Skip to content

There’s an Existential Threat to Feminism – Where Are the Feminists?

The left likes to use the phrase “existential threat” to push their points, and to instill a sense of urgency in their brainwashed followers. Here’s their strategy. Choose a group you want to portray as being victimized, and then target and demonize the perceived nemesis of that group by calling them/it an existential threat. Similarly, if there’s an opponent to your agenda, exaggerate his or her transgressions, and then do your best to frighten those same followers by labeling that individual an existential threat to a much broader ideal. And be as hyperbolic as possible along the way.

President Joe Biden called climate change “the existential threat of our time.” Virtually every Democrat labeled President Donald Trump as an existential threat to our democracy. And we’re told systemic racism, a concept which no one seems to be able to even define let alone cite evidence to support, is an existential threat to our black community. Existential threats are virtually everywhere you turn, if you’re a leftist. But there is indeed a clear, existential threat to feminism – a social movement which is one of the foundations upon which leftism is built – yet prominent feminists are nowhere to be found. Where are the feminists?

Last Thursday a bill known as The Equality Act was passed in the House of Representatives and now heads to the Senate. Due to the filibuster, the bill is unlikely to pass, but its failure will likely be by a slim margin. If it were to pass, The Equality Act would essentially destroy feminism by eliminating the very notion of gender itself. Gender would be written out of existence; at least within the laws of our federal government. If there is no such thing as gender, there can be no such thing as male and female. And if there is no such thing as female, there can be no such thing as feminism.

At first glance, The Equality Act may sound appealing; after all, who doesn’t like equality? NPR labels it simply an “anti-discrimination law,” which sounds harmless. The USA Today lauds its “LGBTQ protections.” And Politico describes it as sweeping and historic. Sounds wonderful, doesn’t it? Hold that thought.

The Equality Act prohibits discrimination against anyone based on their gender, but such discrimination is already unlawful. The bill becomes treacherous with its specification that one’s gender is determined by their gender identity. If someone identifies as a woman, then according to the law that person is a woman; period, end of story. Regardless of his or her biology, simply declaring oneself a specific gender makes it so. A man with one X and one Y chromosome in every cell in his body, who laments his increasingly receding hairline and who comes home from work with a five-o’clock shadow every afternoon, can wake up tomorrow and declare himself a woman just so he can play from the ladies’ tees. Presto, just like that. And if you and I don’t play along, we’ll be engaging in discrimination and in violation of the law.

Under the bill, privacy for all of us will be jeopardized, men and women, but that endangerment is much more problematic for women. The Equality Act would force institutions, including schools and business, to allow anyone who identifies as a woman, including that balding man with the five-o’clock shadow, to use women’s locker rooms and bathrooms. A pair of women out to dinner with their husbands who excuse themselves to go powder their noses could find the local pervert waiting for them in the restroom: combing his hair, picking his nose, and peering over his glasses for a better look.

Additionally, the law would cover women’s sports and would apply the same logic. High schools and universities would be forced to allow biological men who identify as women to compete as women. We’ve already seen, in fact, scores of such instances and they don’t turn out well. Men and women are different, and the science of biology explains those differences in detail. One of those differences is an inherent physical advantage for men. Human males, due to their physical and chemical make-up, are stronger and faster than women. That’s not prejudice and that’s not bigotry, that’s just a fact. Allowing men to compete as women is profoundly unfair to the women against whom they are competing.

"*" indicates required fields

Are you voting in the midterm elections?*
This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

These assertions are not to imply that all transgender folks are predatory or are somehow seeking a competitive advantage in athletics, quite the contrary. Genuine transgender people are dealing with a mental condition known as Gender Dysphoria, and they deserve compassion, not scorn. But being compassionate doesn’t mean everyone else needs to pretend that their mental condition determines reality. It doesn’t. Reality is reality; and the reality is that men are men and women are women. Gender isn’t fluid, gender isn’t arbitrary. And, yes, there will also be those who seek to abuse such a law to satisfy sexual perversions and athletic aspirations.

The most disturbing aspect of the law would be the aforementioned destruction of the very idea of gender. The still-developing philosophy of those who embrace transgender philosophy is that gender is merely a “social construct,” as opposed to a biological one. They also attempt to intentionally confuse the terms sex and gender, thereby leaving their nodding minions puzzled but apprehensive of questioning any of their nonsense. The more incoherent the message, the better.

But it’s really not that difficult. Men are men, women are women, and for that very small minority of people who are legitimately inflicted with Gender Dysphoria, we should seek to help them. But to insist that everyone else comply with the charade isn’t helpful, it’s detrimental. And the feminist movement should be leading the way in opposing this legislation, and in opposing the entire ideology.

Prominent feminists, perhaps perplexed by the difficult-to-follow transgender rights narrative, have been either silent on the issue or supportive of the transgender initiatives. Outspoken feminist actress Alyssa Milano seems baffled by the subject, but as a proud leftist is compelled to support transgenderism. In a warped 2019 tweet apparently intended to express solidarity, Milano exclaimed, “I’m trans. I’m a person of color.” The tweet backfired, earning Milano a thorough scolding from those who are more woke.

Rose McGowan, another outspoken feminist actress, is seemingly even more confused than Milano, but equally committed to supporting transgenderism. During a confrontation at a book signing last year, a heckler accused McGowan of being unsympathetic to the transgender cause, with the premise that transgender women who are raped do not receive the proper amount of attention. McGowan shot back and explained, “Trans women are women and what I’ve been trying to say is that it’s the same.”

Perhaps the most prominent feminist of our generation, Gloria Steinem, is also fully onboard with the absurdity. Last August, Steinem co-wrote a letter to the Trump Administration condemning its “erasing of trans people’s civil rights.” Additionally, if we consider the list of America’s top feminists according to Ms. Magazine – a list that includes Stacey Abrams, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice-President Kamala Harris – not a single one has come out in opposition to the effort to prioritize transgenderism over women’s rights.

What had previously been a strong coalition of feminist voices, striving for equality for women and calling out anyone they deemed to be an obstacle to that equality, suddenly refuses to even commit to the idea of male and female differentiation. For the high school girl javelin thrower who should be looking forward to a college scholarship due to the benefits of Title IX, but instead finds herself on the outside looking in due to the requirement that she compete with biological boys, where are the feminists? For the soccer mom who wants to take a shower at the gym after an hour on the treadmill, but has to contend with naked biological men wandering the locker room, where are the feminists? Are you so committed to your absurd intersectional alliance, and to your opposition to traditional norms, that you will allow the rights of your feminist ‘sisters’ to be trampled upon?

There are indisputable biological distinctions between men and women; male and female. Prior to 1920 when the 19th Amendment finally granted women the right to vote, those differences were exploited by the patriarchal establishment, and that exploitation was a travesty. Next to slavery, oppression of women in America was the greatest injustice in our country’s history. But those differences, the differences that resulted in the disenfranchisement of half of our population, were real, and they exist today. They will always exist, and they are in fact beautiful differences that should be revered and celebrated; not tossed aside in order to advance a political agenda in the name of wokeness.

Even without transgenderism being crammed down our throats, one could argue whether or not feminism is truly necessary. Civil rights legislation over the years has corrected most, if not all, of the barriers and injustices that spawned the movement in the first place. But if the feminist movement is to remain relevant, and if they intend to keep any credibility in doing so, they need to stake a stand for women; real, biological women, not the imaginary variety. A united front by prominent feminists against the silliness of transgenderism could go a long way in shutting down this madness.

PF Whalen

P.F. Whalen is a conservative blogger at  His work has appeared in multiple publications, including the Western Journal, Human Events, and American Thinker.  Follow him on Parler @PFWhalen.

Image by b0red from Pixabay