Thursday, 31 December 2015

Patriarchy is Love

Author: Blaise Wilson

What is Patriarchy?

Patriarchy is the idea that men hold the majority of influence and resources, while women tend to be excluded from it [7].

Patriarchy has several competing theories. These centre on two root causes:
  1. social
  2. biological
Most Third Wave Feminists believe that Patriarchy is 100% a social construct, based on the assumption that gender is 100% a social construct [1]. However, as demonstrated in our Outcome of Outcome Series [2], this assumption has been proven false, indicating that gender is, at least partially, influenced by biology.

The biological advocates often cite Bateman's Principle, which is the idea that females are the biological limiting factors within the human species, and as such are allowed to be much more choosey about their sexual partners.

Wikipedia [3] has this to say on the subject of Patriarchy (as of 31/12/2015):

"Most sociologists reject predominantly biological explanations of patriarchy and contend that social and cultural conditioning are primarily responsible for establishing male and female gender roles… Some opponents of feminism have argued that patriarchy has its origin in biological factors...  The male testosterone hormone is, for instance, known to greatly enhance risk taking behaviour; which can generate increased status in groups if successful (balanced with an equal increase in number of failures, with potential losses of status or death as result)."

Curiosity this implies that that most sociologists agree with Feminist theory (or vice versa) of a social construct and 'opponents of feminism' believe in a biological root cause. However, there are very few advocates that seem take the grey approach, implying it is black or white, either social or biological.

However, the definition of Feminism does not strictly definition patriarchy as a social construct, allowing alternative theories to be explored within the Feminist community.

After reviewing the evidence for both social and biological theories EgaFem has come up with their own concept of patriarchy.

EgaFem Patriarchy Hypothesis: Patriarchy is Love.

This is a HYPOTHESIS, as such no evidence will be provided at this stage. This is put forth as a thought for debate and further evidence will be investigated later to test this concept.

'Patriarchy is Love' is embodied by the phase 'Women and children first.'

This hypothesis arises from patriarchy primarily stemming from a biological root cause, but has a social layer. This is the social construct that female lives are more precious than males. This concepts accepts that there will always be a patriarchy to some degree due to the biological factors, but humans can mould their society to mitigates the biological impacts on perceived modern gender roles, and it can do this by treating male and female suffering with equal value.

Under this theory women's lives are held in higher value than men's due to the biological limitations of childbearing and parental investment. This allows women to be choosy in their sexual partners.

In order to compete for women and spread their genetics, men must take the majority of the risks, and successes or failures as a result. This means more men than women are killed in combat, in violent crimes, are homeless and so forth. However, men are also more likely to be heroes, have ideas outside the box, invent wonders, win prizes, and push human knowledge forward. All this takes risks of time, effort and resources, as they are not guaranteed to succeed.

Successful men are rewarded for taking risks in the form of social influence and resources. Men who are successful have more influence and resources making them more attractive to women as sexual partners. Women gain access to the power and influence through men, without having to take the risk themselves.

And this is Patriarchy. Women do not have direct access to the influence and resources, because they did not earn them. Society discourages women from earning them because women must be protected from risk.

Patriarchy in History

Consider the eras of human development:
  • Hunter Gatherer 
  • Agriculture 
  • Industrial 
  • Modern/Tertiary
Considering this theory throughout these eras. As hunter gatherers, men traditionally did the hunting. This is a high risk endeavour in which many men would not return home. While women kept closer to the community, raising the children in relative safety compared to the risks taken by the males. A heavily pregnant, recently given birth, or nursing Mother cannot hunt. And if a pregnant women hunts, you risk two lives. In order to improve the survival of the species it makes logical sense for women's lives to be protected, and for men to take the risks.

Humans have been hunter/gatherers for about 90% of our history [5], with agriculture only appearing about 11,500 years ago [4]. We are genetically almost identical to when we were hunter gatherers.

The agriculture and industrial ages suffer with similar issues to the hunter/gatherer era, women are safer at home. Although this didn't mean women never took risks, but it was rarely by choice but rather as an imperative to earn enough food or starve. Middle-class and families that could afford for women to stay at home, often did so. Women being able to be protected became a privilege provided by class/money.

It is only in developed, modern society of the last 100 years when safe jobs became commonly available. Even today, when you consider the jobs many Third Wave Feminists are demanding women are given better access too, they are the higher paid, safe, low risk jobs within offices, not high risk roles.

Risk Taking and Women

The biological need to protect women has sprung up in social etiquettes. Women are discouraged from taking risks. The social protection of women is a symptom of biological influence. Men take the risks and gain the rewards, while women are kept safe. This appears as patriarchy.

Patriarchy is the system in which women gain power and influence through their men. In order to break patriarchy women must gain this power and influence directly by taking their own risks and not transferring these risks, and thus the rewards, to men.

Under this theory, patriarchy evolved as a social construct based on biological influences. It was not designed. Men did not get together one day and decide to come up with a system to systematically oppress women. Both men and women continue to perpetuate patriarchy by allowing and encouraging the protection of female lives over that of males.

To break patriarchy, women must be allowed to fail. Women must be allowed to die at the same rate as men. Women must be equally disposable as men.

Either the value of male life must be raised to the same as women's, or women's reduce to the same as men's (or a bit of both). Any inequality of the value of life between men and women will result in either patriarchy or matriarchy through the rewards of risk taking.

Many Outcome/ Third Wave Feminists are, in fact, promoting patriarchy through their demands and actions, particularly the concept that men are eternal oppressors and women are perpetual victims. Ignoring the plight of men, and only focusing on women promotes patriarchy and is damaging to the ability of women to earn their own influence and resources.

Patriarchy is the love of men trying to stop harm from coming to women, in the same way parents control and limit their children from dangerous and risky behaviours and situations in order to protect them.

Addressing the Patriarchy Problem

Patriarchy is beautiful. The sacrifices men have made for women should be celebrated. Without the risks men take, the human race would likely be extinct. But instead we have thrived. We have thrived so much, and developed to a point that women are now able to take the risks men have always taken on their behalf.

But, reducing the social norms that perpetuate patriarchy will be a challenge. In the same way parents must allow their child into the world to make their own lives, men must let women go. And women need to leave the safety of men, and go out into the world to take those risks.

Under the Patriarchy is Love hypothesis,
this is patriarchy in action.
Women are biologically adverse to taking risks. As a result many women will not be comfortable leaving the safety of men and will want to choose to remain in a patriarchal society in which men continue to take risks on their behalf, and women continuing to gain access to these rewards through their men.

This is fine. However, women who choose to continue to live in a patriarchal household do not get to demand direct access to the rewards and privileges without earning them.

If a women wants direct access to influence and resources she must take the risks, she must earn them herself. She must break out from the patriarchy and take responsibility for her own safety, and take risks.

Women must take full responsibility for the risks, if they are to take full responsibility for the rewards. Affirmative action, quotas, men giving women stuff, and other solutions that mitigate women's risks while offering them rewards is patriarchy.


Our definition of Feminism is the empowerment of women to take risks. Risk implies both success and failure. Women must be allowed to fail, and be forced to accept personal responsibility for the consequences of that failure in order for them also be personally responsible for the results of success.

Thus, the Patriarchy is Love hypothesis is the protection of women over men, and can be summed up by the phrase 'women and children first.'

Sunday, 27 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Strategy

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Strategy: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

In order to reach EgaFem's Vision, we will use several strategies.

Lead from the front
We will lead by example. We will be the change we want to see in Feminism. Feminism is defined as fighting for equality, with the emphasis on women's perspective. Under this definition we have EVERY right to call ourselves Feminists.

Change must happen from within. As Feminists, we have every right to try to change Feminism.

This change includes holding Feminism to a higher standard of debate by providing unbiased evidence, avoiding logical fallacies, and practising good debating techniques.

We admit there is a problem with Feminism, and it needs to change. Feminism should change to fit women, it should not demand women change to fit Feminism.

Promote Principles
The rejection of basic principles and human rights by Outcome Feminism is problematic.

EgaFem will promote the basic principles of:
  • Equality of Opportunity
  • Personal Liberty
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Equality before the Law
  • Freedom of Assembly
  • Freedom of the Press
  • Freedom of Speech 
  • Freedom of Thought
These principle apply to adult humans who are mentally able to make decisions. Children and those who are incapability of decision making cannot be held to the same level of responsibility.

EgaFem will promote these principles, even for those who disagree with us. We will criticise those who break these principles.

Freedom of Thought allows women to choose to be #WomenAgainstFeminism, or even Men's Rights Activists. Women (and men) are free to choose which labels they apply to themselves. Feminism should not demand everyone be feminists. Feminism should be something individuals wish to be a part of, something to be proud of. However, we respect the choices of others to choose whatever label they wish. Feminism is an Ideology . Within the Free Market Feminism must compete with other label to attract people.

The test for the principles will be the #NounSwap test. In this a statement will be made and then the nouns swapped out for gender, race, religion and so forth. The opportunities, principles, and social reaction should not change when the noun changes.

Where changing the noun has an impact, it should be investigated to discover why this is the case. Suggestions on how to fix it can then be investigated.

Caveat: The only time these principles could be broken is when human lives will be lost as a result, although every effort should be in place to ensure the equality based on ability. An example of this is careers in which physical ability has an impact on saving lives such as the military and emergency services.

We reject the dehumanization of humans, including men and of those who disagree with Feminism.

We reject the assumptions that gender is 100% a social construct, however, we recognise that social pressures do play a role in 'acceptable' gender behaviours and that this can change over time. But biology has a lot to answer for, including men and women, on average, having different 'norms'. Men and women are different. And this is ok.

EgaFem will explore the differences of gender from physical and physiological perspectives in order to apply this knowledge to different issues.

Woman's Accountability, Empowerment, and Patriarchy

Equal rights come with equal responsibilities. In order for women to be truly equal they must have equal responsibilities to men, this includes taking equal risks. Women are adults, and should be treated as such.

We define Patriarchy as the system of society in which men hold the majority of power and resources. However, unlike most Feminists we go one further and explain why this happens.

We believe Patriarchy stems from a society that protects women over men. Men take the risks, and are rewarded for it through the power and resources they (rightfully deserve to) earn. This is perceived as Patriarchy. Historically, this has allowed our species to grow. Women are the biological limiting factor in our genetics (consider how many babies a women can have in her lifetime versus a man). However, the human species has been remarkably successful and it is time women stepped up and begin to take the risks that previously fell to men, and earn the associated rewards. It is time for women to take the responsibility for their own safety away from men, and to do it for themselves. This is EgaFem's interpretation of Feminism.

Thus, any attempt to provide increased protection and safety to women, but not men, is damaging to women. This is the essence of Patriarchy, in which men face the dangers of the world and are rewarded for it, while women are protected, kept at home and denied opportunities of social rewards such as resources and influence.

In order for women to be equal to men, male and female lives must be equally sacrosanct. Women's lives should no longer be considered more precious than a man's.

A victim is a victim. Everyone deserves help and support, regardless of their gender, and regardless of the ratio of the gender of victims within the issue.

Going hand in hand with this, a perpetrator is a perpetrator. Women are human, as such are capable of evil. Their atrocities will not be glossed over and ignored. This includes supporting for provable false rape allocations to be pursued under the law, and the recognition of female perpetrators of domestic violence, and rape.

EgaFem will encourage women to get out of the victim loop, and accept personal accountability. This starts with recognising women's actions. Women's action will not be ignored, denied or blamed on others. Women are responsible for their actions, to deny this is to deny women's agency. It disempowers them.

However, we recognise that biology will still play a role within Patriarchy and it will never be completely removed. The aim is to explore what changes within society we can make in order to reduce the social influences of Patriarchy, for example the reporting of tragedy within the media should no longer focus on the female casualties, but on all casualties. Male and female lives should be given equal weight within a story.

We also recognise that the concepts of Patriarchy and Gynocentrism are interlinked, with heavy emphasis on attraction of individuals being linked to health and resources.

Misogyny and Disempowerment

EgaFem will criticise those who claim women are psychologically weak, such as claims women are only capability of following a crowd and unable to think for themselves.

EgaFem will criticise those who claim women are incapable of success without additional help and support. However, if there is true discrimination this should be sought out and addressed on a case by case basis and those responsible be held accountable. But equality of opportunity does not create equal outcomes.

EgaFem will provide unbiased evidence to shatter illusions put forth by Outcome Feminists to further their agenda.

EgaFem will address the unjustified levels of fear of Outcome Feminism's narrative that keep women in fear and disempowered.

EgaFem will call out misandry and misogyny within Feminism, when we see it.

Through feedback, research, and connecting with others EgaFem will grow and change. All aspects of EgaFem, including the Vision will be reviewed periodically and changed as new thinking and perspectives arise.

Because of this EgaFem welcomes feedback, constructive criticism and engagement with everyone. This includes talking to those with different views, including Men's Rights Activists.

Where inequality is found, campaigns and action may be recommended. These can be found at:

Saturday, 19 December 2015

A sample of domestic violence research - UK figures

Author - Drew Roan.

Part 1: The Duluth Model -
Part 2: The Conflict Tactics Scale -
Part 3: UK figure of DV - This article

Summary: This entry takes a look at data on the scale of domestic violence suffered by men and women in the UK, estimates for male and female victimisation, differences in the estimates, and availability of emergency shelters for men and women within the UK.

Data provide by domestic violence advocacy services is often missing, incomplete or out of date. It becomes clear that whilst help for both men and women is chronically under-funded, the issue of funding for male victims is even more extreme.


It is no secret to anyone who has looked at domestic violence research in depth that different advocates can produce radically different evidence.

In part 1 [12] of our domestic violence series, we observed that feminist researchers and advocates often use the Duluth Model when understanding and working to end domestic violence. Meanwhile, many independent sources (including multiple Government research bodies) use the Conflict Tactics scale [16].

It’s important to understand where advocates obtain their data from and how it can affect policies, public opinion and advocacy. For the sake of simplicity, we will be focusing on the UK at this time, more specifically England and Wales.

Domestic Violence shelter claims:

When it comes to understanding the scale of domestic violence, many individuals pay close attention to what domestic violence shelters claim on the scale of partner violence. So it’s worth understanding exactly what data they use.

The domestic violence group Refuge make broad claims that “1 in 4” women will experience domestic violence in their lifetimes. However, for solid statistics the nearest they cite is the British Crime Survey (later renamed the Crime Survey for England and Wales) 2001/02 where they claim there were “635,000 domestic violence incidences” with “81% of victims who were women”. [1]

It should also be noted that Refuge repeated the claim by Women’s Aid UK that “two women a week will be killed by male partners or ex partners of violence”. However, this claim is based on a poorly informed understanding of data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales and is not accurate at all. [2]

At this time, Women’s Aid UK have recently switched over their website format, so current stats are unavailable. But in their submission to the UK Parliament in 2012, they state that over “1 million” women are victims of domestic abuse each year. No mention is made in regards to male victims of domestic violence. [3]

In 2014, the Guardian reported that numerous services were at breaking point because they had refused to offer their services to male victims of domestic violence, which was in violation of the 2010 Equality Act. [4]

It is alarming that specialists in helping with domestic violence against people in society do not appear to be using the full facts available or even up to date figures in some cases.

What do UK Government statistics say?

Based off Government data collected over a recent three year period, estimates range between 1.9 and 2.1 million victims of domestic abuse. By gender, these break down as:

Between 1.2 and 1.4 million women estimated to have been victims of domestic violence between 2011-2014. [5][6][7]

Meanwhile, male victims are estimated to have accounted for between 0.7 and 0.8 million victims of domestic abuse between 2011-2014. [5][6][7]

This averages out at around 37.5% men, and 65% women (2 million victims, 1.3 women and 0.75 men). As such women are (a very rough estimated, rounded to the nearest whole number) twice as likely to be a victim of domestic violence than men. Taking these statistics into account we would expect to see roughly an order of twice as many refuges available for women than men.

It’s worth remembering that these are only estimates based off Government surveys and as such may be prone to under-reporting or potential inaccuracies in total estimates.

Further care should be taken when interpreting these stats as to what the definition of “partner/ex-partner” is as the definition can be particularly broad. For example, the ONS document Chapter 2: Violent Crime and Sexual Offences – Homicide define partner/ex-partner as this:

Partner/ex-partner includes the sub-categories 'spouse, cohabiting partner,boyfriend/girlfriend, ex-spouse/ex-cohabiting partner/ex-boyfriend/girlfriend, adulterous relationship, lover’s spouse or emotional rival'. [2]

The ONS definition of “partner/ex-partner” includes people you are not actually in a relationship with or have ever been in a relationship with, so some care should be taken when interpreting ONS data on “partner/ex-partner violence”.

In 2010, the Guardian reported that there were 7,500 shelter placements for women but just 60 for men. However, this total at the time included all dedicated spaces for men and women as well as places that were considered “multi-purpose”. [8] This is a ratio of one space for men, for every 125 for women.

In 2014, the Plymouth Herald reported that the number of shelter spaces dedicated for helping women was actually 4,000, whereas for men is was just 39. [9] this is a ratio of one space for men, for every 102 for women.

What about family research?

Family research is research conducted by researchers about the family environment that can often take a slightly more informal approach.

Family research pieces can vary dramatically between researchers and their motivations. For example, the research piece “Dominance and symmetry in partner violence by male and female university students in 32 nations” by Murray Straus interviewed 13,601 university students from 32 nations and found there were equivalent levels of partner violence perpetrated by both men and women. [10]

Meanwhile, a piece called “Gender Symmetry” in Domestic Violence A Substantive and Methodological Research Review by Michael Kimmel proposed that researchers who find gender symmetry are doing so from an “ideological” basis than what he considers a “factual” one. [11] It’s worth remembering though that Michael Kimmel is an advocate of the Duluth model, which as we have covered previously is immensely discriminatory. [12]

It cannot be ignored that the largest studies of their kind have all reported gender symmetry in Partner Violence. PASK (Partner Abuse State of Knowledge) is one such example. No less than 42 scholars and 70 research assistants across 20 universities reviewed submissions by thousands of people to find that partner violence did display symmetry. [13]

Martin Fiebert, who as of March 2nd (2015) had reviewed 270 empirical studies and 73 scholarly reviews, has also found that partner violence displays a great deal of gender symmetry. [14]

Why the difference?

The main reason that family research pieces can often produce dramatically different results to criminal research pieces is because of the pool of data used. Criminal research pieces, whilst often being considered less open to researcher bias, only focus on reports to the police, court records and so forth. Subsequently, they only deal with a relative minority of all potential victims.

It is worth noting that there is substantial research which demonstrates men are not only less likely to be believed (and less likely to come forward), but are also more likely to consider violence against them to be "wrong, but not a crime." [15]

Family research allows researchers to interview people about their experiences that they may not have reported to the police. Thus they can be useful for indicating the scale and depth of behaviour that can go on behind closed doors which might otherwise escape criminal research pieces.

In all cases, it is absolutely essential to read the research piece in detail and try to understand their methodology before repeating their findings, including their definition of DV as this can have a significant impact on the numbers.


Our conclusion is that domestic violence research is clearly difficult to navigate and, at times, poorly represented. Whilst official government data does not show "gender symmetry" in domestic violence, although an estimated 40/60ish split is still significant, independent family research does. We cannot ignore the possibility that in fact partner violence may actually be mutual in nature in the overwhelming majority of cases.

With 1.9 to 2.1 million cases the number of shelters is woefully inadquate. Although from the Government's own estimates we would expect to see around a 2:1 ratio of gendered shelters in favour of women. The reported reality is closer to 100 women's spaces for every space for a man.

It is obvious that funding for shelters is much lower than it should be, though this issue has clearly not been helped by the refusal of many services to offer help for male victims of domestic violence as the law requires.

Many of these numbers are estimates, with an unknown amount of error. The true figures are very difficult to gauge. As such any decisions based on these numbers should also consider the low fidelity of them and plan for the risk of a wildly different reality.

Saturday, 12 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Vision

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Vision: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

Egalitarian Feminism is a community dedicated to instilling basic principles into Feminism.

At the moment the dominate form of Feminism believes in equality of outcome. Outcome Feminists do not believe in principles. They demand freedoms are restricted in order to 'protect' women physically and psychologically. This is dangerous, as without these freedoms men and women are at risk of losing their basic human rights and the ability to challenge dangerous ideals. Lessons from history have demonstrated the risks of societies without principles.

In order to protect these rights, our goal is to instil basic principles into Feminism. We intend to be the positive change we want to see in Feminism. We plan to grow to become the mainstream version of Feminism. With enough people, enough of a voice Opportunity Feminists can become the dominate voice, drowning out Outcome Feminism. Once Outcome Feminism has been subverted, Opportunity Feminism can use the power of Feminism to protect basic humans rights and principles.

These principles are:
  • Personal Liberty 
  • Personal Responsibility 
  • Equality before the Law 
  • Freedom of Assembly 
  • Freedom of the Press 
  • Freedom of Speech 
  • Freedom of Thought 
What does 'good' look like?

How will we know when we've achieved the vision? When the majority of Feminists defend principles, rather than attack them. When Feminism stop silencing others. When Feminism can stand on evidence and debate rather than use logical fallacies as common tactics. The fight will be won when Feminism defines equality as Equality of Opportunity for the Individual.

Our measurement will be influential feminists. Those with a voice, in positions of influence and power such as the UN Women. When they fight for principles, when their measure is Equality of Opportunity as their vision of Feminism, not Equality of Outcome. We will have won when the majority of influential Feminist voices are Opportunity Feminists.


For this to happen people need to understand the different definitions of equality and their impact on society. A distinction must be made between Outcome and Opportunity Feminists.

Simply by laying down this foundational step by discussing these ideas and raising awareness will help the fight.

Constraints and Boundaries

Although one day the aim will be for Opportunity Feminism to spread about the world, we are only small. We need to target one area and then grow. Perhaps one day we will be able to target additional locations, but for now the UK and US will be the primary locations of interest.

As the community grows we may have enough dedicated individuals to start a second target area. And a third, and so forth.

A key constraint is resources. As EgaFem grows it will be able to take on more, do more and spread faster and further. We will start small and grow. Develop over time into a strong voice.

Manpower is the most important limiting factor, more than money. Even with plenty of money, without the time and effort of people EgaFem cannot grow.

Lifecycle and Framework

EgaFem will use an evolutionary lifecycle model. This means it will change over time, update and re-evaluate itself after receiving feedback from the community and stakeholders.

The Zachman Framework and Viable System Model will be used to support the creation of the enterprise.

Saturday, 5 December 2015

EgaFem the Enterprise - Introduction

EgaFem the Enterprise Series:
Introduction: This article
Campaign Stakeholders:

Types of Feminism:
Libertarian and Egalitarian Feminism:
Liberal and Marxist Feminism:
Radical and Socialist Feminism:
Intersectional Feminism:
Transnational Feminism:
Other Types of Feminism:

Author: Blaise Wilson

After investigating the definition of 'equality' [1], establishing a campaign to differentiate Outcome and Opportunity Feminism [2], and then discussing the problems with Outcome Feminism, concluding that the root cause issue of modern feminism is a lack of basic principles within mainstream feminism [3] this has given Egalitarian Feminism a much greater focus on what it wants to achieve.

Step one: Admit there is a problem.

There is a problem with Feminism. A huge problem. The lack of principles is causing demands for human rights to be restricted to protect women's feelings. A society without principles is dangerous - just look at the holocaust in which Jews were dehumanized to a point of concentration camps. No one could speak out against that evil.

Principles within a society protect women. Principles are a social imperative.

The loss of principles would allow men and women to be silenced, to be dehumanized and to be treated with inequality. This would be a huge step backwards in our history.

And it must be stopped. These are fighting words.

EgaFem, as an Opportunity Feminist, declares war on Outcome Feminism.

Feminism means Equality - but outcome or opportunity?

Challenging the current status quo stranglehold that Outcome Feminism has on our society will be hard. It will be a struggle. It will take time, effort, and a lot of voices. We need to come together as one voice. We have a plan.

The plan is to build a community. A strong voice . However, people are difficult. People are annoying . People make things complicated.

Our new mantra: People, Patience, and Politics.

In order to provide some structure and firm foundations, to allow the EgaFem community to work together towards a common goal of instilling basic principles back into Feminism to save our society, EgaFem is going to be treated as an enterprise.

No, not the Kirk kind.

EgaFem will be treated like a huge organisation. Although we are only tiny now, the plan is to grow - and grow fast. We're not picky - we don't care what label you use. If you believe that Feminism should have basic principles then you are our ally. You can help, even without using the Feminist label yourself.

Even, brace for the shocker - Men's Rights Activists and #WomenAgainstFeminism.

Yes, we don’t CARE what you label yourself as. All labels are wrong, but some are useful. What we care about is your beliefs, your actions, and your words. We respect you, please show us the same courtesy. Joining this community DOES NOT make you a Feminist. What you choose to label yourself as is no one's business but your own.

But if you believe we can do some good in this world. Then join us, lend us your support. Spread the news.

Feminism will never die - but it's course can be changed. It happened from 1st to 2nd Wave. We can do it again. We can #TakeBackFeminism.

So why use the Feminist label at all?

We get this question a lot. There are several reasons but the important one right this second is 'change is internal'.

You cannot change something by standing on the outside, yelling at it.

Change must come from within.

It is hugely important that we are Feminists. And by the dictionary definition we have EVERY right to call ourselves Feminists. Either Feminism needs to change the dictionary definition to exclude Opportunity Feminists or accept us as Feminists.

If they choose to redefine Feminism to mean Outcome Feminism, this not only excludes 1st Wave Feminism as being 'true' feminism but would reveal to the world their true face.

Overnight people would see Outcome Feminism for what it is.

No more NAFALT (Not All Feminists Are Like That), no more using Opportunity Feminism as a shield.


Why treat EgaFem as an Enterprise?

In order to build a strong community, we must have strong foundations. We must know where we stand. We need to work together, not against each other. This will be our biggest strength. Outcome Feminism is unorganised, disparate, and has plenty of in-fighting. This is its greatest weakness. One we mean to exploit, because only by them coming together and re-defining Feminism can they win. But that very act of being clear about their aims will be their downfall. No more hiding.

By laying down firm ground rules, processes, and strategies we can build that firm foundation needed.

Using an Enterprise Architectural Framework. Wait… don't run away! Come back!

It's not scary. It’s all being taken care of. Blaise Wilson is a strange creature who does this kind of thing for fun, and as a founder of EgaFem will take care of everything.

Over the next few weeks articles will appear and grow. They will change as time goes on as new thinking updates the strategies, but think of this as the 'behind the scenes' of a film.

Here is an idea of some of the topics to be covered:
  • Vision 
  • Strategies 
    • Vision Strategy 
    • Decision Strategy 
    • Information Strategy 
    • Resource Strategy 
    • A bunch of other strategies 
  • Governance 
  • Organisation Role and Responsibilities 
  • Stakeholders 
  • Taxonomy
This might seem a bit of over kill. But we plan to grow, and grow fast. By putting things in place now, it will be far easier than attempting to do this later. And it keeps Blaise amused and out of trouble for a few weeks.