“I’m going to write a feminist article”, I tell a relative. A messy expression forms across their face and a comment of disapproval followed right after that. This surprised me, as I was – quite frankly – expecting anything but a negative reaction. How could one discourage something that, in my mind, seemed so positive? Writing, which I see as a form of art: one that communicates knowledge, arguments, emotions, and much more. And feminism, which is the reason women in our contemporary times are what they are; the reason many societies developed in an equalitarian–striving way. I very quickly understood that the reason triggering this reaction was not linked to my enthusiasm about writing: it was the “feminist” part.
Indeed, this concept is understood quite differently by people, causing misunderstandings and therefore making it contested. Some perceive it as hate, while others understand it as a way to strive for a positive egalitarian future. Some see it as an accusation of men, others as an emancipation of women.
Although there is never one official definition of a certain concept, I will put forward three that I judge useful for a better grasp and understanding of it. While Bell Hooks, considered feminism as “a movement to end sexism, sexist exploitation, and oppression”, Simone de Beauvoir framed it as a struggle for women to be recognized as fully human and autonomous. Finally, alongside the previous understandings, my article will draw on the Oxford English Dictionary’s definition, defining feminism as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes”.
As the literature shows, it becomes clear that this notion is central to the understanding of the development and flourishing of our societies. Yet, it remains contested and misinterpreted. After some reflection on this term, I have noticed that the mismatch in the understanding of the concept is applicable on three different layers: the political scope, the cultural/religious one and finally the social dimension.
Political aspect
Feminism can sometimes be politically twisted. Indeed, it can be politically useful to frame the concept in a way that delegitimizes it and presents it as an absurdity. Thus, it pushes people to disregard its ideas and what it has to say. For instance, the AfD politician Christina Baum called feminism “sick and hostile to life ideology” in a speech posted on Facebook (Roy 2021, 167). Indeed, politicians sometimes critique feminism in very broad terms, dismissing the movement as a whole, while ignoring the specific issues it advocates for, such as pay gaps, educational equality, and representation.
Cultural / religious aspect
On another note, it also has a cultural and religious dimension: many cultures and religions consider that acknowledging the difference between women and men is crucial. They refuse to accept feminism because it would mean “sameness”; however, this is not what feminism defends at its core. In some Arab households for example, gender roles are defined, and women are sometimes expected to fulfill domestic duties while the man focuses on providing. As feminism challenges these gender roles, it might be seen as a threat. However, feminism does not insist on radically changing roles and making everyone “the same”. It focuses on making sure that no role is forced upon anyone and that no duty is considered inferior to another. Moreover, in certain Christian or Muslim societies for example, similar patterns can appear: Women can sometimes be expected to dress more modestly. Yet feminism is not a call for women to undress. It pushes them to do as they wish; they are free to dress both modestly and in a more revealing way. This subtlety is often not grasped, which can create a tension in the way we understand, interpret and support this movement.
Social dimension
Socially, the misunderstanding of feminism can polarize society. Some imagine it to be anti-men, full of hatred and anger. Milo Yiannopoulos, a British right-wing political figure, claims feminism has become a ‘mean, vindictive, spiteful, nasty, man-hating philosophy”, suggesting feminists are aggressive or even violent, rather than advocating for equality (Le 2025).
In these types of cases, the critique does not delve into the ideas and arguments feminists aim to bring forward but instead superficially comments on the supposed “nature” of the movement. It portrays it as an aggressive movement that promotes hate. Therefore, feminism is demonized and presented as creating a gender-war instead of pursuing its original goal: unifying people by striving for equality.
Overall, most of the time, the critique emerging is often not truly about the concrete themes feminism touches upon or the real ideas it advocates for, but more about the way the misunderstanding of the concept is used – unconsciously or consciously – to push forward a certain narrative. By promoting a shared universal understanding of this concept through education and information campaigns, society can reduce the spread of these narratives and concerns and move closer to a space where feminism is not linked to division, misunderstandings and discomfort, but understood for what it truly seeks: equality.
Reference list:
Le, Tiffany. 2025. “Is Today’s Feminism Irrelevant?” The Fashion Globe, September 21, 2025. https://thefashionglobe.com/feminism-today.
Roy, Nicole. 2021. “We Are Just Normal Women: Narratives of Far‐Right Women Members of the AfD and FPÖ.” PhD diss., University of York.
https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/33153
Proofread by Sarah Mottet
