More thoughts on that destructive philosophy called feminism – my overall impression after almost three decades of observation

The other day I heard of yet another example of why feminism is a destructive philosophy.  It got me to thinking about it again.

For several decades I’ve considered this a horrible and destructive philosophy.  Originally, though, I believed it.  When I was about 20 or so I used to support the feminists.  I supported it mainly based on its political overtones, as this was during the cold war, when ‘freedom and democracy’ was everything.  But, by the time I was in my early 20’s, that had changed:   I had become against them. . . and it only took a few years!  This was all based on observations of them and their claims, which I can only describe as ‘absurd’ and ‘asinine’.

In the 20-plus years since then, I have only become more adamant in the fact that it is a destructive philosophy.  Hardly anything they’ve said or done has made me think otherwise and most of what I’ve seen has supported it.

The point I’m trying to make is that, at one time, I did agree with them but, on discovering more about them, I had no choice but to disagree.  This means that I am not blatantly going against them.  I went against them based on observation.  The fact is that the more I got to know them the more ‘twisted’ and ‘sick’ this point of view became.  I would compare it to a German, in the 1930 and 40’s, who first agreed with the Nazi’s, only to go against them after they found out what it was all REALLY about.  That’s basically what I did.


On first glance, it seems that their whole perspective is based on law and political ideology, of reflecting democratic ideals.  It seemed sincere and serious, expressing real concerns.  They used words such as ‘freedom’ and ‘equality’ that made it seem ‘legitimate’.

But, on closer observation, I began to notice that their perspectives go way beyond that.  They brought in far too many other things that had nothing to do with law or politics at all, and they did this consistently.  In fact, as time went on I began to feel that the whole philosophy had nothing to do with law and politics at all!  The more I watched them, the more I could see that there was ‘something else’ behind what they were doing.

There were a number of reasons that led me to think this:

  • They emphasized too many things that have nothing to do with law and politics.  Many of their complaints struck me as a ‘personal whining’ about things andt had nothing whatsoever to do with law and politics.  Only occasionally did their complaints have anything to do with law and politics at all.  But, yet, they would continually weave them into their ‘personal issues’ making them almost inseparable.  In fact, I consider the weaving of ‘personal issues’ with law and politics a characteristic trait of feminism.  In so doing, they tricked many people.
  • They criticized things and conditions that have been in existence for centuries all over the world (such as sexual identity and roles).  This, to me, was like condemning basic facts of life, a denial of the way things are.  I’ve seen many feminists who were in a denial that there was even a difference between the sexes!  It’s like they thought they were the same.  Ridiculous!
  • They repetitively and continually condemned the females of the past, often portraying them as ‘slaves’ and ‘victims’.
  • They condemned ‘female things’ and traits that have been have been a part of female life for centuries all over the world.  Many of them seemed like they were trying to destroy femininity.  All you had to do, sometimes, is mention that females cooked and cleaned and many would blow up over it.  What nonsense!
  • A lot of what they said seemed to reflect odd-ball perspectives of things, many of which were absolutely ridiculous and out-of-place.  To be frank, feminism strikes me as sounding more like something neurotic than anything else.  More than once did I hear them say something and I’d find myself saying, “that sounds like some neurotic point of view”.
  • Many of their claims were absurd, asinine, and ridiculous (see my article “Thoughts on the absurd claims of feminists“).  Many rank as the most ridiculous things I’ve ever heard come out of someone’s mouth.
  • They seemed to fabricate threats out of nowhere, often making everyday things into horrible ‘acts of oppression’ or a ‘degradation’.
  • They often made the female out as a victim.   Many times, they’d style themselves the “oppressed” or “enslaved”.  Quite a few have made a life out of seeing themselves as ‘victims’.
  • They were too personal.  They took things in a riduculous and nonsensical seriousness.  If they got mad their faces would often turn red, and they’d start to yell and turn into a raging beast, and attack, accuse, and condemn things.  Watching this for many years, you could see there was more to it than law and politics.
  • They were too accusatory and were too easy to condemn people, conditions, and things.  Many would jump on the chance to accuse and condemn, particularly the male.  Not only that, a lot of their accusations were unfounded and over ridiculous claims.
  • They spent too much time blame the male for a lot of their problems, labeling the male as ‘oppressive’, tyrants, or some other thing.  They were often VERY accusatory against the male, which I found INSULTING and UNCALLED FOR.  These continual ridiculous blind accusations is one of the things that really put them in doubt for me.
  • They try to be men and try to act like men often doing male things.  Many feminists are man-want-to-be’s.  This made many of them look unstable in their feminine identities, as if they had a problem with it (which I believe they do).
  • There was too much hate behind what they were saying.  I was often stunned by the hate they expressed.  In fact, I’ve never seen so much hate than from what I’ve seen from a feminist.
  • I was often stunned by their anger and how some of them would fly into a rage, often over trivial things or things they didn’t agree with.  I’ve seen feminists faces go red and even some jump up and down.  I thought some would even get violent.
  • Some of the views of the more extreme feminism is completely and absolutely ridiculous, almost frightening.  I’ve heard of them stating things such as how they want the male to become extinct or to become a slave.  In some cases, they want the female to become both the male and female.  They’re speaking of the eradication of half the population!  What type of philosophy is this that says such things?  Equality . . . freedom . . . where?  And what amazes me is that no one condemns such points of view.  These are points of view that should be condemned and there should be no toleration whatsoever for this!  But, with the cause of ‘freedom and equality’ everyone gives it a blind eye.  Yeah, similar things happened with the Nazis and we saw where that went.
  • They developed points of views that undermined and deteriorated the family, sexual identity, relationships, and society.  What they were saying, in a way, was nothing but a complete breakdown of society, relationships, roles, identity . . . all because they see themselves as not ‘equal’ and see themselves as ‘oppressed’.  That’s ridiculous.
  • They repetitively used the legal system, and political thinking, as a ‘weapon’ to get their way.  In other words, they were manipulating the system for their personal gain.
  • I could see that they have low self-esteem and, in some cases, a strong self-hate.  In some respects, feminism seems to as be a ‘projection’ of these feelings onto the world.
  • Overall, it looks like they have a problem with their femininity, being female, and the female role.  Feminism appeals to them as it seems as if it is an “escape” from this dilemma and situation.

I was always stunned how the feminist took things so personally, as if we were all attacking them in some deep personal way.  To me, this ‘personal’ quality is one of the defining traits of feminism.  I also think its ‘too personal nature’ reveals that this whole philosophy is, in fact, personal and about personal problems, and not about law and politics.  The more I watched this the more this seemed true.  It looked as if feminism was nothing but an avenue for their personal problems, an outlet, so to speak, a way for them to ventLooking at all this behaviour and their claims, how can a person not come to the conclusion that this is going way way way beyond the law and politics.  This is not about ‘equality’ or ‘freedom’, as they claim.  There’s too many ‘other things’ involved, to many ‘personal issues’.  When all you have to do is mention cooking and cleaning, for example, and they get mad, then you know there’s something wrong.

As I observed them more and more I could not help but come to the conclusion that feminism reflects a ‘female problem’, a ‘female conflict’, a ‘female neurosis’.  Even from the very beginning I always had this sense that there was something ‘amiss’ with feminists, like they had a wire loose or something.  Listening to their claims and their behaviour only confirmed it.  The more I looked at them the more convinced I became that it reflects a ‘female neurosis’ than anything else.  In fact, to me, the very word ‘feminist’ has a connotation of something like a person with a mental problem . . . it means an insecure female, a person that has problems being who they are.

Now, I know its true.

All you have to do is look at what feminism has done to see that this is not about law and politics.  It’s done things like:

  • It’s created an anti-male attitude.
  • It’s created a “war” between the sexes (something that SHOULD NOT exist).
  • It’s made it so girls don’t want to be female.
  • It’s created an atmosphere of blind accusation.
  • It’s destroyed the family.
  • It’s undermined sexual identity.
  • It’s destroyed our roles in society.
  • It’s created bias and discrimination in the law, working world, and home life creating a favouritism toward the female.
  • It’s warped the law and legal system, creating unjust and stupid rulings and laws.

With all their fancy explanations of how bad things are, what have they created to replace it?  Have they helped society?  Have they created a stabler society?  Have they really helped the female?

Not only that, with all that feminism has undermined whats left?

Think about it:  What would the world be like if it was run by feminists?  To me, that’s a scary thought.  I know I wouldn’t want to live in it.  For one thing:  it would be against me, a male (I’m one of the oppressors, remember!!!).  Not only that there would be no family or social structure.  Females would get special privilege.  They’d probably make a big temple to glorify themselves too.  They’d probably have to be in charge and control things too.  You’d probably also have females ‘bumping heads’ all day to see who is ‘in charge’.  And there would be endless complaining about things.  In effect, it wouldn’t be a society at all but a society of ‘favoritism’ toward the female, at the price of everyone else.  But this society would not be for the female in general, but only the ‘feminists female’, who thinks like they do.  All other females would probably be shunned, perhaps even worse than the male.

I wouldn’t want to live in their world.

Law?  Politics?  Equality?  Freedom? . . . I don’t think so.


I’ve found that there are a number of traits or qualities of a ‘feminist’.  Whenever I see them in a female it often a hint that she’s a feminist.  These include:

  • A horrible bitterness and unhappiness.
  • A sense of insecurity in themselves.
  • A belief that the male is ‘bad’ or a ‘threat’.
  • An attempt at trying to be a man.
  • A lack of genuineness.
  • An “I’m a victim” mentality.
  • Thoughts of ‘grandeur’, of how great they are, often claiming superiority.
  • The wielding of the law and politics like it’s some form of weapon, often threatening us with it.

In my opinion, none of these are admirable traits.   Not only that, they show that feminism revolves around a deeper problem, not a political or legal issue as they claim.  It’s referring to a personality type and a specific personal ‘issue’, not to a legal or political ideology.


In the almost 30 or so years that I have been observing feminists I have developed certain points of view about it all, and a general overall impression.  To put it in its simplest form I’d say it looks like this:

–Femininity, by its nature, causes low self-esteem and an insecurity in what it means to be a female (I wrote an article on naturally appearing low self-esteem in the female called “Some thoughts on the naturally appearing female low self-esteem“).  This low self-esteem is innate, part of the female character.  As a result, there is a tendency to be frightened of it or apprehensive of it.  Some girls even want to flee it.  Many girls all over the world feel this feeling, a common ‘unhappiness’ that femininity causes.  

When the idea of democracy appeared, with its ideas of freedom and equality, some of these girls saw this as a way to escape their ‘female unhappiness’.  It gave them a political and legal explanation to flee their femininity, to flee their unhappiness.  As a result, they used it and turned their ‘female unhappiness’ into a legal and political issue.  They portrayed themselves as victims, slaves, and the oppressed to fit into the ‘democratic ideology’. 

In so doing, they created a philosophy that is anti-male, anti-family, and even anti-female.  They turned it into a ‘life philosophy’ all based on their ‘female unhappiness’.  The problem is that it is not helping them with their unhappiness, as it does not get to the heart of their unhappiness. 

What they did is create a philosophy that is a delusion to themselves, a failed attempt at dealing with their ‘female unhappiness’.  Despite all they think they’ve done they are still going to be unhappy with themselves . . . which they are.

This new philosophy, being based in ‘female unhappiness’, has no meaning or value to the rest of the world because the rest of the world is not suffering from their ‘female unhappiness’.  As a result, it does not ‘fit in’ and has an undermining quality.  But, because they use ‘democratic ideology’, everyone thinks it means something. 

As a result, its become a delusion to the world that they conned into believing it.   Wherever feminism goes it brings deterioration in the male, female, relationships, and society.  No one will see this because it was said in the name of ‘freedom and democracy’, which means its supposed to be true. 

One day, feminism will become seen for the delusion it is and people will be stunned that people could believe such silly notions.—

The more I look at it the more I see the theme of low self-esteem in the female.   I saw it from the very beginning.  In some cases, it is actually a self-hate.  I was stunned to see this.  In fact, I should point out that it was actually the feminists who first showed me what low self-esteem was and what it can do, as well as how people deal with it.  They are still the ones that have displayed the lowest self-esteem that I have ever seen!  I have even written an article about it in this blog called “Some thoughts on the naturally appearing female low self-esteem”.

The low self-esteem they feel is innate in the female character.  That is to say, society didn’t cause it nor did the male.  In other words, feminism is trying to fight a naturally appearing ‘problem’ by blaming society and the male.  This is one of the reasons why feminism fails:  they’re blaming the wrong thing!

Feminists do a number of techniques with dealing with their low self-esteem:

  • They project their low self-esteem onto the world.  They blame the world, for example, and see themselves as victims of the world.  Much of their hatred of the male, and society, is really a self-hate projected outwards.
  • They try to counteract it with feelings of superiority.  Because they feel like ‘nothing’ the tendency is to counteract it with ideas of superiority, grandeur, or a false ‘greatness’.
  • They try to be someone else.  Since they have a bad view of themselves they try to imitate of ape another person.  This is generally the male, which is why they want to do do male things.

Interestingly, these follow common claims stated by feminists:

  1. “I’m a victim of the male” – projection.
  2. “The female is superior” – counteraction.
  3. “We’re equal to a man” – trying to be someone else.


The three claims above seems to create the three forms of feminism,.  They take whichever from ‘favors’ them and which appeals to them and their specific problem.  Sometimes there is a mixture.  These three forms are:

  1. The ‘female-as-victim’ feminism.
  2. The ‘female-as-superior’ feminism.
  3. The ‘I’m-a-man’ feminism.

All these are attempts at dealing with their low self-esteem.  Note how I said ‘attempts’, as they do not work.  They do not solve their low self-esteem.  At least, I have seen no proof of this at all.  What it does is make a bunch of girls think they’ve solved it.  But, deep down inside, it hasn’t.  This can be seen by their continual attempts at trying to solve it, which goes on all their lives.  Yes, we could give them all they want and, still, they will find something wrong.  This shows that feminism is not the solution to their problem.

What does this mean?

It means that feminism is really a self-created illusion the females created in their minds, in an attempt at trying to gain some form of self-esteem.

In that sense, then, it’s a delusion.

And there are continual examples of this delusion.  Listen to them speak about all their claims of ‘abuse’, ‘oppression’, and ‘victimizing’.  Listen to how they see ‘bad’ in everything, even in being female.  A feminists sees these things because they want to see it, not because they are there.  How many times have I seen both male and female stunned at the claims of feminists, of a bunch of people fabricating things out of nothing, seeing threats where there are none.  It like they’re trying to pul a rabbit out of a hat.  I recall, when I first confronted feminism, how I was continually stunned trying to figure out what it was they were complaining about.  Most of the time I could never see what, exactly, the ‘problem’ was.


And, we must remember, that these attacks by the feminists are being made at a society and male that has given them so much.  Nowhere else in the world has the female been given so much as in western society!  And . . . nowhere else has their been so much complaining and stupid complaints by the female!  This gives the feminists an appearance of a bunch of spoiled brats, in my opinion.  My personal feelings, are that they are.  All they do is want, want, want, and if they don’t get what they want they throw a tantrum . . . in the name of ‘freedom and democracy’.  We males gave them too much and now they expect the world.

This means, basically, that feminism is a product of the male giving the female too much, of putting them on a pedestal.  It’s a product, really, of all the chivalry we gave them.  For centuries the male, in western society, has given the female ‘special privilege’ and treated her with great respect.  Even when I was a kid I was always taught to give the female great respect and courtesy.  We’ve built things for them, protected them from the ‘bad’ things in life, showed them endless courtesy like opening the doors for them, we practically worshipped them, and so on and so forth.  When there was a war we did everything we could so the females would not be harmed by it.  As a kid I sat and watched male after male work hard everyday to support his wife and family, so that they would be provided for and happy.  Never have I seen such respect given to the female than what was given by us.

But, sadly, the chivalrous male turned the female into a spoiled brat.  We turned them into a bunch of people who expect everything to be given to them, that expects us to do everything for them.  It turned them into a bunch of selfish conceited people.

This spoiled brat, created by chivalry, went in a number of directions over the years.  In one direction it created a bunch of girls who became conceited and selfish.  In another direction it created a bunch of females who think everythings supposed to be done for them, that things are supposed to be handed to them.  And in another direction it created a bunch of feminists.

One of the main traits of the chivalry created spoiled brat is that their whole concern is about themselves.  Feminists are primarily about themselves.  This is their primary concern . . . their problem.  Who cares about the rest of the world!  When has a feminist ever cared about other points of view and other people?  I don’t think I’ve ever seen it . . . ever!

This self concern has created a very strong ego-centricity with feminism.  By this I mean that everything is looked at from their standpoint, from their viewpoint, from their philosophy.  Many feminists view their philosophy as ‘above’ everything else, as if the world should be following their philosophy.  As a result, they become very fixated on it, almost like an obsession.  This creates a very strong narrow-mindedness with feminism and an unwillingness to see the ‘greater picture’ of life.


Most feminism, though, does not concern itself with ‘female things’ or females in general.  In fact, feminism has little to do with females in general.  Feminism only concerns itself about the dilemma which the feminists have.   This makes it so that feminism does not reflect the female, the ‘female situation’, or ‘female issues’ at all.  I’ve even heard many females admit to this, that ‘feminism isn’t about females’.

This shows that feminism is dealing with a particular mentality, reflecting a particular person.  This shows, further, that it is less about politics and law as they claim.  In other words, feminism is about a particular type of person only.  This further shows that it is not the great representative philosophy that it claims to be.


But, like I said, the ideas of democracy gave their dilemma some ‘credence’ so they used it, and they are milking it for all its worth.  In the end, though, it does not do anything for the female.  In fact, it often only makes them more bitter and delusional.  The ‘happiness’ of a feminist is a measure, really, of how much they believe the delusion.  I have never seen a ‘happy feminist’, especially in later life.  This is because that, despite all their feminist doctrine, the basic root cause of the problem, that initiated their ’cause’, is still there.  This is an observation I have made repetitively over and over again for many decades.

Feminism doesn’t work!

Nothing they do makes them secure in their femininity.  Nothing they do makes them feel ‘whole’.   Nothing they do gives them self-esteem.  Having a career does not ‘save’ them.  Having some responsible position does not give them self-esteem.  Trying to be a man only alienates them from who they are.  Equality isn’t going to solve it.

I have never seen one ‘feminist solution’ work yet.

If we look at many of the ‘feminist solutions’ you can see why they fail:  they do not cater to their problem.  They use politics and law to ‘justify’ everything.  It’s the ‘weapon’ they use to get what they want.  As I said in the beginning, the whole philosophy is based in ‘democracy’ making it a product of a political ideology.  Its whole relevance and truth is based in a political ideology, not in any sort of wisdom or following of natural inclinations.  Feminism is a politically based philosophy, making it relevent only from that perspective.  As such, it does not cater to the human ‘soul’, so to speak.  The fact is that political ideology seldom caters to the human ‘soul’ nor does it solve basic human problems.  Political ideology is neither a religion or a psychology.  This is one reason why feminism fails.  The feminists are trying to solve a personal psychological problem of the ‘soul’ with politics!

It doesn’t work!

 In general ‘feminist solutions’ tends to do a number of things:

  • To flee their femininity in some way.  They often ridicule and condemn everything traditionally female, such as raising kids, taking care of the house, etc.  This shows a basic anti-female sentiment they have.
  • To become a man in some way.  They want a ‘man job’, with ‘man responsibilities’, and to do ‘man things’, like sports.
  • To glorify the female in some way.  They paint the female as a saint, something ‘beyond human’, a genius, as representing life.  I can remember, in the 1980’s, when some feminists would say “woman” they treated it like it was the name of god.  Some girls have even ‘turned’ god into a female!

This shows that the ‘feminist solution’ primarily consists in trying to not be who you areIn every case, they are not being ‘genuine’, they are not being who they are.  What do you expect this to cause . . . an enlightened happy female?

I don’t think so . . . and that’s not what we’re seeing.

This is just one of the many reasons why I consider this philosophy so destructive.


I’ve heard many feminists say that “all they want is equality”.

I don’t think so.

Many of us want fair treatment in the legal and political system.   The difference is that we don’t make a ‘life philosophy’ based in that idea.  Feminism is a ‘life philosophy’, a whole interpretation of life and the worldNot only that, they think it supercedes all other beliefs.  This makes it more than “just wanting equality”.  The fact that it has become a ‘life interpretation’ shows that it goes way beyond the political and legal system.   Making it a ‘life philosophy’ made everything a ‘personal’ issue, revolving around ‘personal’ problems, defining their life and the life they think everyone else should lead.  And this fact reveals where the ‘heart of the matter’ is with feminism:  their low self-esteem doesn’t place them in the world


I have always felt that the basic problem behind all this, of why they struggle so much  with low self-esteem, is primarily a result of alienation.  Basically, the modern world has taken their ‘worth’ from them.  In taking their ‘worth’ they lost their dignity and this, eventually, ate away at their low self-esteem.  This, coupled with their innate low self-esteem, created a crisis in the females (I’ve written an article that involves similar issues called “Thoughts on the ‘failed sex’ – how many female traits have failed – a hidden crisis of the American female“).  This same phenomena took place with the male as well, but it appeared differently because the male is a different person.  The point being . . . they aren’t the only ones.  In fact, we guys have been struggling for far longer than they have and with greater intensity.

What the last 200 or so years has seen is an extensive alienation by practically everyone in society.  This is all a result of the modern world, of machines, consumerism, media, mass society, and all that has been created.  It has basically upset and disrupted the whole of humanity.  Life is no longer ‘human centered’ . . . its machine centered, or media centered. We’ve seen a slow removing away of ‘humanness’ in life.  As a result, we’ve found ourselves in an increasingly more unhuman world.

Basically, we are having difficulty ‘adapting’ to this unhuman world.

Its caused all sorts of problems and attempts at solutions.   It seems that practically all ‘organized’ attempts have failed.  Some of the earliest attempts were political, begun in the 1800’s.  These include things like democracy and communism.  Ironically enough, they have only contributed to our alienation.

And this includes the products of those political ideas, one of which is feminism.  This politically derived ‘solution’ has only made things worse, and has caused more alienation than it prevented, as well as created even more disruption and damage to the society.  As a result, feminism can be considered just another destructive aspect of the modern world.  It’s another dehumanizing effect of the modern world to add to the collection, another thing to make the world less natural, less human.


After almost 30 years of watching feminism I cannot come to any conclusion but that this is one of the most destructive philosophies I’ve ever seen.  Everywhere it goes it causes some form of destruction (except to the feminists, who are usually the only ones to benefit from it).

Some of the destructive qualities of feminism include:

  • It teaches females to not be who they are.  It often teaches girls to hate themselves and things femalish.  In general, it preaches a female to not be ‘genuine’.
  • It preaches fear of femininity and feminine things.
  • It preaches manipulation of things, such as the law and politics, to get their way.
  • It preaches the needless blaming of people.
  • It preaches an unjustified hatred toward the male
  • It preaches an unjustified hatred toward society.
  • It preaches the destruction of identities and roles.
  • It preaches the destruction of the family.
  • It preaches the destruction of social structure.
  • It preaches self-glorification, usually at the expense of others.

These traits do nothing but degrade the male, the female, and society, which is exactly what its done.

Someone show me where any of this makes things stronger or any more just!


Feminism is a delusion.  It’s a delusion justified and supported by the ideals of democracy.  Without the blind obeyance to the ideals of democracy feminism probably could never of gained any credence or followers.  If anything, it shows the fanatical nature of democracy, particularly during the cold war.

But the feminists have deceived themselves, chasing after something that will not do anything.  Many grow to be old bitter feminists, often prematurely aging, I’ve noticed.  What do you expect?  With a ‘flight from self’ philosophy like feminism do you expect them to grow up and be happy people?

And, more importantly, they have deceived the rest of the world, making them think that there is truth in their philosophy.  In a way, they have pulled the wool over everyone’s eyes.  It’s like a great deception, a great joke that has been layed onto everyone.

Some day, though, when the ‘democracy fanaticism’ ends, this will be VERY apparent and the ‘great joke of feminism’ will be acknowledged.


Copyright by Mike Michelsen

This entry was posted in Feminism: a destructive philosophy, Government and politics, Male and female, Modern life and society, The U.S. and American society and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s