"Femagogue" is a term coined by Argumentative Penguin here on Medium. He is referring to an idealized world where women/girls become considered inherently superior to men/boys, and where men/boys are the ones who'll constantly have to "prove" our moral value to the world. Penguin doesn't support "femagoguery"; he seemed to have coined the term in order to illustrate an archetype that misandrists (self-described "feminists") are trying to gaslight the rest of us into believing doesn't exist (it does!).

What I'm saying is that, based on what I've read of Katie's articles, she doesn't seem to fall into this "femagogue" mold that Penguin has implicated. Katie, by all accounts, appears to want to see a world where women and men (and nonbinary people and children) are valued for their intellect, talent, and skills without either misogyny or misandry being a guiding compass. I share that view.

You may not be willing to give Katie the same credence that I do. You're certainly welcome to make that point, if it's how you view things. I'm just countering it with my own positive perception of what Katie's philosophies (as an author) seem to embody, insofar as how I perceive it.