Interesting. I know lots of people who are Christians and feminists, and many of them I see every Sunday at church. Perhaps they don't meet your definition of Christian.
Serves me right. I had in mind crazy radfems when I wrote that, the type who see oppression behind every tree and rage against the patriarchy for fun. Even typed it up that way at first but changed it at the last minute, not wanting to be unnecessarily provocative. Turns out maybe it was necessary, as "feminist" is too broad a term for what I had in mind.
It has me thinking about who qualifies as a feminist? In my mind, "feminist" conjures up images of the crazy radfem type mentioned above. The dictionary def says it's someone who supports equality and justice for women. But I don't think that's quite right. Supporting e&j for women isn't anything noteworthy or deserving of a special term. We all support equality and justice (or should), and it doesn't put us into any special category, that's just normal.
You mention feminists at church. Perhaps you even consider yourself one such. Surely that's 'feminism' in the basic e&j sense, not the crazy radfem sense. I'm not sure how the anger, resentment, and man-hating that lies at the core of crazy radfemdom can coexist with the universal love and compassion that lies at the core of Christianity. I dunno.
Anyway...
For contrast, here's another critique of the Christianly chastity pledges and their consequences. This one comes off as a lot less phony. The tone and context are 180 degrees different from the original piece, and much more sincere. Or so it seems to me. Most of the comments also seem more genuine, even though they're mostly critical of the whole TLW thing. Food for thought....
http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2014/05/13/true-love-waits-and-waits-and-waits/32051