It’s from an old piece.

One might object to the socialist aspects of the term, as well, but they needn’t pose a problem. Yes, along with the useful idiots, the little women of Marxism have allowed women to be used as pawns in the larger socialist class war. (Since the ’60s ,feminist power brokers have argued for the independence of women as a stealth means of destroying the nuclear family, which is the last and best defense against Marxist ideology.)

But while Marxism needs feminism to destabilize society, feminism doesn’t need Marxism. Women can achieve without the restrictive governmental ideology. That is, there is no reason feminism needs to be socialist. In truth, by reclaiming the term we could provide clarity for women and everyone else. Let the Marxists call themselves Marxist. And let women call themselves feminist. Then perhaps we could stop arguing over definitions and actually achieve for women. Why should we allow declared feminists to continue to use women as pawns?

Teacher of life admin and curator of commentary. Occasional writer.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store