My concern with feminism as it has evolved today, is that it often presents itself as championing equality, when often, in practice, feminists are attempting to achieve equity. Equality, to my mind, should be about empowerment, granting equal access to resources and so on. Equity is about matching ratios, and setting hypothetical benchmarks for individuals that may or may not wish to achieve those benchmarks.
It runs the risk of telling a woman what she should be, instead of just letting her be the person whom she wants to be. Equal access to the CEOs chair, definitely, but equally little condemnation for whatever she decides. Is feminism letting women make their own decisions or is it propping up an ideal of a woman and measuring women, and their shortcomings, by that.
Another concern surrounds the notion of victimisation, and falsely equating of victimhood and moral superiority. I imagine a lot of this chimes in with the snowflake accusation often thrown at feminists, that people are being made weaker by having their agency removed. I’m not alone in this, I believe many older feminists have expressed a similar concern.
Finally, I‘d like to know what a society would look like if feminism ruled supreme. At what stage do feminists get to sigh and say we must stay vigilant, but as of today, all of our feminist objectives have been achieved. I want to understand the ultimate goals of feminism, to assess whether or not it is a movement about equality or equity, but also as means to understand, from a feminists perspective, how much farther the road to equality is.