I'd hesitate to use the term 'feminism' in such a way. By the Webster's definition: : organized activity in support of women's rights and interests I share the former, and might partake in various forms of the latter. I have a daughter. Disagreeable activities conducted by some that consider themselves to be feminists shouldn't reflect upon all that hold the belief that equal rights and opportunities between the sexes is a goal worth striving for. 'Feminism' is a broad term with a noble goal. Not all feminists are noble, and not all actions by feminists work towards the same ends.: the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities
The problem with believing in feminism, the ideal, is simply that the actual product of the movement's efforts have only led to female empowerment. And while female empowerment, especially back when females were anything but empowered, is a noble goal to strive for, the actual results have led to an increasing breakdown in intersexual relations. With the rise of third wave feminism, the focus has shifted from a focus on gender equality to a focus on victimization and sensationalized dissection of toxicity in culture. Most feminist rhetoric nowadays focuses on a pointless tirade against potential misogyny that exists within what they claim to be every facet of media today. What you see out of it is exactly what this article describes: people become too afraid to face anything that is objectionable to them, and they feel that, in the name of safety for victims and the oppressed, this speech should be demonized and suppressed.
The dictionary fallacy. What matters is not what the "official" definition of feminism is, but what feminism actually is; and in the real world, feminists hate men. Therefore, feminism is a hate movement. I'll change my mind when feminists stop trying to hurt men and start helping them (but they'll never do that, because their whole philosophy can be reduced to "men are the problem").
That's not my personal experience with feminists. It is a fallacy to apply a definition over evidence, but that's not what I am suggesting. I am suggesting that in order to speak of a group in a meaningful way, you need to define that group in some manner. It is also fallacy to generalize your own experience as a definition, especially when it runs counter to that of others. I can imagine that you have had a certain kind of experience with feminists, but your experience is different than my own. To me, it's not surprising. Every 'ism' that is widely practiced and espoused is muti-faceted and has contradictory elements. It's human nature.