I don't understand why she wrote the book the way she did. The title suggests her goal is to illuminate what is mistaken in feminist thought, but so much of the book is nothing but the feminist thought itself without comment from her that the reader is left with no clue to the author's point of view.
At the beginning she states that she has some sympathy with the motives for feminism:
...I believe that feminism has drawn attention to crucial problems that exist for women in society and in the church. In this work I am not so much debating the validity of the questions that feminists have posed, but rather seeking to evaluate the validity of their answers.A reasonable objective it seems to me so I look forward to seeing her spell out her thinking. Perhaps she's left it for the very end and I'm not quite there yet.
In the meantime I've had to plod through the whole history of modern feminist thought, rather minutely detailed in parts, without the slightest relief from its relentless irrational humanity-crippling and God-defying logic. Not a hint as to which are those questions posed by the feminists that she says she is not necessarily debating, not a hint as to what in all that massive material exemplifies those "crucial problems that exist for women in society and in the church" she says she finds there. This is very puzzling as well as frustrating and even maddening at times.
Again, perhaps she'll save my sanity at the very end -- or possibly I've missed some of it in my skipping around -- but I have to comment that she should have been giving her analysis all along for the sake of the reader. There's an enormous amount of detail there. Surely in all that detail there are many questions she finds sympathetic and many answers she must condemn, and it would help the reader enormously to see her thinking on all that at each stage of the presentation.
Later. (July 5) I've skimmed around enough to find some places where Kassian does stop to analyze the feminist position she's just described, so maybe I've just been missing it. But through the first third of the book at least I was starved for some comment, and especially something to orient me to what she believes might be LEGITIMATE in the feminist project. So far I've found nothing along those lines. Could be again my own fault since I'm not reading it thoroughly.
But I think I need to take a break from this book for a while anyway. Just had to say this much so as not to give a completely wrong impression about the book.