By now, it’s not much of a secret that many feminists movements operate on the assumption of victimhood- the idea that women are automatically victims just by the fact that they live in a (supposedly) patriarchal society wherein they are paid less than their male counterparts, they are subject to abuse and harassment, and subject to sexual violence. All of these claims have been thrown into the pot of feminine consensus and boiled up for a while until feminists begin to think of themselves as inferior to the point where they must petition the government to pass laws to protect them from the rest of society.

Somehow, the melting pot of ideas feminists like to drink from has never taught them self-agency, or self-determination. It’s never taught them that a system dedicated to their financial impoverishment does not equate to a defeat of one’s own aspirations for personal wealth. It’s never taught them that the double standards they see and experience with regards to appearance and sexual behavior, however galling, can be ignored upon the understanding that the opinions and behavior of others need not have a detrimental effect upon one’s own feelings. It’s never taught them that survivors of rape and other forms of sexual assault are capable of rising above their circumstances, instead of assuming that every man out there has it in mind to assault a woman- just because. Most importantly, it’s never taught them that politicians, bureaucrats, and government agents were reared in the same (supposedly) patriarchal society, and may have internalized the beliefs that feminists would like to see disappear.

Instead, the collective thinking of feminism today has produced a different, more radical, more violent attitude than ever before. In December of 2014, writing for the Guardian’s website, Jess Zimmerman wrote that she wants to “ban men.” (No plan was put forward on how men can ban themselves.)

In her article, Zimmerman writes:

Frustration with men became as vocal in 2014 as it’s ever been – especially online. Instead of commiserating behind closed doors, women and sympathetic men started increasingly bringing our anger to social media. Ban men, we said when tweeting a link about the latest rape apology or nude photo theft. #KillAllMen. Launch men into space. I can’t wait until we send them all to Dude Island.

We were joking, sort of, but we were also very serious. A lot of feminists are very fond of individual men, but it’s hard to ignore that men as a group are responsible for an ongoing parade of offenses – indignities at best, violence at worst. And while recent circumstances have demanded that many of us take a break from banning men in order to ban white people instead (it’s an emergency), 2014 demonstrated that “ban men” could be a rallying cry, a banner under which we could mass and direct our frustrations.

Though it appears the main thrust of her argument is that women should not engage in misandry- the hatred of men- she admits that she likes the togetherness she feels by advocating for a gender-based genocide movement under the banner of “Kill All Men.”

Her comments, and those of other women who feel themselves marginalized by society (whether they actually are or not), reflect a growing hatred that is not unlike white supremacist movements wherein the common theme is: “We who are white are good. Everyone who is not white is bad.” Supremacist movements, whether conceived across racial lines or gender lines, always demonize the behavior of one group while excusing the behavior of another group.

Jess Zimmerman, and those like her, appear to be forming what I can only call a feminist supremacist movement. Rather than seeking to improve their own lives through their own efforts, they instead seek to throw any potential irritant, even those who sympathize with their cause. This is akin to being upset that bugs are eating tomatoes in a garden; instead of spraying insecticide or introducing a natural predator to the environment, the person decides that the bugs are bad enough that they must all be wiped off the face of the planet. This attitude ignores the good that bugs- and men- provide to the world.

The feminist supremacist does not want equality. She wants domination. She wants women in control, women making the rules, women in power. She wants to create a matriarchy, a society which may be no better than the one that we have today, merely with a role reversal. The feminist supremacist ignores the harm that overly masculine expectations do to men, believing that overly feminine expectations do not do any harm to women.

The truth is that the marginalization felt by everyone, and most especially felt by feminists who always cast themselves in the role of the victim, originates in the authoritarian nature of power. Authoritarianism demands that people ask permission before doing what they want. A small group of authority figures, whether they operate in a government or in a business, have a habit of demanding obedience. Through the dynamic of rewards for obedience and punishment for disobedience, people find that their life choices are limited. This goes beyond male or female, black or white. It applies to every single person.

Feminists supremacists who wish to kill all men, or shoot every man off onto the moon, commit the same error that is committed against them: they presume to tell a man what he may or may not do with his life, even how long he may remain alive. An equitable society is simply not possible under such conditions, nor does it appear likely that feminism, which has taken on such a form, will do any service to any woman anywhere.