I see you're up on the 'bash' terms that a lot of men sites use to belittle the feminist movement.
I'm going to use my personal experience here. I'm not always up for talking about myself but in this instance I can at least relate to it.
Anyone easily offended by the term atheist or anti-theist might want to bypass this post.
So I mentioned in an earlier post I'm an atheist, I'm also anti-theist. I've been one since about my early 20's (probably a touch earlier). However at the time I didn't think much of it. Generally kept it to myself, didn't see any point in admitting it, went about my life without much thought.
In 2006 a book came out which changed my opinion about that and my thinking towards more activism thoughts. The book was The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. Aside from clarifying my own personal thoughts on things it also opened my mind up to more scientific thinking.
The term 'New Atheists' was coined as a way of insult, to differentiate from the 'Old Atheist' and other terms emerged to try to make atheist appear 'mean, nasty and horrible'. The most laughable of these is the term 'fundamentalist atheist' which is so ridiculous because there is no doctrine in being an atheist. However, the whole exercise was to belittle, undermine and generally try to shut up atheists. Now that's not to say that some atheists aren't jerks or that some aren't more provocative than others, Christopher Hitchens is a good example of this.
The thing is you need a variety of people when you have movements. Some will come across more strident than others. They will say things that will generally upset you. Make you angry. Make you question things. Evoke emotion. But that's a good thing.
Now these popular atheists have had death threats, insults and so on thrown at them. (If you want to listen to something really funny, I highly recommend you find the YouTube video of Richard Dawkins reading his hate mail. It's really amusing.) It's part and parcel of being a popular person in a movement.
Now what's my point in this? Well we have a 'new' feminist movement. Kind of interesting how the word new seems to keep cropping up as a way of differentiating between the original movement and today. A lot of the same tropes that were used in the New Atheist movement are now being used in current feminist movement. In a bizarre twist of irony in this is that the new feminist movement has ended up dividing the new atheist movement. You can't make this stuff up I tell ya.
One of the bigger issues here is that when we talk about feminism a lot gets lost in some very basic facts. Women make up 50% of the population (actually a little more if memory serves) however they are hugely under represented in politics, employment and generally seen as second class citizens. Which is pretty sad when you think about that and let it sink in.
Here's something to get your head around. Science has recently found that the male brain and the female brain are no different. There's always been this assumption it was but it isn't. Also the nonsense about right and left brain is incorrect as well. There is only one real thing that differentiates women from men. That is they can get pregnant. Yes their bodies are a bit different and they are generally not as strong but on the whole that's the usual sticking point. Is it right to discriminate a whole 50% of the population simply because they have a womb and give birth? Because to put it in the simplest terms, that's what being done.
Our perception of what makes a woman or a man is purely cultural. There's more and more studies being done on this but they're finding that our preconceived ideas about sexual identity is purely a cultural abstract of what we expect. You could say we've gone out of our way to make a man 'X' and a women 'Y' simply because of physical difference and not for any other reason.
The new feminist movement needs provocateurs as much as the New Atheist movement did and still does. Without them we don't have a movement. The worrying thing however is that for the simple reason it's women, there's this feeling that it's OK to 'shock' a woman back to being 'a women' by saying simply vile things. People (mostly men) feel justified in doing so. Without much thought on what their words or threats mean to that person. Most male provocateurs don't get gang rape threats.
The term feminazi might seem amusing but you miss the point of it. It's sole purpose is to shut down conversation. To belittle, to subdue. These words are there to generalise and stereotype feminist. Just like other insults typically thrown at feminist. It's no different than someone calling me a fundamental atheist. Though I find it amusing it amounts to the same thing.
Now I'm not saying that everything about a movement is good there are always people taking things to extremes but that shouldn't detract from the message. That being that women are more than just things. They have desires outside of wanting to bear children. They are as human as men and that their desires are worthwhile.
I know that a lot of women don't necessarily agree with a quota systems for work places but sometimes you need to start somewhere. Sometimes you need to force an issue. It's OK to disagree with that but you need to look at the bigger picture.
Even though there was a feminist movement so many years ago, isn't it interesting that we're still at the same place in some ways so many years later? The main question you should be asking is why is a movement even necessary?
Lastly, it's chauvinist.