the (non)sense of anti-feminists: the end of the traditional family

The world will end soon. And feminism will be responsible. Feminists are thought to have caused so much pain and destruction that very little will survive this feminist assault. Anti-feminists believe changes to the traditional family are some of the best examples of how relentless and damaging feminism has been.

I don’t need to tell you there are a lot of people who dislike, hate, even despise feminism. For someone who writes about anti-feminism, it is often hard to know where to start because there is so much material. There are many self-declared anti-feminists and many more who simply voice what they think about feminism. A number of these opinions focus on the idea that feminists want to destroy the popular family as we know it in western culture; that is the mum, dad and 2.4 kids. Often anti-feminists will say the family is suffering because feminism encourages women to work, which means women give the family less attention than they should. Anti-feminists rarely, if ever, mention how much attention men should give to the family. Anti-feminists also believe that feminism has poisoned the likelihood of young women wanting to have a family because of the lies feminists have told about family life. In fact a lot of anti-feminists suggest feminists fabricate most of what they say. But if feminists do fabricate everything they say, then how come I can’t remember a time when I didn’t feel a little uneasy walking alone at night?

One of the most disturbing examples of how influential anti-feminists have been was in the writing of Anders Brevik. Brevik believed feminism weakened the western family and is the cause of suspicion and hostility. He used this writing to justify killing 77 people in Norway last July. Anti-feminists often roll out the high rate of divorce to show feminism’s devastating influence on marriage. @ScreaminMumx2 on Twitter implies that thanks to feminism, her prospects for marriage are now lowered because no man wants to rescue her. Really, @ScreaminMumx2, all men?

But for Racheli Reckles, feminism has meant that men only want to marry women who have a degree. But Reckles is clever in her online article, suggesting women are trained to believe they will have a glamourous career after college (university in Australia). However, she never identifies who or what trains women to expect this (it’s obviously feminism). And of course, this glamourous career interferes with women and their possible role as a mum and wife. What I found startling is that Reckles is actually questioning a college/university education for women as she implies women should forego something so the intense demands of family life do not overwhelm them. Can Reckles honestly question education for women in this day and age? But wait, just one minute. If Reckles is implying women should focus on their family, and forego a college/university education, then isn’t she saying that women won’t be attractive to men for marriage?

Yet with feminism’s supposed negative impact on the family, others have documented how feminists are more likely to use attachment parenting. But how is this possible if feminists put their career first and their family last? In the 8 principles of attachment parenting, the words love, respect, sensitivity and nurturing are used. But these words are the complete opposite of how anti-feminists often write and speak of feminists: as heartless, selfish and intent on causing destruction.

Unless the world really has ended, then mum, dad and 2.4 kids remain safe, despite what anti-feminists believe. Yes, feminism has caused changes to the family but the idea of shared but equal housework is not a radical idea.