The label “feminist” remains popular even among women who reject the socialist radical feminism of organizations like NOW (especially among older women who lived through the feminist movement). These kinds of women, including Tammy Bruce, Christina Hoff Sommers, Camille Paglia, Wendy McElroy etc., challenge the notions of radical feminism, but remain “feminist.” I’ve been told repeatedly: they are different from other feminists! I’ve been told that there is a difference between classical feminism and socialist feminism; between authentic feminism and political feminism; between equality feminism and gender feminism; between ifeminism and radical feminism; between the good witch and the bad witch. Frankly, I ! don’t care. They are all the same to me.

There is one uniting theme among all women (and people) who consider themselves “feminist.” I have found, in my couple years of challenging feminism at Penn State University and also reading feminist work, that all feminists have one single common attribute. It doesn’t matter if they are socialists at NOW or “authentic” feminists like previously described. It is regardless if the feminist at hand is a Marxist or a capitalist. These things are debated among feminists. Those who disagree with the radical feminists – they perhaps believe it is a woman’s choice to be a housewife or they may not be socialists – will just make up a new type of “feminism.” The one common! attribute among all feminists, everywhere, is that they reject the notion that men are men and women are women.

They range in their radicalism of this, from believing men should be women and women should be men to others who simply believe it is a woman’s “choice” to be male-like or female-like. Regardless, all feminists, everywhere, fail to endorse the idea that men should be masculine and women should be feminine.

It is not the libertarian women or the moms or the housewives who run from feminism: it is the women who revel in the idea of masculine men and feminine women, i.e. sexy sex. It has, entirely, to do with sexuality. Those that are open to the idea of toying with gender remain feminists. A woman who revels in her femininity – or a man who appreciates feminine women – rejects feminism.

I’ll tell you why I rejected feminism. I was always an advocate of the free-market. I was never a socialist. I also never cashed in on the victim mentality of feminists. But, I remained a “feminist” despite these things. It wasn’t until I realized the sexes were different, and, in fact, it is better to embrace your femininity, not run from it, that I rejected feminism. The choice, for a woman, is quite simply feminine or feminist.

An insightful quote, from Frank O’Connor is “No man is as anti-feminist as a really feminine woman.” This was my favorite quote for quite some time. The truth in it is mass. Feminine women are hostile to feminism: from sorority girls to feminine Christian women. The opposite is also true. Feminists are hostile to feminine women. I don’t care who she is, advocate of a woman’s “choice” to be feminine or not, deep down, feminists are nauseous of the idea of feminine women. The hallmark of a feminist is she is sexless.

Supporting femininity does not mean supporting women “at home in the kitchen.” The Independent Women’s Forum is an organization that advocates career women, but they also endorse the notion that women should be feminine – as seen in much of their work. Because they embrace feminine women and actively affirm heterosexuality, the IWF does not counter the socialist feminist institution under the name “feminist,” the way many others have. They are what they are: independent women. Feminism, again, has nothing to do with strong or not strong women. It has to do with feminine or non-feminine.

This is why conservative and Christian women, from the beginning of the feminist movement, never got washed up in the label feminist, but many libertarian women have. Conservatism/Christianity is based, largely, on the notion that men and women are different. To conservatives and Christians, setting up solid, healthy heterosexual relationships is of utmost important. They would never jump on a movement that tried to challenge this. Libertarian women, who do not understand differences between the sexes or the importance of affirming heterosexuality and marriage, would. (This is also why Christian women will, appropriately, tell anyone trying to jam feminism down their throat to go to hell.)

Some may argue that the belief in morality itself is the anti-thesis to feminism. That is true, a belief in morality as opposed to moral relativism is a good cure to feminism. However, nothing is as powerful is someone who admires masculine men and feminine women. This is why, I propose, among feminists, the ones still willing to fight for “feminism,” even if they have conservative and moral tendencies, tend to be lesbians. There is a lot of gender bending in the lesbian community. This explains why Tammy Bruce, the feminist I most admire for her ideals, still remains a “feminist.” Despite her hostility to moral relativism, she remains feminist. It is becaus! e she is a lesbian.

Feminism’s only real accomplishment of the past 40 years has been the destruction of the male-female relationship. Some may argue that feminism was necessary to liberate women in the work world. I say bullshit. Ayn Rand, a woman who was writing about strong, career women in the 1940s and 1950s, called feminists on their bullshit from the very start of the feminist movement. She knew what they were: unattractive women who could not get everything they wanted hence resorted to feminism. Women would have progressed and made bigger names for themselves naturally, without the malicious WLM of the 1970s. And we would have don! e it without destroying dating, marriage, and family along the way.

I believe all feminists are interested in only one thing: destroying sexuality. They either don’t care about or want to destroy the male-female relationship. If any feminist wants to challenge this argument of mine, I encourage them to stand up and support segregated gender roles. Support genuine heterosexuality: men as masculine and women as feminine (which will necessarily lead to men as husbands and fathers and women as wives and mothers). And I do not want a loose: “I support a woman’s CHOICE to be feminine.” Thanks, but we don’t need your permission. Give a full, unapolo! getic endorsement of it. Make up yet another variety of feminism. A feminine feminist movement. I dare you to.