Feminism is focused on equal rights, but equal rights do not always produce equal outcomes.

For example, efforts to create equal outcomes in the financial sphere may sound fair in principle, but they can also reduce advantages that men historically developed around the role of provider. If men are expected to give up traditional advantages in areas where they tend to perform well, the same standard of equality should also be considered in areas where women hold greater advantages.

For instance, there is no true equality of opportunity in the reproductive and dating spheres, where women are often more selective and have greater leverage because they are generally the more sought-after sex. Yet discussions about equality tend to focus heavily on areas where men are perceived to have advantages, while similar concerns receive less attention in areas where women may have greater advantages.

That creates a double standard: equality is emphasized where it benefits women but is treated differently where women already have an advantage.

My point is that equality should be applied consistently. If it is a universal principle, it should be considered across every area, not only where one gender is disadvantaged. Otherwise, it risks becoming selective equality rather than genuine equality.