I would refer to women like Cassie Jaye, Christina Hoff Summers, Janice Fiamengo, or Camille Pagila as women who are feminists who have not been intellectually compromised by Marxism, and I have zero issues with them.
I would offer you a friendly caution, not to abandon your obvious critical thinking skills when examining the content these ladies offer. The basis of this caution is in having observed not necessarily any true confederation but certainly an informal alliance of ideologies, between such seemingly “reformed” feminist thinkers and the men’s rights “movement”.
What I see happening, is a by-product of this phenomenon I have had described to me as “women won’t listen to men but they will listen to women.” As such, it seems that men’s rights people are content to rely more and more on female spokespersons such as those in your list, to articulate the messages they believe men need to hear as well as those aimed at feminist women in critique of their feminist-ness.
The result, is an increasingly female portrait, of what being a man actually is.
As such women have cut their intellectual teeth on the ersatz-intellectual baby food of feminist ideology, it is unavoidable that their vision of manhood is rooted in a sense of victimization. What so much of their content points to, is an idea that men can be victims too. Take any stat showing how women are “oppressed”, and these ladies will hold it up to a new light by saying that “look, men get victimized in these ways as well as other ways too.”
Thanks, but equality of victimhood, made into a mindset and world view for me by partial feminists, is not what I was looking for when I decided years ago to finally liberate myself from the chains of a lifetime spent as a man under the thumbs of feminism and her apolitical cousin Matriarchalism, which I consider to be a far more destructive force to the lives of everyday men and boys than any Marxist-inspired feminism ever could aspire to be.
We live in a female-dominated, female-preferential society. It is for all intents and purposes, a matriarchy. The needs, demands, tastes, preferences and desires of women reign supreme in so many aspects of life that for a man to decide for himself how to live and whom to be, is undertaken only against extreme and continual resistance.
And this resistance is not from feminism itself. Feminism barely even has a dog in the fight, to own and operate the soul of manhood. Matriarchal family structures, female-dominant education, and a pop-culture pantheon of myths and mores codifying and normalizing the superior virtues of femaleness and what women deserve before men, are all enforced rigorously and continuously: by men and women alike who by and large have never even heard of feminism nor know even the most basic things about its history and theories.
Allowing ladies such as the ones you name, admirable and overdue as much to be found in their messages may be, to define for us what being male is by re-shaping manhood into a more “egalitarian” vision of intellectual feminism, is just more of the same matriarchalist second-classing of maleness, whether this is their intent or not.