The 2016 women’s marches were a massive, crude homage to women’s anatomy, with costumes, posters, and slogans. Home knitting of the de rigueur hats representing a bawdy word for female organs led to nationwide shortages of pink yarn. Marchers left cities a mess, a metaphor for what feminism has done to society, men, women, and children.

In 2023, the Left (of which feminism is a tentacle) aggressively rejects using the word woman to specify or exclude particular anatomy, insisting any definition of woman, as well as anyone in the dating world, embrace the “female penis.”                                       

However ridiculous it is to claim to not know what a woman is, we’ve had decades of active repression of the wisdom and enjoyment to be had mixing men’s and women’s separate skill sets and interests -- the recipe for thriving couples, families, communities and nations. Instead, we’re bombarded with celebration of the family-optional woman, a vapid blank slate, with male capabilities and no innate womanly nature.  Men are shoved out of education to promote STEM for girls (who invariably choose people-centered jobs). Men are disfavored in employment law and government and corporate policies, as they are in family and child custody cases. Nowadays, sex-blurring body modifications are the only form of iron-clad job security.

Weirdly, there are opponents of feminist and trans activism, such as anti-trans activist and self-identified former feminist Kellie Jaye Keen, who say this isn’t men’s battle to fight, reducing potential recruits by up to half. That’s some strategic thinking.

Some who count themselves conservatives displaying vicious glee about female college athletes suffering decades after feminist incursions in college education and sports. These athletes were not born when the Equal Rights Amendment failed and Title IX was new. No matter. it’s time to woman-up, without training or talent for political or military strategy. We need to see these women change draconian divorce laws, bloated welfare programs, and anti-police policies -- and don’t forget to remove trans activists from children’s classrooms and ladies’ restrooms.

Doubtless, many current social calamities were initiated by -- or in the name of -- women.  But, if Group A caused some specific problem, how wise is it to give Group A sole responsibility for fixing the problem, keeping Group B out of it? Maybe if the problem is a mess kids made in the living room. But it’s too risky for grown up politics.

The different strengths and weaknesses of men’s and women’s brains have grave implications, especially if our society’s future were placed in the hands of a women-only group. Shouldn’t thousands of years of human history, documenting only a handful of women successful in commercial, political or military leadership, tell us something?

Conveniently for shadowy political operatives, and fans of a female-only fight against feminism, it’s a widely unknown fact that feminists have received aid from famous and powerful male figures from John Stuart Mill to Prince Harry. Criticism by feminists didn’t stop Hugh Hefner giving financial and political support to feminist causes including the ERA, birth control,  abortion, and funding to day care centers.

Even the word feminism was coined by a man, Charles Fourier.

Male feminist leaders who are also political leaders include Barack Obama, Nelson Mandela, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the Dalai Lama, and Justin Trudeau. Meanwhile, Forbes lists fifteen “most inspiring” feminist women: Kamala Harris, Mel Robbins, Bethenny Frankel, Esther Perel, Rachel Hollis, Radhika Jones, Cynthia Marshall, Kathrin Jansen, Whitney Wolfe Herd, Maria Eitel, Jacina Ardern, Christine Lagarde, and Sonia Syngal. Their listed accomplishments are heavier on fashion than politics. Only Ardern has been leader of a nation (which hasn’t gone well for New Zealand). Whitney Wolfe Herd founded Bumble -- imitating her previous employer, Tinder.  Famous feminists, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Victoria Woodhull, and Mary Wollstonecraft have utilized the fame and fortune of fathers, husbands, and male admirers to become famous feminist faces. A job unrelated to her husband’s presidency would be a powerful symbol of female independence. Yet self-identified feminists Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama spent their husbands’ presidencies making themselves highly visible as First Ladies.

Gloria Steinem was a creature of the CIA, which provided funding to Ms. Magazine. Founded in 1971, its first editor, Clay Felker, was a man. By 1989, with consistently low sales, Ms. covers featured women celebrities that attracted buyers for traditional women’s magazines. Helen Ready secured feminist icon status with a single song pointing out that there’s lots of women showing strength by being loud. Her manager/husband Jeff Wald ’s clients included Sylvester Stallone, George Carlin, and many more. He was also a boxing promoter.

In 1919, the all-male Congress voted to give the vote to women who overwhelmingly preferred leaving the voting to men. In some states, women’s support was as low as 3%. Women feared society’s collapse if women abandoned their household responsibilities for politics. They saw unique dangers of immoral women in politics, pushing nefarious policies, aided behind the scenes by unscrupulous men, and employing methods difficult for honorable women to counteract.

Would it even have been possible for feminism’s 20-21st century gains to have been the work of women alone?

Women are the logical face for feminism, even while quietly, or openly, receiving assistance from men. Numerous spokeswomen exalted for mouthing feminist talking points could deliver messages without anyone considering whether the ideas were crafted by women alone, especially if nobody thought to look.

After decades of failed attempts to recruit American working men into communist takeover of America, international communism deployed feminist ideology. Only two years after the 19th amendment passed, the Communist Feminist Movement was founded as an arm of international communism. This afforded feminism funding, political connections and attention.

If famous feminists have been merely the face, and not the brains, of feminism, taking down these women will not put a stop to the ugly political machinations that put them to use.

It is now sadly obvious pre-19th amendment anti-suffragist women were correct about the implications of unscrupulous women in politics. Feminists are highly visible pushing policies and laws detrimental to society and families. The only development anti-suffragist women didn’t predict was the naked depravity of slut walks and trans ideology.

While families have endured decades of disruption, entertainment and government have propped up unwed motherhood. Law has been distorted to foster easy divorce for any or no reason. In the name of children, fathers’ assets are stripped for distribution to hostile exes, under threat of a debtors’ prison complex more draconian than Americans fought against centuries ago. Fatherlessness, dropping out, incarceration, and chronically low employment are increasing together. With parents overextended and scattered, trans activists take to the internet, schools, and libraries, introducing other people’s kids to their “glitter family” -- adult strangers who spend way too much time thinking and talking about weird sex scenarios.

Feminists are using -- or being used by -- male allies to push America out of alignment with what most of us want for our country and future generations. Shouldn’t all opponents of feminism and its monstrous offspring, the trans agenda, be joining forces to push back with everything we’ve got?

Image: Joe Sioufi