My purpose for writing this essay is to say that the feminist movement has essentially outlived its usefulness and is actually doing the cause of women's equality more harm than good. The whole purpose of the movement seems to be the eradication of pornography and sex in general, with the possible exception of lesbian sex. I have nothing against lesbian sex, but not all women are natural lesbians. Shouldn't the straight and bi women have the right to choose their partners, too? Shouldn't men have the right to couple with women, as well as with other men?
The anti-porn aspect of the movement is one of the most troubling. Far from being a liberation movement, they have been the most fascistic element in the feminist camp. Since when is speech and expression a form of "exploitation" to be eliminated through censorship? This is disturbingly Orwellian in its focus and quite vociferous in its hostility to men and women who are freely exploring their sexuality. Incidentally, are men in porn being exploited, too? There is an eerie silence on this matter, as if the idea is that only women can be victims of oppression and injustice.
When the feminists allow the SCUM types and the Andrea Dworkins of the world to speak for them or seem to speak for them, they give credit to the part of the male psyche that views feminism as a real threat to their life, liberty, and property. I certainly don't confuse Camille Paglia with Valerie Solanis, so why let them be confused by not sticking out?
Unless the feminist camp is willing to stand up to the would-be censors, we are headed to either a police state or an armed revolution, or possibly both. In addition, the Marxist groups within the feminist movement must be faced. Marxism is one of the most discredit ideologies of all time, but many Marxists continue to hold onto their delusions. Class struggle and dictatorship of the proletariat are articles of faith for them, which doesn't bode well for the future of any nation.
The greatest issue, however, here is that the extremism of the militant feminists provokes a long-running male backlash that if unchecked will roll back all of the rights that women have gained through their activism. A chauvinist vs. feminist civil war would really harm the country, but it would be over soon, and the main harm would come when the male chauvinist victors outlaw feminism. They will probably go further, as indicated by my story, "The Donation."
Some might ask why I assume that the radical feminist side would lose. It is simple. They have mainly chants and dogmas. Most of them aren't trained with weapons and organization. They would have trouble forming an army, as compared to the chauvinists. Right or wrong, there is a certain tactical advantage to being a bit macho.
Even if never came to blows, it would still be disastrous, however, as the politicians would finally agree on something if presented with a feminist conspiracy. They would crack down on them, and that would lead to sexist laws in time.
The feminists need to awaken to what their comrades-in-arms are doing, before they create a backlash that leads to a paranoid male establishment quashing feminism. If you doubt me, just consider that Robespierre's actions were motivated by paranoia, not ambition. He had to defend his Revolution against tyrants. That would be the attitude of those committed to disenfranchising women. They would view it as self-defense against a peril to his rights and his skin.
I don't want either a patriarchy or a matriarchy, so let's not fuck up our egalitarian society with extremist agenda. Let men and women work together for social and political progress. Let's make this a co-operative thing, not us. Vs. them. I want rights for all, oppression for none. No more misogyny or misandry should be permitted to rule. To quote the motto from the American Pledge of Allegiance, "with liberty and justice for all," should be our goal, instead of power to one group or another.