You’ve seen the aesthetic. It’s usually a pastel-colored Instagram tile or a minimalist tote bag with "Support All Women" scrawled in a trendy serif font. It feels good. It feels like progress. But lately, a different phrase has been bubbling up in the cultural lexicon, and it’s making people extremely uncomfortable. I do not support all women isn't just a provocative thing to say at a brunch table; it’s becoming a serious rallying cry for a more nuanced version of feminism that refuses to give a free pass to harmful behavior just because of a shared gender.
Blind loyalty is a trap.
Think about it. We don't expect men to support every single man on the planet regardless of their actions. We shouldn't expect women to do it either. When the phrase i do not support all women first started gaining traction, critics called it "internalized misogyny." They claimed it was a step backward. But honestly? If you look at the landscape of 2026, it’s clear that "unconditional support" has often been used as a shield for corporate greed, political manipulation, and straight-up bullying. True empowerment involves accountability. It requires us to look at the individual, not just the identity.
The Problem With "Girlboss" Solidarity
Remember the era of the "Girlboss"? It was a specific moment in the 2010s where we were told that any woman in a C-suite was a win for all of us. Then the stories started coming out. We saw the downfall of founders like Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos, who was convicted of massive fraud. We read the investigative reports about toxic work environments at brands like The Wing or Away.
Suddenly, the "Support All Women" mantra felt a bit thin.
If a female CEO is exploiting her workers or a female politician is drafting legislation that actively harms marginalized communities, why should she get a "get out of jail free" card from her peers? She shouldn't. Using the phrase i do not support all women is a way of saying that gender isn't a substitute for ethics. It's a rejection of the idea that we owe our solidarity to people who wouldn't hesitate to throw us under the bus for a profit margin.
People are tired of being told they have to cheer for everyone.
Intersectionality and the Reality of Privilege
Kimberlé Crenshaw coined the term "intersectionality" decades ago, and it’s the bedrock of why the "all women" approach fails so many. If your feminism only supports women who look like you, make the same amount of money as you, or have the same able-bodied privileges, then you aren't really supporting "women"—you're supporting your own demographic.
White feminism has a long history of excluding women of color. Historically, the suffrage movement in the U.S. saw many leaders sideline Black women to gain favor with white politicians. In 2026, this tension still exists. When a woman says i do not support all women, she might be specifically referring to women who use their privilege to oppress others. This isn't "tearing other women down." It's standing up for the women who are actually being harmed.
Consider the "Karen" phenomenon. It’s a trope, sure, but it’s rooted in the very real experience of women using their perceived vulnerability or societal status to endanger others—often Black men or service workers. Supporting those women doesn't make you a better feminist. It makes you an accomplice.
📖 Related: Zara Promo Code May 2025: Why Most Shoppers Are Looking in the Wrong Place
Why Nuance is Terrifying
Most people hate nuance because it requires work. It’s much easier to follow a slogan than to evaluate every situation on its merits. But the "all" in "support all women" is a heavy lift. It includes:
- Women who commit violent crimes.
- Women who promote hate speech.
- Women who actively work to strip away the reproductive rights of others.
When you break it down like that, the "I do not support all women" stance becomes the only logical one. You can't be for everyone if "everyone" includes people working against your fundamental safety and rights.
The Cultural Shift Toward Accountability
We are seeing a massive shift in how we consume media and follow influencers. A few years ago, "cancel culture" was the buzzword, but now we're moving into an era of "curated support." People are much more selective about who they give their "likes," their dollars, and their emotional labor to.
If a female influencer is caught spreading medical misinformation or promoting "almond mom" culture that fuels disordered eating, her female followers are increasingly likely to call her out. This isn't "hate." It's a refusal to settle for a low bar. We are finally treating women as fully realized human beings—which means acknowledging that women are capable of being just as flawed, greedy, or malicious as anyone else.
Treating women with "soft gloves" is actually a form of infantilization.
If we want to be taken seriously in boardrooms, in government, and in the arts, we have to be held to the same standards of integrity as everyone else. By saying i do not support all women, we are actually demanding more from our gender. We are saying that being a woman is the starting point, not the finish line of your character.
Breaking the "Sisterhood" Myth
The "universal sisterhood" is a beautiful sentiment, but it’s often a myth used to silence dissent. How many times have you been told to "be nice" or "not be so catty" when you had a legitimate grievance against a female colleague?
The pressure to maintain a united front can be suffocating.
It prevents us from addressing real issues like workplace bullying, which, according to some studies, is frequently lateral (woman-to-woman). By acknowledging that i do not support all women, we create space to talk about these uncomfortable truths. We can admit that some women are toxic. We can admit that some women are not our "sisters." And that's okay. You don't have to be friends with every person who shares your chromosomes.
Taking Action: How to Practice Selective Solidarity
So, what does this look like in practice? It’s not about being a "hater" or looking for reasons to nitpick. It’s about alignment. It’s about making sure your energy goes toward people and causes that actually reflect your values.
First, stop the automatic "like." Before you signal-boost a woman’s message just because she’s a woman, take ten seconds to see what she actually stands for. Does her work align with your ethics? Does she use her platform to lift others up, or just herself?
Second, lean into "discerning support." This means being an enthusiastic champion for women who are doing the work—the community organizers, the honest creators, the ethical leaders. When we stop spreading our support thin across "all women," we have more resources and energy to give to the women who truly deserve it.
Third, get comfortable with the discomfort. People will call you "unsupportive." They will say you're "not a girl's girl." You have to decide if you care more about a superficial label or your own integrity.
The phrase i do not support all women is a filter. It filters out the noise. It filters out the performative activism. It allows us to build a movement that is based on shared values rather than just shared biology. That is where the real power lies.
Next Steps for Moving Forward
- Audit your influences. Look at the women you follow on social media. If their content makes you feel lesser or if they’ve consistently shown a lack of empathy for others, hit unfollow.
- Define your "Support Criteria." What do you actually value? Is it transparency? Is it inclusivity? Use these values as your compass for who you support financially and socially.
- Practice honest feedback. If a woman in your life or workplace is behaving poorly, address the behavior directly. Don't let it slide just to "keep the peace" among women.
- Invest in intersectionality. Actively seek out and support women from different backgrounds than your own—especially those who are often overlooked by mainstream "girl power" narratives.
- Reclaim the narrative. When someone challenges your lack of support for a specific woman, be prepared to explain why. Focus on actions and impact, not personality or gender.