Women’s March on Wash­ington par­tic­i­pants carry signs to demon­strate against abortion restric­tions, climate change, and sexual assault. Madeline Fry | Collegian

Mil­lions of women from all walks of life cel­e­brated Inter­na­tional Women’s Day on March 8 — a day meant to inspire and strengthen all women. But when some women who had embraced the fem­inist label tried to join their ranks holding pro-life signs, they were berated. 

The day was sup­posed to rep­resent the pride all women can take in being uniquely and won­der­fully made. Instead, those who dis­agree with modern feminism’s pro-choice advocacy found them­selves on the outside, ridiculed for thinking that they as women — who happen to support the right to life — had a place among the other feminists. 

Perhaps they were too busy “empow­ering” each other to rec­ognize the irony. 

A group of rad­icals con­sumed the modern fem­inist movement, pre­senting an ulti­matum: join the fem­inist movement or accept that women will remain oppressed. These rad­icals became rep­re­sen­tative of the fem­inist agenda, turning the once inspiring movement into a bul­lying spree.

The ide­o­logical under­pin­nings of the modern fem­inist movement only appeal to a select group of women who support the vulgar tactics radical fem­i­nists adopted — like donning cat-eared hats and parading with profanity. 

Even stu­dents on campus who identify as fem­inist, like senior Rachael Reynolds, are astounded at the lack of common decency shown by these out­spoken women.

“A movement that is striving toward equality is being hin­dered by a small minority of rad­icals. They aren’t rep­re­sen­tative of the values most fem­i­nists hold,” Reynolds said. “I do not agree with the vul­garity some rad­icals display in their actions or rhetoric, and I do not believe that should be taken to rep­resent the fem­inist movement.”

According to Reynolds, a small minority of radical lunatics twisted the original goals of fem­inism — equal pay, repro­ductive rights, and suf­frage — into a movement first-wave fem­i­nists would scarcely recognize. 

Perhaps so many Amer­icans find this new wave of fem­inism dis­tasteful not because of the vulgar women who rep­resent it, but because its true goals stand against every­thing many women want and need.

Fem­i­nists market them­selves as the provider of every­thing women want, but in reality, the prin­ciples of their movement render them inca­pable of accom­plishing this.

In the name of securing “equal rights,” modern fem­inism empha­sizes a radical desire to make women com­pletely autonomous — dependent on no one but them­selves and Lena Dunham. The movement rejects fun­da­mental desires many women share, including pro­tection from men and the joys of motherhood.

Fem­inism is becoming so unat­tractive because of a prevalent and blatant dis­re­spect for life among many of its ide­o­logues. It seems these advo­cates will do just about any­thing to lib­erate a woman from the respon­si­bility of moth­erhood, except of course the morally sound alter­native of absti­nence. The abhorrent dis­re­spect for life drives fem­i­nists’ disgust with women who identify as pro-life feminists.

Not only that, but many modern fem­i­nists ignore the natural inter­de­pen­dence of the sexes. For instance, Sheila Cronin, the leader of the National Orga­ni­zation for Women, attacked tra­di­tional mar­riage for years, arguing its only purpose is to enslave women. When asked why she was so adamantly opposed to the sacred tra­dition, she said:

Since mar­riage con­sti­tutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women’s movement must con­cen­trate on attacking this insti­tution,” Cronin said. “Freedom for women cannot be won without the abo­lition of marriage.”

But this car­i­cature of mar­riage is just that. in fact, the vast majority of women today want the mutual depen­dency found in a rela­tionship. The modern fem­inist movement is insulting to women who have respect for life and morality. The ridiculous notion that every­thing “offensive” is the patriarchy’s attempt to enslave women and force them to become barefoot, pregnant kitchen slaves, is degrading.

The modern fem­inist movement, driven by rad­icals, gives self-respecting women no reason why we should jump on the band­wagon. If fem­i­nists want support, or even sym­pathy, they need to move beyond the radical autonomy of the indi­vidual. In order to truly stand for what all women want and need, modern fem­inism needs to embrace all women’s rights, including the right to life.


Ms. McGhee is a sophomore George Wash­ington Fellow studying pol­itics and journalism.