According to Hillary Frey, Ms. Flanagan calls herself an anti-feminist. In the time I’m willing to devote to googling her, I can’t find a first-hand statement one way or the other.

But if she does call herself a feminist, you don’t get to tell her that she’s not. You might ask her what sort of feminist inquiry led her to her conclusions — but only if you’re prepared to hear the answer.[1] You might compare her analysis to other feminists’ analyses and point out where hers are problematic.[2] You might even say outright that her analysis is wrong, and she wouldn’t be the first feminist to get something wrong.

Deciding who is and is not a feminist in contradiction to their self-identity is, however, the very leadership and co-optation of feminism that you seek to avoid by calling yourself “pro-feminist.”

[1] Too often in feminist circles, the verb “question” is a euphamism for the verbs “silence” and “invalidate.”

[2] Such as why she’s placing the responsibility for hiring and adequately compensating nannies[3] entirely on the shoulders of professional women and not at all on those of their husbands.

[3] Which is, of course, in and of itself a perfectly valid criticism of those professional men and women who fail to examine and counter the white and class privilege that positions them to hire mostly poor, possibly immigrant, people of color for domestic labr for exploitative wages.

I’m just not up for calling myself a feminist anymore because I don’t think I have the understanding of the oppression in order to truly call myself that.

Just because I am a feminist supporter doesn’t mean I’m stupid… she’s clearly not feminist.

Well, he does, doesn’t he? I wouldn’t deprive any man of the right to tell Caitlin Flanagan or Camille Paglia that they’re not feminists.

Actually, no, I don’t see how a man — whether they identify as feminist or pro-feminist — can to set their judgement in place of a woman’s about whether they are actually feminist. Such an act is necessarily predicated on that man holding the attitude that he’s entitled to put his agency in place of hers, which undermines any claim he might make to being feminist or supporting feminism.

It’s not about stopping someone from saying stupid things. It’s about how those things will be perceived by others. I know his foolishness bothers me less coming from a “pro-feminist” than if he was claiming the full title of “feminist” and then trying to deny it to certain women. He’s opining but doing it from a supporting role, and that’s inherently less threatening.

Of course, if you could point out that a woman was doing harm and somehow reinforcing sexism, you can call yourself anything you want and still point out that woman isn’t necessarily a feminist, right?