Why Thaïs d’Escufon Says She Is Not a Feminist, Including a “Right-Wing” Feminist

Thaïs d’Escufon states that she is not a feminist, including in a so-called “right-wing” version. In this video, she challenges the idea that the freedoms women enjoy today create a moral debt to feminism. Instead, she presents feminism as an ideology distinct from the concrete defence of women and advocates a traditional, hierarchical and complementary view of relations between men and women.

Her argument is personal, historical and political in the sense of ideas. She draws on her upbringing, debates she says she experienced at school, and her reading of the evolution of feminism to explain why she rejects the term.

Questioning the “debt” to feminism

Thaïs d’Escufon begins with several objections she says she frequently hears: without feminism, she would not be able to work, have a bank account, vote, wear trousers or speak on YouTube. She rejects this way of presenting matters.

In her view, the ability to produce videos online depends first and foremost on a technically advanced civilisation, industry, infrastructure, digital tools and social stability. She largely attributes the building and maintenance of this environment to men, particularly in occupations she describes as arduous or dangerous.

She does not deny that feminist activists may have advocated for certain rights in certain countries. However, she considers it impossible to state with certainty that, without feminism, those rights would never have been obtained. For her, this hypothesis is based on counterfactual reasoning: it is impossible to know precisely what other historical path might have occurred.

The right to vote and civil rights, according to her reading

On the right to vote, Thaïs d’Escufon challenges the narrative that all men benefited from suffrage while women were entirely excluded from it. She points out that, depending on the periods discussed, access to voting could also depend on criteria such as property, wealth, social class, education or military service.

She therefore interprets the expansion of suffrage as a general process that gradually extended to more men, and then to women. In her argument, this movement was part of broader transformations: industrialisation, wars, political developments and popular demands.

She also believes that rights and duties should be considered together. In particular, she links men’s historical access to voting to the military, economic and legal responsibilities incumbent upon them. Her position is that political equality should not be separated, in the debate, from the obligations and risks borne by each person.

A personal experience of traditional roles

The video creator connects her position to her family history. She explains that she grew up in a family with openly gendered roles, which she did not experience as a constraint. She describes a protective father who provided for the family, as well as a mother dedicated to her children.

For her, this framework was a reassuring and structuring reference point. She therefore rejects the idea that traditional family patterns are necessarily synonymous with oppression. This personal experience informs her opposition to the discourse she attributes to feminism, which she says presents these roles as stereotypes to be dismantled.

She also says that she expressed minority opinions from middle school and high school onwards, notably during debates on same-sex marriage, and later in a class devoted to the Veil law, abortion and women’s rights. She reports having been insulted and harassed after expressing nuanced positions or views opposed to those of her classmates.

Defending women without claiming feminism

One distinction runs throughout the video: for Thaïs d’Escufon, not being a feminist does not mean opposing women’s rights or downplaying the violence they may suffer.

She mentions in particular the right not to be subjected to violence, freedom of choice in marriage, access to justice following an assault, and respect for women’s dignity. She regards these principles as matters of common sense rather than a particular ideology.

She criticises feminism for having appropriated the representation of women as a whole. In her view, women who prioritise family, wish to be financially dependent on a husband or want to be stay-at-home mothers are too often discredited or regarded as alienated.

She also refers to an attempted rape and unlawful confinement that she says she suffered in Lyon. She states that she received no support from feminist organisations, which she interprets as the consequence of an ideological disagreement with those movements. This account constitutes her personal testimony in the video.

Why she also rejects “right-wing feminism”

Thaïs d’Escufon speaks at length to people who describe themselves as feminists while defending family, motherhood, gender roles and criticism of woke ideology. In her view, this attempt to reconcile feminism and conservatism is contradictory.

She argues that contemporary feminism is not a distortion of a feminism initially compatible with traditional values. Instead, she presents the different “waves” of feminism as stages in the same logic: viewing differences between the sexes as structural injustices, challenging male authority and making the autonomous individual the norm.

In her reading, the demands of the 1960s and 1970s concerning sexuality, work, contraception and abortion extended this dynamic. She considers contemporary debates on gender and intersectionality to be its culmination rather than a break from it.

She therefore refuses to reclaim the feminist label and give it a conservative meaning. In her view, retaining the word means accepting the ideological assumptions she challenges.

The three models described in the video

To clarify her reasoning, Thaïs d’Escufon contrasts three models for organising relations between men and women.

The strict egalitarian model

The first would be a model of complete equality, in which rights, duties, risks and responsibilities would be identical for both sexes. She cites military service, dangerous occupations, judicial penalties and the absence of differentiated treatment as examples.

She specifies that she does not personally defend this model, but believes it would at least have the merit of consistency if it were applied all the way through.

The traditional model she advocates

The second model is the one she advocates. It rests on the idea that men and women are different and complementary, rather than interchangeable. In this conception, men would have more authority, but also more material, financial and protective responsibilities.

Women would in return benefit from particular protection and consideration, with a central role in the family and in raising children. Thaïs d’Escufon presents this arrangement as structured by an exchange between authority, duties and protection.

The feminist model, which she considers contradictory

The third model corresponds, in her argument, to contemporary feminism. She criticises it for seeking to combine the advantages of the traditional model and those of the egalitarian model without accepting the obligations associated with either.

She thus criticises what she perceives as a demand for equality in access to power combined with an expectation of protection, material support or special treatment. It is this combination that she describes as incoherent.

The principles she puts forward

In conclusion, Thaïs d’Escufon sets out three principles. The first is, in her view, to recognise differences in nature between men and women. The second asserts that whoever bears the main responsibility should have corresponding authority. The third states that no right should be separated from the duties that accompany it.

Her conclusion is unambiguous: she refuses to define herself as a feminist because she associates feminism with challenging family hierarchy, gender roles and complementarity between men and women. However, she says she wants to defend women who are victims of violence or injustice, while also supporting men’s responsibility and protection.

FAQ

Is Thaïs d’Escufon a “right-wing” feminist?

No. In the video, she explicitly rejects this label. She believes that feminism, including in a conservative version, remains incompatible with her defence of gender roles, family hierarchy and male authority.

What distinction does she make between women’s rights and feminism?

She argues that protection from violence, respect, freedom of marriage and access to justice are legitimate principles. However, she refuses to consider that these principles necessarily entail subscribing to feminist ideology.

What model does she advocate for relations between men and women?

She advocates a traditional model based on roles she considers different and complementary: greater responsibility and authority for men, alongside protection and a valued family role for women.