Thread by @ProgressLevel1, FEMINISM [A Thread] (Quite looooonnggg but read it till the end) [...]

FEMINISM [A Thread] (Quite looooonnggg

but read it till the end)

Feminism is riddled with contradictions.
1. Feminism claims to be good for women, yet being a woman is not good enough for feminism.

By denigrating things that women tend to excel at (being empathetic, nurturing, having and raising children), feminism strips women of their very womanliness.

Feminism opposes femininity, forcing women to view their innate feminine qualities (modesty, chastity, nurturing, etc)

as suspect and as weak, unimportant, and less than men. It creates an artificial equivalence between masculinity and power, thereby masculizing women, stripping them of their femininity. Feminism devalues traditional femininity and pressures women to adopt masculinity.

Women end up warping their own selves, suppressing their own emotions and feminine inclinations in order to act more stereotypically masculine (being promiscuous, valuing career over family, etc).

So which is it? Is being a woman not good enough, even though feminism claims to be good for women? Is femininity not good enough for feminism?

2. The foundational premise of feminism is that the patriarchy exists to subjugate and abuse women, so basically men are bad. But...the irony is that feminism is also pushing women to be like men.

So which is it? Are men bad and thus not to be imitated, or are they superior and thus to be imitated? It can't be both.

It actually teaches women that men are superior. If women are pushed to be less like women and more like men, then the feminist implication here is that men are better. That is why we want to be like them. That is why we are ditching our own natures in order to adopt theirs.

So which is it? Are men worse than women ("men are trash!")? Or are men equal to women? They can't be worse than and equal to women at the same time.

4. Feminism tries to make two opposing claims simultaneously: that women are strong, AND that women are vulnerable. Both of these claims can't be true at the same time. Either women are strong and capable and therefore should be completely independent of men,

OR women are vulnerable, and perpetual victims of men's violence, and therefore should be protected by men.

Which is it? Are women strong and don't need anything from men? Or are women victims and need protection from men?

5. Feminism villianizes masculinity yet it benefits from masculinity.

When men act traditionally masculine, feminists are quick to call them "toxic" and "macho."

Yet feminists don't make a peep when men act traditionally masculine when it suits feminists, such as when men work at construction sites, in sewage drains, or in mines.

The dangerous, filthy, and physically difficult jobs are fine for men to have, but don't they dare extend their masculinity beyond those specific areas! Otherwise the previously-approved masculinity is toxic masculinity.

So which is it? Is masculinity useful or toxic? It can't be both.

Feminism can't seem to make coherent, consistent points. It is based purely on theories that are inherently self-contradictory and self-defeating.

In Islam we don't need to adopt the tangled mess that is feminism in order to secure rights, comfort, or happiness for women. Within the system of Islam, we find the Divinely-ordained balance of the rights and responsibilities of both genders, leading to wellbeing and harmony.

Latest Threads Unrolled: