because it creates diversity in the economy
What creates diversity? An economy dominated by small businesses is indeed a more "diverse" economy, but that's a tautology.
Being a small business does not create diversity. It makes the business more susceptible to "market forces" because, by definition, a small business has less capital to sustain it when times are hard.
which makes it more resilient
Makes what more resilient, and in what way? It doesn't make the small business more resilient, how could it? I imagine your line of thought is that, in a sector dominated by many small businesses, the consumer has somewhere else to go if one small business fails. But the same is true of sectors dominated by large businesses. Take book retail, Borders went out of business but Waterstones is still around, and of course so is Amazon. If there is enough demand to sustain a book retail sector then there will no doubt be somewhere where I can buy books. I can't think of an example where a viable economic sector has disappeared because there were too few or too large firms in that sector. Can you? I feel that your reasoning is based on wishful thinking rather than what actually happens.
benefits local communities
I agree that small businesses are beneficial to the consumer in that they tend to cater to niche demands, I've already mentioned that, but it's not an economic benefit as such.
leads to better employee conditions
Does it really? In my experience, large employers tend to offer better conditions because they can afford it. I've worked for a good dozen or so companies in my working life and the best salaries (and "benefits") have come from the bigger companies.
Being small may lead to innovation, perhaps out of necessity, I'll grant you that.
creates native growth industries
Not sure what you're getting at here.
A reaction to male dominance means countering it with exactly the same attitudes that sustain male dominance in an allegedly enlightened present-day, unfortunate but true in my opinon. Why is it bad for men to feel they are entitled to hold positions of power, but fine for women to feel they are entitled to hold positions of power, just because the existing state of affairs + the past sees men more likely to hold those positions?
I don't think feminism is about "entitlement", except in as far as it's about entitlement to parity, and what's wrong with that?
I suspect you're equating your experience of some women being aggressive with feminism, which I don't think is fair.