The Mullahs of Feminism: from what scientific, religious or moral authority do they derive their right to dictate and define gender roles?
They brought us easy divorce, which has filled our prison with young men from single parent homes. It also filled our shops and businesses with single parent moms, who struggle valiantly to raise the 40 percent of children born out of wedlock every year. They introduced a liberated sexuality and a forced acceptance of homosexual behavior which has driven us to a level of sexual saturation and promiscuity that would make a first century Greek blush. Along with this new freedom came over 35 new sexually transmitted diseases, many which like the HIV virus, are deadly, and dropped a huge financial load on Medicare, medical insurance and society in general. And the damage to Marriage, long considered the building block and glue of any society may yet prove fatal to an American nation founded on the values of the Puritans. The damage has been so pervasive that we may have reached a point of critical mass in which recovery, outside of a moral revival, may be impossible. They came on the scene with unrivaled vehemence, Betty Freidan said,
“Housework] is peculiarly suited to the capacities of feeble-minded girls. [It] arrests their development at an infantile level. “
Gloria Steinem echoed, “[Housewives] are mindless and thing-hungry…not people.” 
Simone de Beauvoir, in a very undemocratic manner ruled,
“[A]s long as the family and the myth of the family and the myth of maternity and the maternal instinct are not destroyed, women will still be oppressed…. No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice…”
And I always thought they were pro choice. If you dared to disagree you were promptly called a Chauvinist Pig, which was supposed, somehow, to end the argument. What’s humorous is that the word Chauvinistic, is defined as someone bombastic and belligerent and who won’t tolerate any dissent. By definition then, it was the feminists who were the Chauvinists, not those who dared to oppose them. They have never really explained who then is best able to care for and nurture the kids, but hey, let’s not haggle over minor points.
But back to the original question, on what authority did these Mullahs base their strident claims? Who or what gave them the right or authority to dictate and define the roles of gender for everyone else? In my philosophy class my college professor used the words sexist and sexism several times in his first online lecture. I wrote him and asked him how he defined these words and how he knew his definition was correct. He gave me no answer, simply refused to reply. But his silence spoke volumes. Islamic mullahs derive their authority from the Koran. Now, I don’t believe the Koran is the word of God, but if I was Muslim that would give the Islamic mullahs a moral basis for their authority. Obviously feminists don’t derive any moral authority from Islam as the Koran teaches that the woman was created qualitatively inferior to the man, but where do feminists derive their authority ?
Despite what might be squeals from many culturally correct Christian leaders in America today, modern feminism certainly isn’t based on Scriptural authority. Modern feminism started in the Christian nations and it could be argued that it could have taken place no where else but in a Christian nation. But the Bible itself is clear in its assertion of the institution of marriage being for one man and one woman from the beginning, and the woman being created from the man and primarily for the man. For this and many other unpopular reasons, the Bible cannot be the moral platform for the feminist’s modern view of gender roles.
The feminist can’t claim Darwin or the evolutionary scientific argument as their authority either. Darwin was quite clear, as were most of his followers, that women were somewhere between small children and/or monkeys in their evolutionary development, due to smaller head size and other attributes which made them inferior to men in quality and capability. I would like to hear the evolutionary argument that proves that men and women are exactly equal and therefore are exactly the same except for differing body parts. The early part of this post shows that recent history renders any feminist argument based on pragmatics, rather dubious.
But modern feminists have never felt the need to explain why we should adhere to their doctrines and why would they? Every one seemed either eager enough or intimidated enough to follow along, including a good portion of the modern evangelical church. Traditional values had been around for millenia and many found them stifling and rigid. The idea of a new “sexual freedom”, though in fact nothing more than age old paganism, had an almost irresistable appeal.
In the Bible, God never created the Man and Woman to war against each other. We were made by the marriage union to be one flesh, a picture of a perfect and nurturing unity. Because of our rebellion in the garden and the subsequent fall, it’s all too natural for the wife to try and undermine the husband’s authority and for the husband to lord it over the wife in an unkind and demeaning manner. This has led to a lot of trouble and divorce, but as Jesus Christ said, “In the beginning it wasn’t so”. [Matt. 19:8] We are in a imperfect world and in a society that is becoming totally unsupportive, even openly antagonistic to God’s original marriage plan and roles of gender. But this is no time to dump the plan, but rather the time to hold on to it all the more tightly. No other will work.
As Theodore Roosevelt said,
” There is a need to develop all the virtues that have the state for their sphere of action; but these virtues are but dust in a windy street unless back of them lie the strong and tender virtues of one man for one woman and on their joyous and fearless acceptance of their common obligation to the children that are theirs.” (4)
 Betty Freidan, The Feminine Mystique, 1963.
 Gloria Steinem, “What It Would Be Like If Women Win,” Time, August 31, 1970.
 Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma,” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975
(4) Theodore Roosevelt, Autobiography, 1924, p.vii