Kathy Gyngell: Feminism has wreaked havoc – it’s time for women to hit back

Some weeks ago Kathy Gyngell co-founded an excellent new website, The Conservative Woman. We wish it well. The following piece by her is typical of the quality of material on the site:



About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Fantastic piece. So true. I love it! Normal women themselves are beginning to recognize that the feminist regime is detrimental not only to men and boys, but also to women and girls, the family, society and the country! Well done Kathy. Looks like the truth is beginning to prevail, finally.

  • “Jill, like Christian Action Research and Education (CARE) and the Marriage Foundation, knows that reversing these trends means reform of family taxation to recognize marriage again.”

    If there’s one thing that feminists and conservative women agree on, it’s the fairness and wisdom of a bachelor tax, either overt or hidden. (Subsidies that only women or families can claim are a hidden bachelor tax). It’s not red-pill women vs feminists, it’s Team Woman, 100%.

    “Women despair of the work/childcare treadmill engineered through so-called family-friendly policies. Six-out-of-ten want to work fewer hours and spend more time with their children; four-out-of-ten want to give up work altogether to look after their children.”

    Yeah, I’ll bet they do. I’ve seen what housewives do all day.

    • It is unfortunate that the concept of a political party desiring less government/taxation in its own interest is an oxymoron. Any political interest that depends on endless growth or endless reproduction is bound to over-exploit gender traits to justify its position. At some point someone has got to realize that throwing more babies at an equation and tossing more men (and childless women) under the bus is not sustainable. The “right” for women to have unlimited babies seems to correspond to the “right” to exploit unlimited men.

      I’m not anti-baby only that it is not the right “choice” for every man, woman, or partnership with or without benefit of state-sanctioned marriage. This is the Achilles heel of conservative women political entities–all “choices” need to be on the table including a man and woman’s choice whether or not to be parents directly or by proxy (ie., taxation, child support, or covering for maternity/paternity leave of other employees by increased work hours).

      There is no sense for taxpayers to supplement anything beyond sustainable population growth and depleted general population wealth and resources are obvious indicators that the general population is overcrowded and overextended. Responsible loving parents produce responsible loving citizens whereas both the nanny and the nanny state are neither responsible nor loving but rather prioritize their own survival foremost.