and powerful.
Radical Feminist Identitarianism is in short, a vulgar bourgeois ideology serving only to confuse and divide the masses and deflect their attention from the obscene and ever-increasing disparity of wealth between the haves and the have nots.
I appreciate your response, but how does that square with the secular religion of Identity that believes that "reason and logic" are nothing more than the creations of Eurocentric white males ... binary weapons meant only to oppress everyone else.
I suppose we could define toxic matriarchy as narcissistic women dominating men via indirect power and control as a socialized norm while projecting shame likes there’s no tomorrow in that they accuse men of doing essentially the same thing.
I have been reading these critiques of feminism on Substack, and it does seem a common theme is emerging here. I think Tara van Dijk is an interesting writer.
My objection would be that feminism, like socialism, is not a coherent ideology but merely a flag that anyone can wave. In objecting to it, I believe we need to be specific for that reason. Not everyone who claims to be a feminist can articulate their connection to its founding principles.
Nevertheless, the fingerprints of post-Marxist academic feminism are all over queer theory and 'sex positivity', and the consequent harms to actual women.
My concern is that the heterodox backlash to feminism obscures the fact that violence against women and girls remains real, particularly within cultures which never adopted Western liberal feminism. I try to remember that when choosing what to write about.
I think it's helpful at this stage to divorce feminism from anything to do with human rights and protection of women. They're two separate things. Women and children need to be protected from the destructive force of this form of feminism.
I wouldn’t give it a name. Protecting women and girls is a moral obligation, not an ideology. The moment we brand it, it risks being co-opted just like feminism was.
So in your view, would this campaign stem from a general imperative to prevent mistreatment of any human, rather than women and girls specifically? What about issues which are specific to women and girls?
There are enough problems to go around. Focus on harm prevention to women and harm prevention to men. One of the articles I included from Rachel shares data about abuse to boys by their mothers. Another one cites spousal abuse by women through coercive control. By focusing only on reducing violence against women at the hands of men and ignoring/minimising violence against women and children at the hands of women isn’t helpful for systemic change.
I often wonder if feminists just stop in their tracks and for a few moments just think about it-Independence? What independence are we talking about?
Being a slave to yr cubicle or yr boss's whims or to a spreadsheet is freedom?
Being hooked to antidepressants or dope for wellbeing is freedom?
Being dependant on yr therapist to simply get by in life is freedom?
But come what may, we won't be dependant on a man!
Hell, man or women, in this fragile and imperfect world, no one is independent!
If they just think about this in quiet moments of authenticity, if for a few moments they have the courage to resist the cultural brainwashing, they'll drop the whole charade and embrace warmth and love and true dependence.
"what looks like male domination is actually a shame-fuelled matriarchy in disguise powered by envy, enforced by men, and sanctified by feminism." you perfectly encapsulate my point in the post you graciously share. Thank you for writing this article and for curating such interesting viewpoints on a subject that is gaining momentum.
Reading this, I was struck not just by the content, but by what must have lived underneath it. The clarity, the conviction, the structure—it reads like someone who’s had to explain herself one too many times, and finally decided she’d rather be believed than misunderstood again.
It’s clear you know what it means to be dismissed, minimized, unseen. Maybe that’s why you’ve learned to speak so loudly and so persuasively—to build a fortress of language around a heart that’s been tested.
What I can’t stop thinking is: the very instincts that shaped your critique—the survival skills, the sharpness, the refusal to be duped—those came from the same world that shaped feminism’s rage. And I wonder what might happen if both could be true. If we could name betrayal and still hold space for solidarity.
Either way, I hope you know this: you deserved to be heard long before you made yourself this articulate. You always did.
I think the difference is (and I'm in the process of writing about this) that I'm conscious of the destructive power of unprocessed and unintegrated rage. Feminists, on the other hand, make rage sacred and continue to stoke it. As you said, both can be true but there is a step in between naming betrayal and holding space - we need to feel the effects of it and process it through our systems so that we can know its wisdom. We can't build true solidarity based on healing without it so instead we build temples to our unresolved feelings and continue to worship them in community.
Hi Nathalie, thanks for the boost. Would love to have you come on my podcast to chat about our mutual experiences. Let me know! I'm free today if you are?
As a high schooler involved in teen drama and a 20 something consumed by my uni studies and then deep into biological research, I simply wasn’t interested. My mind could only take in so much while being engaged in many other higher priority interests. Of course that eventually changed.
Maybe not exactly the same, but it reminds me of a female friend always complaining online how much she was sexually harassed in the musician’s world. Her narrative always suggested that (many) male musicians were kinda hopeless. But the last time she raised the subject in private, all of a sudden she started to tell about lesbian musicians harassing her in an incredibly rude way. It changed the whole picture, but she never told THAT online.
She’s not a very explicit feminist but she is one of the most explicit sex-negative people I know, who every now and then jumps on the feminist bandwagon.
Appreciate the inclusion and you taking the time to put together a review.
Great collection of writing on the negative side of feminism. What's facinating is to see just how much power women have and yet how much can go wrong when they don't realize this power. It makes sense that the ancients considered the feminine as chaos and the masculine as order. Together they can create antifragile systems but ripped apart they create problems.
Yes this is true. Too much feminine can be destructive.
You’ve provoked so many thoughts in this wonderful piece. Here are the top ones:
- regarding feminists who refuse to admit women can be villains as can men, you seem to have hit upon the split representation of objects, per Kernberg (I believe). This happens not only at the individual level, but at the collective level of feminism as a social movement.
- With Democrats being the party of feminine cruelty, I believe I’ve ref’d this book before: https://books.friesenpress.com/store/title/119734000010478091/Michael-M.-McConaughey-The-Mirror
The author argues covert/vulnerable-sensitive narcissism is a feminine form and would theoretically explain Munchausen by proxy being primarily a female-perpetrated form of child abuse (mirroring maternal grandiosity). If we go full Christopher Lasch/The Culture of Narcissism and upscale this concept, we might draw an analogy between this and how Democrats have exploited and suppressed the black segment of US population to mirror the collective Democrat maternal/caring grandiosity. It’s a fascinating parallel.
- In terms of chasing the same ladder that men built, consider the shame etiological component of narcissism. If a woman (feminist) was unconsciously ashamed of her femine biology, she would thus unconsciously want to be… a man. There is no other choice, really.
I think that's what mutating feminism is getting to...its desire to be male due to rejection of self. The transhumanist feminism movement is trying to take us down that path.
Dude:
As a victim of my ex’s…“Munchausen by proxy being primarily a female-perpetrated form of child abuse (mirroring maternal grandiosity)”, I tried with the help of a Court-ordered psychological evaluation of the WHOLE family (including all three sons) to prove her Munchausen-by-proxy which I was able to demonstrate to the female Judge. All to no avail since she was allowed to move to Colorado with them in tow. Needless to say, a gut- wrenching outcome, post-divorce, in fact, I had to force her back to Court to tell the Judge her plans to take my kids away from our home state. I learned of her plans from my sons cos she was going to sneak them out without informing me or the Court.
Nuff said.
Similar. Expert-confirmed, severe parental alienation. Feminist and other women judges, lawyers, and child protection workers/social workers all tacitly coordinated to ensure mother didn’t lose out on HER child support payments. Expert A/Prof of Psychiatry (court appointed) couldn’t also confirm MBP, but expressed concerns regarding this. Tens of thousands $$$ to both fund (via forced child support) and fight de facto court-ordered child abuse, driven way into debt. All three children now adults. Saved relationships with two sons, haven’t had contact with daughter since 2008.
Bureaucracies were gruesome to deal with. Canada is a feminazi Matriarchy.
Thank you! This compilation of articles has given me hope for a societal return to rationality.
But while it may prove enlightening as to Who, Where, What, How and When ... it fails to answer the "Why" of it all.
Radical feminist "Woke" ideology was created and bankrolled by well-heeled elitist women of the ruling class ... because it was the only way that they could somehow imagine themselves to be oppressed. Period.
It emanated from ivory towers on the campuses of exclusive Ivy League colleges and universities that cater to the needs of the rich and powerful.
Radical Feminist Identitarianism is in short, a vulgar bourgeois ideology serving only to confuse and divide the masses and deflect their attention from the obscene and ever-increasing disparity of wealth between the haves and the have nots.
I'm working on the 'why' from a psychospiritual and metaphysical perspective as its roots are deeper than reason and logic.
I appreciate your response, but how does that square with the secular religion of Identity that believes that "reason and logic" are nothing more than the creations of Eurocentric white males ... binary weapons meant only to oppress everyone else.
I so appreciate you putting this together and including me. Going down the rabbit hole.
Enjoy the journey!
I suppose we could define toxic matriarchy as narcissistic women dominating men via indirect power and control as a socialized norm while projecting shame likes there’s no tomorrow in that they accuse men of doing essentially the same thing.
Projection city!
I have been reading these critiques of feminism on Substack, and it does seem a common theme is emerging here. I think Tara van Dijk is an interesting writer.
My objection would be that feminism, like socialism, is not a coherent ideology but merely a flag that anyone can wave. In objecting to it, I believe we need to be specific for that reason. Not everyone who claims to be a feminist can articulate their connection to its founding principles.
Nevertheless, the fingerprints of post-Marxist academic feminism are all over queer theory and 'sex positivity', and the consequent harms to actual women.
My concern is that the heterodox backlash to feminism obscures the fact that violence against women and girls remains real, particularly within cultures which never adopted Western liberal feminism. I try to remember that when choosing what to write about.
I think it's helpful at this stage to divorce feminism from anything to do with human rights and protection of women. They're two separate things. Women and children need to be protected from the destructive force of this form of feminism.
What name would you give the authentic campaign for the rights of women and girls to be treated with dignity and respect, in that case?
I wouldn’t give it a name. Protecting women and girls is a moral obligation, not an ideology. The moment we brand it, it risks being co-opted just like feminism was.
So in your view, would this campaign stem from a general imperative to prevent mistreatment of any human, rather than women and girls specifically? What about issues which are specific to women and girls?
There are enough problems to go around. Focus on harm prevention to women and harm prevention to men. One of the articles I included from Rachel shares data about abuse to boys by their mothers. Another one cites spousal abuse by women through coercive control. By focusing only on reducing violence against women at the hands of men and ignoring/minimising violence against women and children at the hands of women isn’t helpful for systemic change.
Thank you for putting this list together!
Pleasure!
Wow this is amazing.
I often wonder if feminists just stop in their tracks and for a few moments just think about it-Independence? What independence are we talking about?
Being a slave to yr cubicle or yr boss's whims or to a spreadsheet is freedom?
Being hooked to antidepressants or dope for wellbeing is freedom?
Being dependant on yr therapist to simply get by in life is freedom?
But come what may, we won't be dependant on a man!
Hell, man or women, in this fragile and imperfect world, no one is independent!
If they just think about this in quiet moments of authenticity, if for a few moments they have the courage to resist the cultural brainwashing, they'll drop the whole charade and embrace warmth and love and true dependence.
A
You're asking a lot for people under a spell!
Hit the nail on the head. Perhaps it is a mass spell, casted by witches in some parallel world!
Perhaps the old stories are true...
"what looks like male domination is actually a shame-fuelled matriarchy in disguise powered by envy, enforced by men, and sanctified by feminism." you perfectly encapsulate my point in the post you graciously share. Thank you for writing this article and for curating such interesting viewpoints on a subject that is gaining momentum.
Reading this, I was struck not just by the content, but by what must have lived underneath it. The clarity, the conviction, the structure—it reads like someone who’s had to explain herself one too many times, and finally decided she’d rather be believed than misunderstood again.
It’s clear you know what it means to be dismissed, minimized, unseen. Maybe that’s why you’ve learned to speak so loudly and so persuasively—to build a fortress of language around a heart that’s been tested.
What I can’t stop thinking is: the very instincts that shaped your critique—the survival skills, the sharpness, the refusal to be duped—those came from the same world that shaped feminism’s rage. And I wonder what might happen if both could be true. If we could name betrayal and still hold space for solidarity.
Either way, I hope you know this: you deserved to be heard long before you made yourself this articulate. You always did.
I think the difference is (and I'm in the process of writing about this) that I'm conscious of the destructive power of unprocessed and unintegrated rage. Feminists, on the other hand, make rage sacred and continue to stoke it. As you said, both can be true but there is a step in between naming betrayal and holding space - we need to feel the effects of it and process it through our systems so that we can know its wisdom. We can't build true solidarity based on healing without it so instead we build temples to our unresolved feelings and continue to worship them in community.
Hi Nathalie, thanks for the boost. Would love to have you come on my podcast to chat about our mutual experiences. Let me know! I'm free today if you are?
Hi Paula! I would love to join you on your podcast. I'm in Australia so our today is likely 14+ hours apart.
"My dad was the history and politics guy, and I tuned him out."
Why did you tune him out?
As a high schooler involved in teen drama and a 20 something consumed by my uni studies and then deep into biological research, I simply wasn’t interested. My mind could only take in so much while being engaged in many other higher priority interests. Of course that eventually changed.
Understandable. I hope you've resolved that with him!
He’s never been offended. He can talk for days without an audience
Maybe not exactly the same, but it reminds me of a female friend always complaining online how much she was sexually harassed in the musician’s world. Her narrative always suggested that (many) male musicians were kinda hopeless. But the last time she raised the subject in private, all of a sudden she started to tell about lesbian musicians harassing her in an incredibly rude way. It changed the whole picture, but she never told THAT online.
So much for the 'it's the patriarchy' narrative.
She’s not a very explicit feminist but she is one of the most explicit sex-negative people I know, who every now and then jumps on the feminist bandwagon.
The Toxic Male and the Empathic Female are archetypical complements.
I think the opposite applies too.
Can you elaborate?
The toxic female and the empathic male also complement
Would you call them archetypes?
Yes I would. Like the devouring mother and the gentle captive or enabling father
I’ve read a few of those listed. I’m not even anything political, I just find dissecting feminism interesting. Love Fiamengo.
It's fascinating stuff!