Feminism Is Not Anti-Family

One of the misrepresentations of feminism, and I mean the philosophical concepts of feminism themselves and not the beliefs of hypocritical fools who might wrongly identify as feminists, is that feminists hate or have some philosophical or personal aversion to the very idea of ever starting a family of their own.  Sometimes this misconception is embraced with literally no more thought than what is necessary to blindly believe it.  Sometimes this misconception is believed because liberals, who like to claim feminism despite many of them not even consistently opposing misogyny and misandry, like to call themselves feminists as they call themselves pro-choice, and abortion kills children before they can even leave the womb.

First of all, feminism and abortion are not conceptually compatible no matter what liberals generally believe.  Consistent feminism does not entail pro-choice philosophy.  Pro-choice feminism is actually incoherent since feminism is egalitarian (any ideology that stereotypes men or women or oppresses them beyond mere stereotypes is not feminism), and a consistently egalitarian culture would not think less of the unborn as people simply because they are less useful, smaller, or not directly seen by adults.  A truly egalitarian society is one that opposes all biases for and against people.  Only sound judgments of philosophical accuracy and moral character are made by consistent egalitarians.  Ultimately, someone could be consistently egalitarian and not be pro-choice or they could be consistently pro-choice and not truly egalitarian, but they cannot be fully both at once.

Beyond issue of the abortion, feminism is not anti-family in other ways, but rightly defies the idea that there are gender-specific personality traits that make men or women better for certain tasks like earning money, cleaning rooms, or cooking meals.  Feminism is anti-stereotypes rather than anti-family.  The fact that it does not logically follow from having certain genitalia or chromosomes that one has certain talents, desires, or personality characteristics already disproves complementarianism at its foundations with no need for the social and personal examples of people demonstrating this with their lives to actually prove this truth, but the very notion of moral obligations being tied to gender is likewise logically impossible.

There cannot be a certain way fathers, mothers, sons, and daughters should behave that differs from their equivalent of the opposite gender because something morally obligatory should be pursued by all people, no matter their gender, race, age, or personal preferences.  Thus, regardless of what moral obligations actually do or do not exist, an obligation for mothers specifically to stay home with their children and for fathers to specifically work to financially provide for their family could not be among them.  The tenets of feminism nonetheless does not oppose husbands/fathers working jobs while wives/mothers stay at home, just as they do not oppose mothers going out to work while fathers devote their time to watching their children at home without working elsewhere for pay.

Male and female feminists, for feminism is for everyone since it is both true and opposes gender-based oppression of both men and women alike, can intentionally start families and deeply enjoy having children without ever failing to live out their gender egalitarianism.  The desire to have children simply has nothing to do with one's gender just as the roles parents might need to perform have nothing to with their gender, but with the needs of their families and the personal strengths they have as individuals.  Genuine feminists will not make assumptions about their spouses or children on the basis of gender (and truly rational people will make no assumptions about anything at all), and they are free to become parents and find emotional empowerment in this.