It’s arrogant to think you can only be a strong woman if you’re a feminist.

My grandma was a leader in her local Women’s Temperance Union, but that’s probably against what today’s feminist would be.  My other grandma had a brash temperament.  She didn’t care about what people thought.  She was a working woman her whole life.  Spoke her mind no matter what.  But I don’t know if she would have called herself a feminist.

I see it like a square and a rectangle.  Not every rectangle is a square, but every square is a rectangle.

My perception of feminism is not every brash woman is a feminist, but every feminist is a brash woman.

I don’t think you have to be brash to be a feminist, but that’s who you see.  I haven’t seen or heard too many quiet feminists.  Maybe that’s because you’re trying to change something, and when you’re trying to bring change, being quiet doesn’t do any good.

But angry feminists give all feminists a bad name, just like bible thumpers give all Christians a bad name.

You have to challenge my intellect and not challenge me by force.  But that requires people – men and women – to converse about it.  You have to find men who are willing to listen, which is harder than finding women who are willing to talk.  And the lack of men results in screaming women, because if no one will listen, that’s the only route you have.

Why do you think the church thinks feminists are bad?

Their ideal time was during the 50’s, and the feminists of the 60’s and 70’s countered that, so that made them bad, wrong.  In church we’re taught to argue and answer, not listen and question.

(Insert short history lesson about women’s rights.)

I didn’t know about the 3rd wave of feminism.  It’s like the feminists feel they won that battle and moved on, while the church is still stuck in the 2nd wave, arguing with it.

The assumption is that the feminist’s thought process is wrong.  It almost goes back to Lewis’ quote about Jesus being a liar, lunatic, or Lord.  If you’re taught that it’s not the truth, then they’re either crazy or wrong.

Why do you think men are threatened by feminists?

Men like to be in charge.  It’s a change to the status quo.  It’s a generational and cultural thing, and when you’re born and raised in it, this is just the way it is.  And if there are strong women, their husbands are on the church boards, and I assume they have influence that way.

We think women only want the power because they don’t outwardly have it.  The assumption is that feminists don’t want equality, they want power.  You also think that if a man lays down his power, a woman will take it.  That’s reinforced in the media.  Look at Everybody Loves Raymond and that line in My Big Fat Greek Wedding about the man being the head and the woman being the neck.  It’s already assumed and portrayed that women really have the power.

But look at Lincoln.  It took white men who believed in the black cause to enact change.  Whoever is in power needs to be willing to see the cause and help enact it, in order to do it somewhat peacefully.  Even if you find men willing to support the cause, the baggage that comes with the term is off-putting, as well as using a feminine term, which isn’t socially acceptable for men.  Let’s come up with a different term, like equalitarian.

What I truly don’t understand is that women aren’t a minority.  So why is this so hard to accomplish?