I’ve made my position on this concept clear in replies to other people, but I want to elaborate on what, exactly, bothers me so much about it.

I’m going to compare the Feminist Left to the Christian Right a lot in this post, because there are concepts in both that are extremely similar.

Most western women do not identify as feminist. I believe recent data shows that only 1 in 7 women identify as feminist. There are various reasons for this, of course, but the most prominent (from what can be gathered from the ‘women against feminism’ movement) is that most women do not feel they are being oppressed. They believe they already have the same rights as men and no longer need a movement to fight for their rights. Whether this belief is accurate or not is irrelevant for the argument I’m making. What’s relevant is that this is what many women believe.

So, feminism then tells them they have 'internalised misogyny’. They have, somehow, internalised their own oppression.

Well, I say 'somehow’. The idea behind this concept is that the media is keeping women complacent and causing them to internalise oppression. Most of these women would reply by saying that they don’t put much stock in the opinion of the media and that their self self-worth isn’t dependent on outside influences. They claim the media doesn’t have that much effect on them.

The rebuttal from feminists is:

In short, the more you think you cannot be affected, the more likely you are to be affected. - Anita Sarkeesian

The purpose of this post is not to debunk this argument. The purpose of this post is to look at what this argument does.

It completely undermines a person’s confidence. It introduces a nagging doubt into a person’s mind in order to get them to wonder if, maybe, they are actually internalising their own oppression.

It seeks to subvert the way a person looks at themselves.

Now, in my mind, doubt is not necessarily a bad thing. Doubt can lead a person to ask questions and find out new things. It can lead a person closer to the truth.

That’s not what this kind of doubt does. Why? Because there isn’t a clear answer to be found to the questions it leads a person to ask. It leaves a person without the rock they built their life on: their self-confidence.

The concept of 'patriarchy’, the thing that is oppressing these women and also causing them to internalise this oppression, is very nebulous. Feminists admit that there is no actual conscious conspiracy of men holding women down. Rather, it’s unconsciously ingrained in our behaviour, and most of us aren’t aware of it. This makes it difficult to define, and even more difficult for a person to recognise within themselves.

Everyone is, according to feminist theory, in some way guilty of this.

This is where I draw a comparison between the Feminist Left and the Christian Right.

Christianity has, as a core part of its ideology, the concept of 'Original Sin’. It refers to the idea that all humans are, by definition, sinful, purely because their ancestors were.

'Sin’ is a nebulous concept, however. It seems to be 'whatever we don’t like’, with 'we’ being whatever religious authority is making the claim. As such, it’s difficult to actually define and, indeed, even more difficult for a person to recognise within themselves.

It’s an easy way for Christianity to control people, to make them feel guilty for these 'sins’ and, of course, according to Christianity, everyone is inherently guilty.

Funny thing, that.

So, according to both feminism and Christianity, you are inherently guilty. It’s never made entirely clear what you’re guilty of, but it’s made very clear that you are, in fact, guilty.

Naturally, it’s easy to see how this would backfire. People don’t like being told they have some nebulous guilt. The solution to this by both feminism and Christianity is twofold:

1. Externalise the guilt. 'It’s not your fault, the [Patriarchy/Devil] made you do it’. You still did something bad (and that something bad still isn’t defined), but you were manipulated into doing it, so it isn’t really your fault

2. Offer the cure. 'But if you repent and join us, we can wash away this guilt and the influence it has over you.’ You still don’t know what you did wrong and why it was wrong, but now it doesn’t matter anymore, as long as you stick to this group and are aware of your guilt and the harmful ideas you held.

Does that sound a little sinister? It’s how marketing works, too. The first step to selling someone your product is to convince them that they need it (yes, that Wolf of Wall Street scene is relevant here). It’s blatant psychological manipulation in order to undermine a person’s confidence and make them dependent on a group or person.

It’s also how cults operate.

Everyone that rejects is viewed with either hostility or condescension. This is especially the case with how feminists treat women that reject feminism. They are bombarded with claims that they’re stupid, place too much value in the opinions the outside world has of them, are only doing it because they don’t want to alienate men (which is probably slut shaming, come to think of it) and what have you. They are degraded like nobody’s business, all the while they’re being told that being a feminist would be really awesome and fun.

The idea is that, eventually, they will realise that it’s 'in their best interest’ to become feminist. In other words, they’re being bullied into submission.

Note how this is all based on playing with emotions. Facts and reality don’t even factor in when it comes to the 'internalised misogyny’ claim:

if you’re not a feminist, you have it,

it’s bad and you should feel bad for having it,

the only cure is to become a feminist.

This is what women face when they dare go against the ideals of the leading feminists and, even worse, it’s one of the ways feminists control one another. More influential feminists hold the power to determine whether or not someone else is a feminist and, if the above argument convinced you to become a feminist in the first place, you really, really want to stay a feminist, because as soon as you get kicked out, it means you’re back to, essentially, hating yourself.

This is why the concept of 'internalised misogyny’ is as awful as it is, and how feminism is an inherently controlling and authoritarian ideology. Modern western feminism isn’t harmful to men. It’s harmful and abusive to women.