‘Hello ladies and sons of ladies’: women are using ‘microfeminisms’ to flip the gender script 54%

By Alaina Demopoulos0%

5/26/2026, 11:00:49 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Hasty Generalization, and Framing Effect, with Anecdotal as the most egregious example at 21.2% saturation with 167 hits. Analysis detected 1,218 faulty-reasoning hits from 789 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.1% and a BS Rank of 54% (9,927 of 21,175 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 53.10% of the article peer group.

When Tori Dunlap writes a letter or email to a heterosexual couple, she puts the woman’s name first in the greeting. 
When her good friend got married, Dunlap waited until the name-change documents were officially signed to update her surname in her phone contact. 
These tiny rebellions are not activism. 
They are “microfeminisms”, or what Dunlap, 31, describes as “little actions for women’s equality, as opposed to going to a protest or donating to a cause you believe in”. 
Dunlap, a Seattle-based author and podcast host who focuses on promoting women’s financial literacy, posted on TikTok last year asking her 2.4 million followers: “Tell me your most unhinged way that you practice microfeminism.” 
The comments section filled with niche  and not entirely serious  answers, such as starting every work presentation by saying “hello ladies and sons of ladies” and “immediately assuming men are talking about women’s sports instead of men’s”. 
Women on TikTok have revived the trend in recent weeks, sharing their own microfeminisms. 
“I call the spiders MOMMY long legs,” one user wrote in the caption of her TikTok. 
“Only planting female trees in my yard,” said one commenter. 
“As a waitress, whenever a couple orders the same thing, I give the larger portion or better looking one to the female,” wrote another. 
The examples go on: “I default to ‘she’ when I don’t know the gender of an animal.” 
Saying, “‘I like your costume’ when they’re wearing a jersey.” 
“Instead of ‘Thank God’, I say, ‘Thank Goddess’.” 
“Assume the drink with the fruit and the umbrella is the man’s order.” 
The term “microfeminism” recalls the concept of “microaggressions”, or everyday instances of bias based on race, gender, sexual orientation or disability: the store manager who follows around Black customers thinking they will shoplift, or the parent telling their newly out child that it’s “just a phase”. 
Microfeminisms push back on what Andrea Press, a professor of sociology and media studies at the University of Virginia, calls “everyday sexism” by subverting expected gender roles. 
(She co-wrote a book on the topic in 2021.) 
“Women constantly experience all these assumptions that are incredibly sexist but we just kind of accept: women will make dinner, or asking them ‘do you work?’ 
while you assume men always work,” Press said. 
“[Microfeminism] is evidence that women’s consciousness is somewhat raised in this current environment so that they notice everyday sexism that our culture basically incorporates into common sense and normal life.” 
Under this deeply antifeminist presidential administration, US women have experienced the systemic erosion of reproductive and civil rights, and a wider cultural shift towards misogyny led by rightwing manosphere figures. 
Against this backdrop, discussion of microfeminism “turns into this really interesting microcosm of what it is to be a feminist today”, Dunlap said. 
“These small actions are ways that we can contribute to our own equity and equality.” 
Jordan Palermo, a 24-year-old from Toronto, did not grow up with gendered assumptions; her mother worked while her father did most of the household chores and child rearing. 
But later, when she got a job in the hospitality industry, she realized that “a lot of people perform gender roles in their day-to-day life without realizing it”. 
Palermo believes it’s important for women to call out microaggressions from men that might otherwise go unnoticed, because they speak to larger issues about equality and autonomy. 
She practices microfeminism herself when she refuses to move aside on the sidewalk for men, who often assume she will and sometimes plough right into her. 
“It’s about being able to take up space in public settings,” she said. 
Brianna Wood, a 34-year-old therapist, content creator and mother of five, has experienced this with men, too, even while out walking with children and a stroller. 
“I don’t move out of the way, but that’s also really difficult to do, especially if you’re a smaller person,” she said. 
Wood has posted TikToks about microfeminism that have been viewed over 1m times. 
She says this content “makes a certain type of man very pissed off”. 
Digital spaces can be hostile to women, with misogynists weaponizing their hate and toxic masculinity to harass feminists in inboxes or comments sections. 
When a manosphere influencer says that men are the “real victims” of DEI and gender equality  a favorite talking point of theirs  those ideas trickle down to faceless acolytes. 
Wood saw some men in her comments calling microfeminism displays of sexism  towards men. 
“I’m like, yes, that’s exactly the point!” 
Wood said. 
“If you flip the script, it looks very sexist to men. 
So if you’re doing it to women, it’s also sexist, too.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 5.6%Alaina Demopoulos: 5.5%the Guardian: 3.7%Confirmation Bias5.6%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Alaina Demopoulos: 5.9%the Guardian: 3.1%Availability Heuristic8.1%This article: 9.4%Alaina Demopoulos: 3.0%the Guardian: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic9.4%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 2.0%the Guardian: 1.0%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.6%the Guardian: 1.6%Overconfidence Bias3.8%This article: 11.5%Alaina Demopoulos: 4.0%the Guardian: 6.1%Framing Effect11.5%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.6%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.6%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.3%the Guardian: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 1.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.7%the Guardian: 2.5%Optimism Bias1.9%This article: 3.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.4%the Guardian: 2.1%Pessimism Bias3.8%This article: 17.1%Alaina Demopoulos: 9.1%the Guardian: 10.4%Negativity Bias17.1%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 2.3%the Guardian: 1.6%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 3.3%Alaina Demopoulos: 4.5%the Guardian: 1.4%Fundamental Attribution Error3.3%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 1.6%Alaina Demopoulos: 2.1%the Guardian: 1.3%In-Group Bias1.6%This article: 3.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.3%the Guardian: 0.7%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias3.9%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.5%the Guardian: 3.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 1.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.8%the Guardian: 1.1%Recency Bias1.8%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.5%the Guardian: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.0%the Guardian: 2.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.1%the Guardian: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 4.6%Alaina Demopoulos: 4.9%the Guardian: 3.8%Appeal to Authority4.6%This article: 1.4%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.6%the Guardian: 1.7%False Dilemma1.4%This article: 3.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.7%the Guardian: 1.1%Slippery Slope3.9%This article: 3.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.1%Circular Reasoning3.8%This article: 14.7%Alaina Demopoulos: 8.0%the Guardian: 6.3%Hasty Generalization14.7%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 3.4%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.2%the Guardian: 0.7%Bandwagon3.4%This article: 1.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 3.6%the Guardian: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion1.9%This article: 0.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.9%Begging the Question0.8%This article: 3.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.7%the Guardian: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)3.8%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 3.4%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.1%the Guardian: 0.4%Burden of Proof3.4%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 2.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.5%the Guardian: 0.4%Composition/Division2.9%This article: 21.2%Alaina Demopoulos: 9.9%the Guardian: 3.1%Anecdotal21.2%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 1.4%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.0%the Guardian: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.4%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.0%the Guardian: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.4%the Guardian: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.7%Alaina Demopoulos: 2.1%the Guardian: 1.6%Unattributed Quote3.7%This article: 0.9%Alaina Demopoulos: 1.3%the Guardian: 1.1%Quote-first Misdirection0.9%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 6.2%the Guardian: 10.4%Biased Writer Voice0.0%This article: 7.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.8%the Guardian: 1.8%Indoctrination7.0%This article: 3.8%Alaina Demopoulos: 5.3%the Guardian: 3.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias3.8%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.2%the Guardian: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Alaina Demopoulos: 0.3%the Guardian: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

789 words analyzed.

Speakers

4speakers37%attributed speech498writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageTori Dunlap • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 14 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageAndrea Press • 26 words • 0.0% coverageAndrea Press • 8 words • 0.0% coverageAndrea Press • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverageTori Dunlap • 23 words • 0.0% coverageTori Dunlap • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJordan Palermo • 28 words • 0.0% coverageJordan Palermo • 27 words • 100.0% coverageJordan Palermo • 26 words • 0.0% coverageJordan Palermo • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 7 words • 100.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 2 words • 0.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 11 words • 0.0% coverageBrianna Wood • 11 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Tori Dunlap

100%flagged-word coverage
67 attributed words23% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Unattributed Quote+43.3 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tori Dunlap: 43.3%43.3%Indoctrination+22.4 ptsWriter: 0.0%Tori Dunlap: 22.4%22.4%Politically Left Leaning B-6.0 ptsWriter: 6.0%Tori Dunlap: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.