For centuries, there was no question at all. Apart from some outliers who departed from prevailing norms—one thinks of Thomas More, in the early 16th century, giving his daughters a classical education—the societal conventions surrounding the place of women in society were not in dispute. In the 18th century, however, radical utopians reimagined the roles that women might play in the world within the context of visions that disposed of the core components of extant family structures. There have, of course, been radical thinkers in every age; but, in the 19th century, the theoretical speculations of Enlightenment philosophes suddenly became matters of pressing, practical concern. Waves of inventions and innovations created new economic and social conditions, and the so-called “woman question” came to the fore. Was there a role for women in society beyond such spaces as the home, the convent, the schoolhouse, or the royal court? Could they participate in commerce, artistic production, social discourse, and even politics and government? And, if so, how would other the central aspects of their identity—and of society more broadly—pertaining to marriage, the family, and child-rearing remain stable?

Answers to these questions gradually emerged in the 19th and early 20th century—but they were very different than the ones which began to be asserted in the 1960s. The feminist movement, rekindling the radicalism of their intellectual ancestors, identified any social, legal, or institutional arrangements short of total parity between the sexes as iniquitous impediments to a new, enlightened future. The language of “women’s liberation” and “women’s rights”—with their obvious echoes with civil rights discourse–proved to be incredibly effective in advancing their cause. Indeed, so effective (and so transformative) has the feminist movement been, academics now assert, as an indisputable fact, that the history of the West has been perpetually hobbled by “the patriarchy,” an amorphous, catch-all term for the biases of any period or the enduring posture of any institution which fails to conform to feminism’s newly established norms. The trickle-down radicalism of these intellectual doctrines now informs public discourse in ways which are as palpable as they are pervasive. The ideology which was once only espoused by activists and ivory-tower extremists is now in our midst.

The putative advances of radical feminism have been damaging and destructive: they include both the removal or the conventional protections in the realm of dating and the conflation of legal prenatal infanticide with “woman’s heath.” But, for all of this collateral damage, one might reasonably conclude that, if nothing else, women now enjoy unprecedented opportunities and protections. Yes, it’s true. Young women are now menaced by new and seductive forms of pressure and deception. But surely women are otherwise safe, and their insulation from unfair forms of competition from men or outright physicality is all but guaranteed? Not so. The transgender phenomenon of recent years has brought men with spectrum disorders and sexual fetishes within this seemingly protected category and, by doing so, they have entirely deprived the category of “woman” of any meaning whatsoever. Now, a U.S. Supreme Court Justice can claim that the definition of “woman” is complicated, contested, and an all-but inscrutable state of being. In the 21st century, a new “woman question” has emerged, one pertaining to the very existence of the concept as such. If everyone can be a woman, then no one is.

It is tempting to see the transgender phenomenon as a betrayal of feminism, and some dissident feminists, objecting forcefully to the lightning-quick changes this new movement has wrought, take this view. However, transgender activists are actually continuing and deepening the same revolution that feminism began. Just as many of the architects of the French Revolution met their end on the guillotine’s chopping block, so too do old guard feminists watch with horror as female spaces are eradicated. But what they are witnessing is the same “norm-busting” spirit of feminism disrupting their own, newly settled conventions. Thus, athletic records fall away, and men wearing makeup win accolades for “woman of the year.” In all of these developments, the spirit of feminism is not being betrayed, but fulfilled. The transgender movement is a continuation of its onslaught against centuries of protective traditions and hard-won wisdom.

It should be obvious that the solution to the problems precipitated by feminism is not more feminism. The real solution is simple but implausible: the total and sincere repudiation of one of the most successful social movements in world history. This might seem like a quixotic remedy at the moment but, as the full extent of feminism’s destructive legacy becomes clear, the need to reject the source of our current cultural chaos only becomes more urgent. We have always known what a woman is—the only question for us now is whether women themselves will have the courage to say so, and to lead the charge against the unacknowledged origin of our current crisis: feminism itself.