"The slave seeks only to be free, but he does not hope to acquire the estate of his master." -The Gospel of Philip (a non-canonical Christian gospel)

I'm currently reading A History of U.S. Feminisms, by Rory Dicker, which is a short introduction to feminist movement in the last 200 years, broken up into the three waves. It's one of the best and most approachable books I've found for anyone coming to the subject matter for the first time. I might have more to say about the book later, but I want to merely make a simple point here.

From this book, I learned that it was Rush Limbaugh who popularized the term "feminazi". It's never been lost on me that feminists in popular culture are often painted with broad strokes in an unfavorable tint. They're made out to be aggressive and self-seeking individuals who seek not only women's equality, but to tip the scales so that women have more rights than men.

The message is as pernicious as it is subtle: men should oppose the advancement of women having equal rights lest they find themselves overtaken by them. Men unite! We must defend the patriarchy, lest it become the matriarchy and we find ourselves subjugated by it. This takes a very dim view of human nature, and one that has been prevalent in our society since Hobbes penned The Leviathan.

I've recognized that this is what we're supposed to learn from the stereotype of the feminist. The oppressed begrudge the oppressor, and thus desire to become the oppressor. But if we accept this lesson (as men), aren't we conceding the simple fact that oppression is, in fact, now occurring? Why don't our consciences convict us? Pundits who would encourage men to accept this argument and resist the advances of the feminist movement are implying that men should remain oppressors; as a man, are you okay with passively accepting this identity?