As someone who is atheistic and anti-religious I find it disturbing that current belief systems and cultural trends in the West are being heavily influenced by an ideology whose adherents defend it with blind faith like a religion – the ideology of Feminist Fundamentalism, which seems to be part of a broader trend to replace scientific rationalism with post-rational mysticism. Feminist Fundamentalism in many ways resembles a religion in that it promotes beliefs that are mostly based on magical thinking and not based on science or on the weight of the evidence, including beliefs that men and women are the same intellectually, emotionally, and in ability (or even that women are intellectually superior, based on flawed comparisons that ignore that girls/women mature and peak earlier than boys/men). Also, like most religions, it has fanatical followers, mostly consisting of over-privileged young women, many of whom glorify victimhood and are obsessed with acts of micro-aggression.
Feminist Fundamentalist beliefs are easily distinguished from, though they are often conflated with, the related moral imperative that women and men should be treated as having the same value to society and provided the same respect, nurturing, and concern and their needs attended to equally. Also, note that these beliefs imply that men and women are equal in virtually all ways, except that only women can have babies so that women are a bit more equal, making men redundant, unnecessary, and expendable.
The Feminist Fundamentalism belief system, which is the source of most of the rules of political correctness and which has become accepted uncritically by much of academia, is backed by pseudo-science designed for the pseudo-sophisticated, is counterfactual, deviates significantly from what the best available evidence suggests, fuels hate-filled and divisive rants about “the patriarchy” which demonize half the members of the human race, and causes great inefficiency in the degree to which Western societies meet the needs of their members. It is interesting that the proponents of Feminist Fundamentalism argue that it follows from applying Critical Theory to traditional beliefs, though a similar application of Critical Theory to the Feminist Fundamentalist belief system would demonstrate that it is at least as arbitrary as traditional belief systems while, unlike traditional beliefs, it cannot be said to have successfully built a modern civilization.
One of the most dangerous and destructive Feminist Fundamentalist beliefs is that homosexual relations are equal to heterosexual relations. Like the other beliefs, this is counterfactual and not based on any scientific evidence but instead is based on what those promoting the ideology wish to be true. Evolution designed heterosexuality, as it designed gender differences, over millions of years to serve purposes related not only to reproduction but to the creation of group harmony and cohesion. The attacks on the value of heterosexuality and the poisoning of the relations between men and women by the advocates of Feminist Fundamentalism erode the fundamental bonds that hold a society together, creating a plethora of associated short- and long-term costs, many of them unforeseeable.
Among other costs of adopting Feminist Fundamentalist beliefs, including increased confusion of self-identity and social chaos resulting from more unmet expectations, the legal system is burdened with the task of limiting and punishing behavior, mostly by males, that results from the adopting these beliefs and ignoring the differences in the sexes. The ignoring of the differences leads to not only criminal prosecutions that overburden that system, but creates a great many broken and bitter people who will become burdens on, rather than contributors to, human society. Even more concerning, it becomes impossible to design an efficient, harmonious society on a scientific basis with these nonsensical and non-scientific beliefs dominating social relations.
One place where the legal system does recognize significant difference in the sexes is in child custody preferences. Here, a flawed assumption is made that women should be given custody of children after divorce. It was decided long ago that child custody cases would operate under a presumption that the mother should receive custody as it was assumed that the mother was the more necessary parent. However, I think the data developed over the past few decades of how poorly boys do without a father in the house makes it imperative to abandon the earlier presumption. Also, children learn more from the parent of the same sex so the presumption in child custody cases should be in favor of giving custody to the parent of the same sex as the child. I would further add that while the earlier practice was in part based on the assumption that children would fare better if siblings were not separated, the need of a boy for the constant oversight and companionship of a father appears to far outweigh any benefit the boy might receive from being placed with female siblings.
Note that Feminist Fundamentalism is not any more scientific or rational than the traditional deity-based religions that it is apparently supplanting. Similar to what these religions did in the past, it is ascending because it corresponds with the interests of those with the most power, which in today’s world means globalist elites and the giant corporations that they control.
As these globalist elites have divided the common people and made it more difficult for them to resist their subjugation, they have corrupted Maslow’s ideas about personal fulfillment and have glorified tedious office work while devaluing motherhood and the importance of nurturing. By this they have not only elevated financial concerns above broader human needs, but have pushed more women into the labor force, depressing labor costs, and normalizing the viewpoint that the common man or woman should strive to be, and should expect to be, nothing more than an interchangeable, disposable, corporate worker bee.
No man or woman dares to challenge Feminist Fundamentalism for fear of being targeted and labeled as someone socially undesirable. Just acknowledging that there may be questions regarding the validity of some of its premises can end or seriously damage someone’s career – just ask Larry Summers. The oppressive environment fostered by the priests of Feminist Fundamentalism in protecting this irrational belief system in some ways rivals that created by the Catholic Church in Medieval Europe.