The ideologies of feminism in general are based on the shunning of masculinity and the preferment of female supremacy over any other system, as can be identified by the logical fallacies that exist within the core of feminist argumentation. The arguments that are raised by the feminists are usually based on the; (i) demotion of factual evidence and, (ii) the citation of a select amount of ad-hominem qualities that suit their agenda.

An example of the illogical nature of feminist argumentation can be identified by the manner in which the feminists claim that the concept of *equality* requires men to take accountability for their actions when they engage in an act of sexual intercourse, while declaring that it's a woman's right to abort any unwanted pregnancy that is derived from the leading of a promiscuous lifestyle. Such an argument would qualify as a logical fallacy, as the the claim of equality means equal opportunity for all demographics; a concept that cannot occur when one sex is required to take accountability for their actions while the other sex is allowed to engage in a promiscuous lifestyle with legal impunity.

Understanding The Structure of Feminist Argumentation

As the ideological nature of feminism is based on an assemblage of unsubstantiated theories and concepts, the feminists are unable to use logic in order to refute the claims made by their opposition, therefore the only manner in which the feminists can obtain a great deal of support is through the usage of Straw-man arguments, Genetic Fallacies, Ad-Hominem arguments and Ignoratio elenchi's, as such techniques are able to divert attention away from the subject and focus on irrelevant issues that appeal to their agenda.

The arguments that are raised by the feminists tend to involve the shunning and ostracism of specific legislators, however the concerns tend to be based on the ad-hominem qualities of the men in question and are rarely founded on the existence of objective evidence. Such techniques are dangerous and successful, as they are able to intimidate the accused into withdrawing his presence from the debate in order to protect his reputation.

An example of such argumentation can be identified by the manner in which Larry Sommers was ostracised and defamed for suggesting that the disproportionate number of female to male scientists and mathematicians could be derived from the former possessing a lesser amount of innate ability than the latter, and even though there is a diverse amount of objective evidence that verifies his comment; he was still required to apologise for his comments. The defamation and harassment that Larry Sommers endured from the feminists was so great that he eventually resigned from the Presidency of Harvard University.