Corrupt-a-Wish

Welcome to the modern wealthy democracies, in other words.

There are more than two genders, and more than two sexes, even though most people fit more-or-less neatly into one or the other of the commonest designations for both gender and sex.

Sexuality -- and sexual orientation -- are separate from gender and sex, though they, too, are often confused and/or conflated with the others.

It is inappropriate to compare "feminazis" and "MRAs" (that's men's rights activists) using those terms, because one group (MRAs) self-identifies with that label, whereas no one self-identifies with the other label (feminazis). It would also have been inappropriate to compare "feminists" with "misogynists" for the same reason. (Though there are some few people who are admitted misogynists, as well as some few people -- who are not actually feminists -- who will refer to themselves as feminazis.)

Contrasting "feminazis" with "MRAs" is the gender equivalent of contrasting self-identified "Aryans" (as opposed to people of actual Aryan, i.e. southwest-Asian, ancestry) with so-called "mud people" (in white-supremacist parlance, anyone whose skin is more brown than pink, including people from many parts of Europe along with those of African, Asian, indigenous American, etc. ancestry). There are, of course, many white people who are not white supremacists, just as there are many men who are not MRAs.

"I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute." --Rebecca West, 1913

"Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." --Marie Shear, 1986

"Remember that, less than 150 years ago, the 'radical' feminists, the ones who the mainstream feminists of the time did everything they could to dissociate themselves from, were the women who wanted to wear pants. Under their dresses." --the Jack

(I actually identify as a womanist, rather than a feminist. But that's a whole other long digression. )

There's nothing wrong with confronting instances of individual discrimination when one encounters them, and anyone doing so is to be commended. When systematized forms of oppression are involved (and sexism, cissexism, heterosexism, racism, colorism, classism, etc. are all examples of systematized forms of oppression), however, that simply does not go far enough. It is impossible to end any kind of systematized oppression solely by confronting the perpetrators of individual instances of oppression.

That would be like trying to end slavery (in a time and place where slavery is or was legal and more or less socially acceptable) by convincing each individual slave-owner to voluntarily free their slaves. So long as the legal system -- and, at least as importantly, the cultural values of the society -- allows slavery to continue, slavery would be impossible to entirely bring an end to just by appealing to individuals one by one. Invariably, some of the same people who had agreed to free slaves previously would acquire new ones (or re-enslave their former chattels), and/or people who hadn't owned slaves previously would decide it was their turn.