I just found a post on The Harvard Law review.  It is perfect for why I am anti-feminist.


The post is written as supportive of Feminism, but talks about the transition from advocacy based feminism to governance feminism.  It goes into great depth about what this difference is and why it’s important.  In advocacy based activism it is perfectly fine and reasonable to focus on the simple cases, the clear cases, the easy cases.  In governance based activism it IS NOT.  In governance based activism the hard cases, the edge cases, the ambiguous cases MUST be considered.

I only find myself disagreeing with the author on two points.  Feminism isn’t just starting the transition to governance based activism, Feminism is almost completely transitioned into governance based activism already.  Secondly, at the end the author asks a question.

Assuming danger, risk, and holistic environmental contamination ensures that restrictions will go into effect even where the facts don’t justify them. Will decisionmakers — and in particular governance feminist decisionmakers — be able to resist this trend?

We have seen this answered time and time again.  The answer is NO.  A clear and resounding NO.  The question before us isn’t IF feminists will continue this trend, but how to stop them given that they ARE continuing this trend.