It's about females sharing in the development of the human story as equals, never mind as bloody godesses of the new age. It may well turn out that a big swing from male domination to a female domination is the right way ahead, but, until we sort this bloody niggle out, I'm pretty sure none of us are going anywhere soon.
Here's a synopsis to consider:
.......This dependence of the female and the child on the male causes "psychosexual distortions in the human personality", distortions that were described by Sigmund Freud. Firestone describes Freudianism as a "misguided feminism", since she sees the only real difference between Freud's analysis and that of the radical feminists as being that Freud and his followers accept the social context in which sexual repression develops as immutable. Freud demonstrated that the source of repression and sex-class distinctions is the inherently unequal power relationship in the biological family: women and children are alike oppressed by the more powerful father. The young boy identifies first with the mother, whose oppression he shares, but soon switches his identification to the father, whose power he fears but will someday inherit. In the process he accedes to the incest taboo and the strict separation of sexuality and emotion which this requires, and which is the psychological foundation of political and ideological oppression. While the young girl also envies the father's power, she learns that she cannot inherit it and can only share in it indirectly, by currying favor with the dominant male.....
The niggle point I'm concerned about with this is that it seems very few females can differentiate, yet, between this quoted scenario, and the greater human scenario. Male domination, in as much as it's still a real issue, is 'nothing' compared to the main domination issue we need to be putting all our shoulders together to deal with, even with a unision of 1, 2, 3, heave hoe.