Whatever the arguments for the intentions of early feminists (some had good intentions, many others didn't) are nullified by the stark and undeniable reality of revenge-themed feminism today - that is pervasive throughout society and entrenched in law. The irony is, those feminists that screech the loudest, whom are usually white middle-classed women, are at the very top of social hierarchy. You have to question what the motivation is for these women luxuriating in their elevated excess. Is it struggling to rise above a deprived position? No. Is it concern for other women? No. Only unless they share the same bigoted values as themselves. Is it to use the guise of gender equality to perpetuate their hateful contempt of men and instill female supremacy. Yes, for the most. You only have to look at any country where it's government has feminist influence, there's not a single example where feminists haven't engaged in implementing revenge-themed laws and policies against men.

Feminism didn't solely create bitter, misandric and vengeful women, it merely gave an acceptable platform to something disturbingly innate that resides within the female psyche. Read accounts of writers, poets, philosophers, scribes, etc describing female behaviour as far back as several millennia ago and it's not too different from contemporary women/feminists.

Feminism is just an old theme with a new facade and unbridled political license.

Feminisms elaborate tinkering with historical facts by falsely claiming women were oppressed (of course, every group has been oppressed to varied degrees, women being the least so) is then used to justify a genuine oppression of their own - on MEN - with the full support of the state! It has to be one of the greatest hypocrisies ever witnessed in history.

feminitism is a take over but by accretion

wimyn's agenda ( gynocracy) - if it has a cunt it is good !! to replace the established ( patriarchy) - very bad demeaning harassing putting wimyn down culture

or a hostile take over a little bit at a time

the old company rules are subverted and replaced by that of the new board ( feminits and manginas)

employees of the old company are retained by the new if they are useful to the new (manginas) ( commissars)

Quote from Celtic Druid

Whatever the arguments for the intentions of early feminists (some had good intentions, many others didn't)

Many early feminists wanted votes for women but NOT for working class men!

Quote from brian44

Many early feminists wanted votes for women but NOT for working class men!

Brian, that is a very, very interesting nugget you've addressed there - I'm would be seriously keen to throw some of this in the feminists faces... I don't suppose you got any information on it d'ya?

Quote from Marx

Brian, that is a very, very interesting nugget you've addressed there - I'm would be seriously keen to throw some of this in the feminists faces... I don't suppose you got any information on it d'ya?

I came across it in Steve Moxon's excellent book 'The Woman Racket' (page 121). It seems the suffragettes were a fairly elitist lot, consisting of mainly upper-middle and upper class women. They wanted to deny uneducated men the vote.