The Two Main Kinds of Feminism

Years ago, I wrote several blogs about how feminists have captured the word “woman.” By that, I meant that if we as a society were to respect free will, one could not speak for all women. I reason that every woman is an individual who can speak for herself. The ultimate right that any woman can ever have is her ability to choose for herself. With this right, she can decide not to be a feminist in the first place. You can see that in a recent Gayle King interview with basketball great, Lisa Leslie. In the interview, Gayle hijacked the word “woman” and expected Lisa Leslie to play along with the victim narrative. Gayle ignored the fact that Lisa has a mind of her own, which is what feminism robs from most women.

You are a woman, so if another woman accuses a man of abuse, you should be obliged to ruin his reputation. Even if there is no evidence in the case. And it doesn’t matter if he is Bill Cosby or Kobe Bryant. You should contrast your defiant, self-sufficient posture with victimhood. Notice how Gayle spoke from a position of authority. As if she felt Lisa Leslie was too stupid. Gayle suggested that because Leslie was a close friend of Kobe, she would not see his faults. Gayle wanted the public to perceive a predatory sexual behavior Kobe Bryant “might” have had. But, in the interview, Lisa Leslie demonstrated that she controls her mind. That is what I have been talking about all along. Regardless of how the media brainwashes, some women have an account of their own. Every woman does not share the same feminist attitude, and that is entirely elegant.


The feminist cannot, therefore, claim to speak for all women. Frankly, a feminist cannot even speak for all feminists because we know that there are different kinds of feminism. The most commonly identified types are Liberal, Spiritual, Radical, Marxist, and Cultural feminists. I’m sure there are other varieties. After years of personal research, I have identified two main types. They are Progressive and Radical feminists. In my tenet, every feminist slump into one of these two categories. By that I mean, every woman is not a feminist, and every feminist does not want the same thing. For those who may not trust my study, I will outline some of the main types of feminism to illustrate my point.

The first kind of feminism in my research, is Progressive feminism. They are convincing and sophisticated women who want gender equality. Progressives have measured the stereotypes of women. They advocate for women who yearn to step out of the box. The Progressive feminist focuses on problems such as inequality in labor rights, the reality of domestic violence, the importance of child safety, wage parity, women’s health and yes, sexual abuse, and rape. She values masculine strength and appreciates chivalry. She is a woman who will admire, date, or marry a man and raise her children with an old school mentality. When necessary, she separates the woman’s movement from gender war. As long as society regards her concerns, and she can exercise freedom of choice, this feminist is satisfied. She only wants a few adjustments to the system. 

She understands gender duality, so there is no oppression or marginalization for her gender role and agrees with biology – men are men, and women are women. The Progressive feminist does not see all men as latent rapists. For her, every man as an individual. She believes in forgiveness and the rule of law. Progressives do not judge men by what other men did to women in the past. They go by the content of individual character. The second feminist I identified in my study is a Radical feminist. This woman is a fundamentalist doomsday pessimist. She is not only seeking for equality. For some reason, this feminist feels scorned. She is an individual who has targeted masculinity as a significant obstacle in her society. The Radical feminist has a fiery temper that every man can “trigger” without notice. The keyword in this ideology is radical. 


She is not agreeable with anyone who has a different opinion, and she envies the achievements of successful men. Radical feminists enjoy the sex shaming of heterosexual men. They advise other women to be irritated by a man’s sexual or romantic gesture. These are women who reject all compliments from men and classifies male attention as harassment. They report that women can be anything they want. In reality, that translates to rebellion against tradition, culture, or even religion. In light of that philosophy, a Radical feminist assumes responsibility for all women. She believes that every woman is a feminist. If a woman decides not to identify as one, the Radical feminist considers that woman as a sellout.

Her prerequisite is that women should stand up and be who they are, regardless of accountability, tradition, or culture. Radical feminists consequently advocate that women ignore what society has to say. Women should ignore religion, tradition, customs, ancestors and teachers. They should ignore their parents, tribe, or the essence of their nationality. They want all women to become self-serving egotistical sexists. Look at the five different feminists that other authors and scientists have identified. I believe it is essential to know this information. Everyone should make an educated decision. If you are reading this blog and you’re a feminist, this information can help you to discover your branch of feminism.

The five types of feminism are Liberal, Marxist, Cultural, Radical, and Spiritual feminism. These five categories are different from the two I have stated as my classification. There are only two kinds of feminism in my analogy – Progressive and Radical feminism. That is because a Cultural or Liberal feminist could be Progressive. A Marxist, Radical, or Spiritual feminist could be Radical. Some feminists could be none of the above. Some women are not feminists. In either case, I believe that every woman or man has a right to choose to be any kind of feminist. What is essential is that they know what they are practicing and preaching, and understand the collective ramification of that lifestyle or identity. 


Liberal feminism come from another author’s rendition. As the name suggests, this woman believes in social injustice against the oppressive situations that impact her gender negatively. She wants all women to integrate into the power structure of mainstream society. For her, women should be Supreme Court judges, prime ministers, chairwomen, chief executive officers, and presidents. Liberal feminism values the unwritten social covenant between men and women. A feminist discussion group identified Abigail Adams and Mary Wollstonecraft as their protagonists for gender equality. The Liberal feminist is largely non-confrontational. She negotiates the benefits she can gain from the system.

These benefits may include cheap housing, social welfare, and food stamps, financial assistance, scholarship, child support, employment, or any support that comes; because of her gender. In my opinion, this feminist is Progressive. She wants to live a comfortable life either alone or with a traditional family of her own. However, in most cases, they tend to be single, or divorced or single mothers. This ideology seeks to replace the patriarchy with the government. Here, women do not become fully independent. Instead they shift from one provider to another. If that is the case, then why not stay with your spouse rather than to rely on the government? That institution may be worse than the resented spouse. 


These feminists are not the same as traditional Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, or Christian women. Since all religions place the patriarchy above gender, the Spiritual feminists do not follow any dogma. She is spiritual in the sense that she accept one of the many forms of witchcraft as a source of inspiration. Often, they take to goddess worship, yoga and vegetarianism. They believe that because of the hierarchical nature of patriarchal society, men are in a privileged position to exploit women regardless of any consequences. So their answer to that problem is to use spells and rituals to manipulate reality. They may feel connected to nature, the environment, animals, or the ill treatment of other women.

By defying the patriarchal culture, Spiritual feminists feel that they also promote good health and the preservation of the earth. Here also, I believe a Progressive feminist can be Spiritual, but in most instances, they prove to be Radical. Often, you will notice that these feminists tend to love owning pets. I have even discovered that some traditional Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, or Christian women practice this form of feminism. This feminist is not a Marxist or a Cultural one. For her, the focus rests on her diet and her commune with energies. She is a witch. Depending on the brand of witchcraft, dark or light, that is what determines her orientation on the reality of life from her perspective.


According to, Cultural feminism is a philosophy that says men and women react differently to the world around them. And the global society must put more emphasis on how women approach the world. I would agree with this concept. But it implies that the female way of looking at the world is automatically better than the male. Yes. That rhetoric can unite women of all ethnicities, races, classes, or ages. There are two dilemmas there. 1. The feminist movement began with the idea of gender equality. How can it declare that one sex is better than the other? 2. The unification of all women by ethnicity, race, class, or age excludes women from honoring their tradition or representing their homeland.

What is the greater responsibility? Preserving her gender or guarding her cultural heritage? Is an Italian woman more loyal to her gender than her Italian heritage? Is a Chinese woman more loyal to her gender or ethnic culture? What comes first to a woman? Her gender or her heritage? Some say Radical feminism no longer exists. It is the bloggers who continue to confuse it with Cultural feminism. I intend to show that one movement cannot speak for an entire sex. Some women are not feminists. Every feminist does not belong to the same framework or philosophy. For example, the Cultural feminists’ doctrine of Ethic Care puts more emphasis on women’s cooperation, relationships, and peace.

Are the nurturing characteristics of a woman determined by biology or society? The truth is that these feminists aim to create a sisterhood culture. Will we look at the world as a global society through the eyes of men? Radical feminism teaches they should root out the deep-seated oppression of women. Let’s make the world just for women. To achieve that, society must oppress men dramatically. To me, even though Cultural feminists broke away from Radical feminism, they both have the scent of radicalism. Cultural feminists want to find techniques to enhance female essences without defining the meaning of those feminine realities. In my opinion, that proves my point once again. 

There is no single definition for feminism because every feminist has a different experience. How do we use the extraordinary gifts of a woman to contribute positively to the world? We must define those gifts and figure out if they are undoubtedly different from what we already had in the current system. The question becomes, what is the import of Radical feminism, a movement to transform society by oppressing men. Do cultural feminists insist on building a culture it has not defined? Will the world be more peaceful if women led the way? Where does Cultural feminism fit into my parallel? Since it has not determined the cultures or changes it wants to make, it seems to be a milder version of Radical feminism.


Whether it is in Asia or Africa, Europe, or the Middle East, the underlying thread of feminism is that women feel oppressed and unequal in our society. The antagonists of this cruelty are men. Radical feminists point to the most aggressive passage to the eradication of patriarchy rather than any other framework of feminism. The Radical feminist intends to destroy the patriarchy rather than improve the existing system, even if those changes were legal. A Radical feminist is about dismantling religion, culture, tradition, or any system that she believes contributes to the economic and social oppression of women. That means the concerns of women are more critical than even God.

As a traditionalist who swears to protect cultural heritage, I have difficulty accepting Radical feminism. I equate Radical feminism to man-hate because the word patriarch means father. If you initiate a movement for the destruction of the patriarchy, you seek to destroy masculinity. To me, both are inseparable, both in philosophical and political terms. Let’s say Radical feminists redefine masculinity as if we asked MGTOW men to define femininity. Therefore, as a man, I regard Radical feminism as the most awkward component of the movement. Putting it in the context of the Civil Rights Movement would be a faction that encourages physical violence as a means to end white domination.

The The only way to end police brutality is to dissolve the entire police force? Or, if we want to end corruption in the judicial system, we should burn all the courts? There is no way that such a philosophy would have support in any country. Do we want dissatisfied feminists to rewrite centuries of our history? Radical feminism cannot cross the boundaries of race, culture, and economic class, because then we find ourselves in a MeToo culture that destroys cultural icons based on accusations rather than evidence. When Radical feminists advocate that women’s reproductive rights include the unrestricted freedom to choose an abortion, I see that as potential freedom to commit murder. There have to be some clarifications in these arguments. However, I recommend a woman’s right to use contraception or to become sterilized.


I do not encourage the idea of irresponsibility. There are cases where a woman has unprotected casual sex for money or pleasure. And then decide to discontinue any resulting pregnancy as a way to avoid the consequence. That is especially not under the same circumstance when the movement advocates for the destruction of religious and cultural institutions as well. Like everyone else, the Radical feminist must respect order. I support the right of individual women to reject gender roles in their relationship. But to remove gender roles from society altogether? In my opinion, we should leave it up to individuals to decide whether they will cooperate with their partner in a relationship or protect public policy.

If Radical feminism does not oppress women, then a woman’s choice to participate in professions such as pornography or prostitution should be up to her and not the movement. It cannot be argued that women can do anything they want and then claimed that men force women to work in pornography and prostitution. If that were the case, we would accept the superiority of one sex over the other. That would defeat the purpose of feminism. Feminism is a movement about equality and freedom of choice. A woman can, therefore, choose to be a porn star or a prostitute without the influence of men. A Radical feminist should respect that choice when a woman makes it. Or they should redefine sexual assault.

Can Radical feminists make a definite contention and stick to it? Or is their movement fluid at all times? Radical feminism does not sit right with most people who follow tradition, culture, or heritage because it criticizes motherhood, marriage, the nuclear family, and questions how much of our culture we’ve based on patriarchal expectations. To criticize our institutions, such as marriage, government, finance, or religion, is the same as a Civil Rights activist with an unconfirmed conspiracy theory that he claims as truth. The problem with that is some women may prefer the opposite of what Radical feminists advocate. That is also their right. Maybe she is not a feminist and wants to continue her family’s tradition.

She might want to be feminine in the dictionary sense of the word. A woman might want to marry a dominant heterosexual man and enjoy the excitement of motherhood. Other women have the right to choose to be stay at home moms and, therefore, do not require any sweeping changes to the law that affect their everyday life. She may not want to sterilize herself or cancel all pregnancies to pursue a corporate career. Then again, another woman may wish to forgo the experience of being someone’s wife. She may prefer a successful corporate career instead. I do not believe that gender equality has anything to do gender roles in a family setting. I don’t even believe in gender roles.*

Leave a Reply