Data Is Beautiful

Well-written response.

I agree and had a tangentially-related conversation the other day. I believe in feminism generally, yet as a man, I see the name as a disservice to its cause in the same way that white privilege instantly makes many white people defensive. It was revolutionary in the time it was created, but revolutionaries aren't always great marketers (ie: 'Defund The Police' starting out as a means to redistribute governmental resources but becoming a rallying cry for Republicans) There is a modern day irony that as we try to make society more gender neutral and non-judgmental, the definition of equality is purposefully labeled after women which (un)consciously reframes masculinity in a negative light. In my limited understanding, I feel like early feminism tackled the 'othering' of women but never had a plan for if/when the pendulum swung and society started to (un)consciously favor them more in certain areas.

At the same time, it's hard to have a nuanced conversation about semantics when there's a non-trivial amount of the slighted group who wish harm/death on you solely because of your gender/race/religion. As a man, I can say that a lot of the Men's Liberation/MGTOW people I've experienced tend to be toxic, misogynistic and insecure AF. Their foremost definition of themselves could be classified as 'in opposition to women"(There are radical feminist who view the world similarly FYI). It happens in religion too, and even the lack of religion as well.. I've seen atheist forums that really just repost memes & news articles ridiculing religious fanatics instead of self-actualizing. The same thing happens re: politics generally too.

TL;DR: From a nuanced perspective, there are ways to make equality more marketable so that it doesn't demoralize those who are expected to relinquish power/privilege (or to just generally become an ally). At the same time, it's hard to negotiate w/ terrorist/bad-faith actors.