Feminism is not a stand alone issue. It's part of a larger package to divide people. Ultimately control is the prize, and division is the path to the prize! As such feminism is one stone in the path to control.
I've written on feminism before. (See Feminism Part I and Feminism Part II). Likewise, I've written on the control aspect of feminism (Socialism and Christianity), and the origin of feminism (The First Feminist).
Most of what I have written is from a Christian perspective, but truly, those in the feminist movement generally have apathy, even hatred, of traditional and biblical values. With that said, let's examine feminism from a secular perspective.
Men and women are different! The physical differences are obvious. Not only are the genders born with different utilities, the biological differences, but the intent of their use is different. Men are built to provide the seed to women and women are to receive the seed. The anatomy of each is different to facilitate that purpose. The resultant reality is that the anatomy is different so that men and women can reproduce in two different models: male and female. Other models are mutations and are out of the ordinary.
In order to reproduce, the purpose for each design, there must be unity. Little human beings, male or female, will not come about naturally unless two people become one, just for a moment anyhow! The sex organs are different to facilitate that unity. Nature intended that there be unity between the sexes. Of course I believe that that is supra-natural, but let's just say, that chance designed that, whoever he is!
Psychologically, it is well known that most women have an instinct to reproduce. That is part of their psychological makeup, but it's a human trait. We have it as all other animals do. The natural instinct to reproduce is the norm in the animal kingdom. Men have the instinct to be gratified. Yes, we are designed to get the best part of the deal, but women too get pleasure from their own design!
Sex was not meant for recreation! Regardless of your theological or atheistic belief, we are biologically, instinctually and psychologically prepared to pro-create, and to facilitate that purpose, each gender desires the other in different ways and can become aroused. Consummation feels good and is pleasurable. Pleasuring each other's purpose is to propagate the species. The pleasure is not the goal, but arousal is just part of the process.
Hence, men and women naturally need each other for civilization to even exist. Unity, one gender to the other, is a natural thing for the well-being of further existence. Throughout history, the dependence on each other for existence was never denied! Now with the advent of technology, nature is fooled. Technically, the genders no longer need unity to replicate as they can do so artificially. Technology has usurped natural instincts and unity came into disharmony. Women now don't think they need men, but it's the unity that they don't need. The seed of men are still needed to replicate, at least until scientists create artificial life!
Men have always been the aggressors. Historically and biologically, they are inclined to seek pleasure over pragmatism. Men were intrinsically sexual in nature. Women were more romantic. Those are psychological differences which complement each other to further the species. With the enlightenment, women discovered that they could be sexual and romantic, at least that knowledge became public, and the mass of women scorned the taboos of society and did what the men had been doing publically all along.
As time went on sexual intercourse was more about pleasure than replication. Sexual mores changed. Women demanded sexual freedom. Eventually people made public that they could be pleasured without the opposite sex, and it became more common, as society became more liberal. Between the sexes, the mutual need diminished. The need for unity diminished.
With equal opportunity and war before that, women joined the work force. They found that they could do many of the same tasks which men could do. Indeed they can! However, the female is generally limited by their anatomy. They truly are physically the weaker sex. Perhaps that is design intent,, or a just chance happening, to satisfy men's pleasure and women's instinctual drive to conceive. Hence, men naturally have had the dominant role.
Since women can do the same jobs that men can do, it came about that they could also dominate the man sexually. Awareness of their strength created a feeling of independence. Not only did they not need men for replication, which became less important with working outside the home, didn't need them for pleasure, but also didn't need men for security. Equal opportunity legislation was pursued to decrease women's dependence on men. The current situation is that in essence, women no longer need men except for their seed, and in modern times the need to succeed and having careers have superseded the instinctual need to replicate.
Progressives have further dampened the desire to replicate by making the very act of birthing environmentally detrimental. Now the instinct to have children is dampened by the effect on the environment and the longevity of planet earth. Environmentalists, either consciously or sub-consciously, have contributed to disunity between the sexes, or at least reducing the dependence, one to the other.
Now women for the most part don't need men for anything. Their independence is near complete just awaiting science to devise a method. With time the natural order has changed. As a child I sometimes wished that I was a woman because of the fear of having to be the provider. I would have desired a strong woman to provide for me. Women failed to appreciate that men provide and women nourish. Now due to society and laws, those vocations are confounded. Neither gender can no longer be stereotyped and design intent or natural evolution (your choice) has been changed by the times in which people live. The natural is now the societal. "Do what thou wilt!" supersedes "Do what you always did naturally."
Unity was a natural thing throughout history. Now independence is in vogue. Men not needing women is unnatural. Women not needing men is unnatural! Yes, men have become more independent too and marriage has suffered. Men want the "united" part, but disdain the unity of it. Marriage is becoming obsolete, as is the traditional family. Men who provide the seed and women who in pleasure receive the seed often bare offspring. There are several choices they can make: allow gestation or abort, make a family or allow others to be the child's family or lastly, let the government raise the child. As such even women who unite just for a moment can still keep their independence.
Disarray is the natural order of things. That's the scientific principle of unrecoverable energy called irreversibility (entropy). Because of time, perhaps we can never go back to the way things were, but contrary to our natural design, we have become lower scales of human beings. We're not performing to our design intent (or any other theory). We have become unnatural human beings and our lack of dependence one to another has decreased as far as genders are concerned.
This flow of events just didn't happen! It's a plan of nefarious people because division furthers the cause of the powerful. If you read the manifesto of Marx, feminism is more than gender rights; it's a way to divide not only the genders, but also families and traditional institutions. It minimizes marriage and encourages work and vocations.
These initiatives are said to be for the masses, but they are for those in control. Division is a tactic for control. Feminism is no more than a way of dividing such that individual interests can be replaced by the good of the state. Honestly, who cares about the state of the state if individual states are disregarded? Although feminism is a front for freedom, the end result is that women will be under more control, ironically by old powerful men who will be the ones who do the controlling!
Feminism is not about equal opportunity, equal pay for equal work or even social justice. Women believe that with feminism, that they can control their own bodies, but it's the state who will control their every move. The state foreseen by Marx and nearly achieved until recently, is more about them using women's bodies to achieve socialist objectives.
Women believe that their sexual freedom is enhanced by feminism. The reality is that feminism is a tool to take away any freedom for the good of the government. Naïve feminist women are the mere tools of despots!
On close examination, any astute person can see that radical feminists aren't seeking economic justice or even social justice! It's perceived sexual freedom, trading off relationships for self-gratification. They are willing to trade off their instinctual desire to have children, to replicate, for a moment of pleasure. That's why abortion is the number one priority for most feminists!
Feminism is essentially women desiring to lack the responsible behavior that men lack. Men don't suffer the direct consequences of uniting for pleasure; women do! Abortion is "der final solution" for promiscuity so that women can be devoid of responsibility just as men are! Social justice is just an excuse for feminism, sexual promiscuity is the reason!
You may disagree with my analysis and that's okay. My desire is that women and men stop the division. Payment of one's own offspring is too great a cost for sexual freedom. Payment of ones own freedom is too great a cost to reach the power goals of Marxists. It's just not worth it!
Where is the respect for life/ Where is even self-respect? Radical feminists gather as a mob just as the Bolsheviks did with the Romanovs. Their society collapsed as some became mere tools of the power hungry. Marxists were happy, but mere power was still with the men, although they promised women so much. Their entire society collapsed as the power of autocratic emperors was replaced by the autocratic power of socialists. Women lost! Everyone lost! Women and men fail to learn. The forces of Marx are still using them!