My Problem with Feminism

Feminism, at its core, claims to champion the empowerment and equality of women. Yet, over the decades, the movement has evolved in ways that often feel disconnected from the everyday realities and complexities women face. What started as a pursuit for basic rights—like suffrage and access to education—has transformed into something more divisive, frequently promoting narratives that seem to oversimplify societal dynamics, and in some cases, even backfire against the very women they seek to uplift. 

Not all victories belong to feminism

Feminism is often credited with much of the progress made in advancing women’s rights, from improved social status to increased participation in the workforce. While the feminist movement has played some part in promoting gender equality (in the context of suffrage for instance), many of the changes in women's roles and opportunities can be traced back to technological advancements and historical events that had little to do with feminism itself and are often underplayed in discussions within feminist circles.

One of the most overlooked but transformative advancements for women's improved social status and freedom is modern plumbing. Before the advent of indoor plumbing, women spent a significant portion of their day fetching water and maintaining household cleanliness under much more labour-intensive conditions. The introduction of plumbing, followed by other domestic innovations like washing machines, refrigerators, and electric stoves, freed up time that was previously devoted to arduous household chores. While feminism advocates for women’s freedom to choose careers or engage in public life, these technological advancements were vital in making it possible for women to reduce the time they spent on domestic labour, granting them the ability to pursue goals outside of the household. 

Besides this, war (particularly the world wars) was instrumental in shifting societal norms about women’s participation in the workforce. As millions of men left for battle, women were called upon to fill essential roles in factories, offices, and other sectors. Women took up jobs in manufacturing, engineering, and other male-dominated industries to keep economies functioning during wartime. This temporary shift allowed women to prove that they could excel in roles previously considered beyond their capabilities, thereby challenging traditional gender roles. The post-war period did see many women return to domestic life, but the war experience had already planted the seeds for long-term changes in women's participation in the workforce. The rise of women in non-domestic roles was thus more a byproduct of necessity rather than a direct result of feminist movements. The Industrial Revolution further consolidated these gains over time.

Advances in transportation (which were also, in large part, a consequence of war) dramatically increased women’s mobility. Before these developments, women’s roles were largely confined to the home and local community. The ability to commute and travel gave women the freedom to pursue education, jobs, and leisure activities that were once inaccessible due to geographic limitations. The bicycle, for example, was hailed as a symbol of women’s emancipation in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, offering unprecedented freedom of movement.

The Pernicious Message of Contemporary Feminism

Feminism frequently attributes every societal problem to patriarchal structures, absolving young women of personal responsibility. It is too simplistic to place all blame on patriarchy for modern issues given that women today have more opportunities than ever before in history, in education and professionally. For a movement that claims that its primary purpose is to empower women, feminism doesn’t do enough to encourage women to take responsibility for their actions and decisions, so much as it perpetually frames them as victims of circumstance. Narratives that seek to find a culprit to blame for one’s “lot” in life often hold one back from taking charge of one’s life because one has a ready excuse if one should fail. If one’s setbacks are always the fault of a rigged system, then one's successes are equally out of their control. Is there any greater disempowerment than believing the game is unwinnable from the start?

No Place for Chivalry

One of the byproducts of modern feminism is the notion that chivalry is inherently patronising. Acts of kindness, such as holding the door open or paying for a meal, are now viewed as perpetuating gender inequality, when they can simply be gestures of love or care. In this rush to abolish traditional norms, the distinction between genuine respect and oppressive behaviour has become blurred. Feminism's strict rejection of chivalry alienates men who wish to show courtesy in small but meaningful ways.

When a man offers to pay the bill on a date, it's not a suggestion that the woman is incapable of paying her share, but rather a symbolic gesture of his willingness to provide for her. Similarly, when a man buys an engagement ring—often at the cost of several months, or even years, of his salary—it reflects his deep commitment to the relationship. This significant investment shows that he is serious about building a future together, a gesture he wouldn’t extend to just any girl he might pick up at a bar. It signifies his intention to make her happy and create a lasting bond. As a woman, would you prefer a man who is unwilling/ incapable to do heavy lifting, is inattentive in public so that you have to be extra vigilant for the both of you, or can't hold a steady job that would support you if you needed to take time off while your children are young? Or would you choose the man who only makes grand speeches about feminism, hoping to win your favour, but lacks the strength or reliability to back them up his promises with action?

What’s wrong with building up your man?

Mutual support in relationships is crucial. However, encouraging women to build up their partners emotionally, professionally, and personally is often viewed as regressive or submissive. Feminism's focus on independence and self-reliance can overlook the benefits of nurturing one another in a healthy partnership, which is necessary for true equality. 

Feminism sometimes clouds women’s thinking so insidiously that they end up bringing larger societal issues into their personal relationships, which, in my opinion, is a recipe for disaster. Disputes over tasks like doing the dishes are rarely about the actual chore or the people involved, but rather about the perceived imbalance of household responsibilities between men and women as a whole. Conflicts where you feel you're fighting a battle for the greater good on behalf of all women oppressed by men throughout history are unlikely to leave you open-minded or empathetic towards the man you're trying to build a future with. Constantly calling out what you believe to be “toxic masculinity” or trying to “defeat” your partner with your intellect will win you the argument but leave you with a defeated man—and it won’t be long before you lose both respect and attraction for him. Why not build up your man, especially when you stand to benefit tremendously from his strength, competence, and confidence, and from everything that comes his way as a result?

Excessive focus on the impulsive interests of young, unmarried women

Increasingly, modern feminism has begun to cater almost exclusively to the interests of young, unmarried women while neglecting the needs of married women, mothers, and older women. This is understandable, because the latter are more likely to have built fulfilling relationships with the opposite gender and would find fault with such a narrative that pits men against women. Issues like daycare facilities, abortion regrets, the emotional pain of infertility, the emotional and financial impact of widowhood, empty nest syndrome, etc. often receive less attention than topics like sexual freedom, abortion rights and equal pay. 

Not to mention, women who disagree with the feminist narrative, regardless of which demographic they belong to, are often labelled as "pick me" or accused of proving that "aurat hi aurat ki dushman hoti hai" (women are their own worst enemies), implying that they are upholding patriarchy instead of supporting "fellow women" in dismantling it. This leads to another issue: feminists frequently accuse these women of “pulling other women down” when they criticise entitled or unpleasant behaviour. Why should you, as a woman, be expected to show false solidarity with another woman simply because you share the same gender, rather than be free to debate and disagree based on her opinions and actions?

Teaches the fun of working without the provider responsibilities

This one cannot be stressed enough. Modern feminist discourse teaches young women about the fun and independence that comes from earning money without discussing the responsibilities that come with being a provider. Just as men historically have faced pressure to be sole breadwinners, women now too must grapple with the realities of financial responsibility, taxes, and long-term career planning if they wish to compete with men in the professional domain. By portraying work as a path to freedom without addressing the pressures of providing, feminism risks offering an incomplete picture of what economic independence truly entails. Feminism also perpetuates the lie that the primary source of meaning that a woman will derive in life will be from her career, while significantly downplaying the value of motherhood and family as sources of fulfilment.

Many feminists often look down upon women who choose to take time off work to care for infants or young children. Those who disagree with this perspective may argue that they advocate for women's right to choose whether to work, rather than insisting that every woman must work. However, this choice is not equally available to the men with whom they seek to be equal, is it? As a woman, I would hesitate to choose a man who is unwilling or unable to keep a job for any extended period of time. At the very least, a woman expects a man to have some plan for his life, even if he hasn’t yet established a career. Don’t get me wrong; I do not advocate for men having the “choice” to work or not either. I believe men realise their potential well when they embrace their responsibilities as providers, just as women achieve their potential when they fully embrace motherhood. However, the “choice” of women to work or not often depends on various factors: having a supportive husband willing to provide, not being in a position of extreme poverty, and having a support system to help with child-rearing, among others.

Calls for imitation of men’s negative behaviours

In a bid to dismantle stereotypes, modern feminism sometimes encourages women to emulate behaviours traditionally associated with masculinity, even when these behaviours are negative. Clubbing, casual sexual encounters, violence, drinking, and smoking—previously considered the pitfalls of toxic masculinity—are now championed by some as symbols of freedom and empowerment. Mimicking these behaviours does little to advance equality. Instead of seeking to adopt what is often unhealthy in men’s behaviour, feminism should advocate for women’s freedom to choose without feeling compelled to conform to male standards of rebellion.

Turns activism into consumerism

As is often the case, where there is demand, an industry quickly rises to supply it, and create more of it—and feminism is no exception. A wide array of products, from mugs and t-shirts emblazoned with feminist slogans to movies, books, and even music artists whose entire image capitalises on the wish-fulfilment of women influenced by feminist ideals, are marketed under the banner of empowerment. Many women, who have been sold on the idea of feminism, have internalised a strong sense of perceived injustice and insecurity, and continue to buy these products under the mistaken belief that they are “doing their bit” to dismantle the patriarchy. Companies and creators exploit this "do good" sentiment for profit, turning empowerment into a business model.

What many fail to realise is that they’re being taken advantage of, much like when food chains and corporations marketed fast food and processed food as a liberating alternative to home-cooked food, convincing women they were "too important" to spend time in the kitchen. This led to a cultural shift that redefined cooking as outdated or regressive, ultimately contributing to rising obesity rates and a loss of connection to traditional, healthier lifestyles. Rather than bring any meaningful change, the focus is often on superficial activism and moral superiority, driven by corporate interests.

Focuses on trivial concerns

Feminism has, at times, focused on relatively trivial matters like period leave policies or the "free the nipple" campaign, diverting attention from more pressing and impactful issues. These low-hanging fruits often overshadow far more significant battles, such as improving access to education for girls in developing countries, making affordable child healthcare available to women in lower-income communities, and ensuring that daycare facilities are widely accessible so women can remain in the workforce after childbirth.

Counterproductive for women

Finally, implementing this form of feminism on a large scale creates a culture where women hold ultimate veto power over a range of issues, from defining what constitutes "toxic" behaviour in men to making unilateral decisions about whether to abort a child. This dynamic often leaves women feeling more isolated, as their increasingly unpleasant nature can become off-putting, not just to men but even to other women. It creates unrealistic (and often unreasonable) expectations for men without encouraging women to raise their own standards. The idea that women shouldn't settle for the "bare minimum" in relationships falls flat on its face when "not settling" doesn't involve working to improve the relationship, but instead means leaving or avoiding commitment over exaggerated concerns while engaging in casual flings with multiple partners.

Traditionally, older women have passed down wisdom to younger generations—not just in the realm of homemaking, child-rearing, and relationships, but in cultivating the grace and dignity that defines womanhood. Mothers and grandmothers, often the fiercest protectors of their daughters’ futures, rarely raise them to view the world as a battlefield where every man is an enemy to outwit or a prey to subdue. Much like fathers with sons, mothers are strict with their daughters and set high expectations from them, aware of both the joys and burdens of womanhood.

When advising their daughters about relationships, older women don’t arm them with a checklist of demands or expectations for how men should behave. Instead, they offer a vision of what a partnership can be—one rooted in mutual respect, shared goals, and a commitment to a lasting union. The man a woman chooses should be willing to work hard, provide protection, and strive for a monogamous relationship that leads to marriage, while also handling practical tasks and allowing her to fully embrace her femininity. In turn, she should be willing to have and nurture his children, put some effort into her appearance for him, offer emotional support, and cultivate a harmonious home life, trusting him in areas where he has expertise. She might strive to regulate her emotions, ensuring conflicts don’t become unnecessarily hostile, while refraining from making him compete for her attention, and show him respect—especially in public—while letting him lead at times. These qualities, neither rigid nor required from the start, can develop naturally over time, as long as both partners are committed to each other’s growth.

Ultimately, the challenge of any narrative that seeks to address the problems of a particular group lies in balancing the message of empowerment with the realities of life, relationships, and individual desires, and this is where modern feminism frequently falls short. True empowerment may lie not in rejecting traditional roles or pitting men and women against each other but in forging strong, meaningful partnerships with men—romantic or professional and in embracing the multifaceted roles women can play—as mothers, professionals, caretakers, or partners. In the end, it seems to me that the advice passed down from mothers, grandmothers and mother figures—rooted in wisdom, reality, and a little common sense—offers far more genuine empowerment than the hollow battle cries of modern feminism ever could.

Image source: Little Women (1994)