Reading the variety of reasons that women gave for being opposed to feminism in the much-debated #WomenAgainstFeminism social media campaign is one of the most profoundly depressing experiences I’ve had for a while.

The reason is a fairly basic one. In some ways, it doesn’t much matter whether or not those women choose to define themselves as feminists, or anything else for that matter.



The reality is that at some point in their lives these women – most of them still quite young, to judge by the photos of themselves they post alongside their reasons for rejecting the feminist label – are going to realize that “feminist” issues are not other people’s problems. From birth control to the wage gap to financial savvy, the “feminist” issues are the everyday obstacles that will shape the lives of young women too.

The Women against Feminism campaign is particularly unsettling because it suggests that lessons have been lost. Jane O’Reilly wrote about some of them in her iconic 1971 essay about the radicalization of the American housewife.



Facebook Twitter Pinterest Her outfit is cute, but she’s still earning less money than the men. Photograph: Alamy

It’s a matter of time. Nearly every women is likely to encounter the same kind of “click” moment that Jane O’Reilly so evocatively describes. Perhaps it won’t involve housework.

Maybe it’s when you realize that the guy just hired to join your group is actually earning more than you are, even though he is fresh out of college and you’ve been there two years – and when you raise the subject with your boss, you’re told not to get too emotional or that you’re a “drama queen”.



When you realize that a financial advisor isn’t explaining things to you in terms that you understand, or is directing most points your husband – or when your partner doesn’t want to share details of the family finances with you, keeping you in the dark about something that affects you just as much as it does him.

It could be something as mundane as being aware that the car salesman you’re trying to negotiate with isn’t taking you seriously.

Or as significant as being told that you shouldn’t pursue a career as, say, an engineer, because the men will give you a hard time or will see you as unfeminine. Femininity and authority are often seen as opposed.



Don’t laugh: stereotypes like these, and not just a lack of women studying math and sciences, mean math, engineering and science programs struggle to recruit women to study fields that will put them on the path to earning higher incomes.

A key thing to understand is that feminism is not necessarily about demonizing men as oppressive beings. Men can be feminists too, if they support equality.



Since this is the Money page, let’s put the sexual politics – reproductive health, sexual violence and related issues – to one side.



Let’s focus squarely on the economic issues, because feminism is an economic issue. Feminism is about recognizing the facts that govern the economic existence of women: we earn less, we save less, we live longer.

It may be nice to wear interesting eyeliner and have nice clothes, but it’s less fun if you have to ask a man or your parents for the money, thus giving them financial power over your look, your life and your decisions.



Some things to consider before dismissing feminism: its whole point is to empower you to stand on your own two feet financially. You will need that – even if you don’t think so now.



If you’re a woman, you’re going to make less than you would if you were a man. This is not necessarily because women prefer lower-paying jobs as teachers or nurses to have flexibility. Even if you’re a doctor, it’s likely you’ll earn 71 cents on the dollar compared to your male peers, well below the average of 77 cents. There is even some research suggesting that the gender pay gap for younger women may be widening, in spite of the fact that on average, they are emerging from college better prepared to compete equally with their male counterparts.

Catherine Deneuve – financially successful, wife, mother, actress – has said she called herself a feminist early on. Photograph: SIPA PRESS/Rex Features

Maybe it’s semantics. Don’t call yourself a feminist, if the label seems offensive in some way. But you should think like a feminist – which to me means believing that you’re entitled to equal pay for work of equal value, to equal opportunities for employment and advancement, to being viewed as a first-class citizen by both employers and employees.

To the extent that feminists has earned a reputation for not being nice – and heavens, even a bit abrasive – it’s precisely because any time you’re part of a group that is operating at an economic disadvantage, and you start speaking up about it and trying to change things, playing nice simply doesn’t work.



When Emily Davison threw herself under the hooves of George V’s horse at Epsom Derby in 1913, it wasn’t because dying for the cause of a women’s right to vote her first strategic choice. It was the outcome of years of increasingly active attempts to change an inequitable power structure. Revolutions don’t start quietly, and change is usually hard-won through relentless effort.



In North America and Europe today, we’re in a position of tremendous luxury. Many of us will never be told, outright, that we can’t or shouldn’t do something simply because we’re women. That’s common in other cultures, so we feel protected in the west. I trace my own willingness to call myself a feminist to the moment at my Japanese graduate school where a professor told me that I was not allowed to speak in the seminar class he taught, because I was a woman; the university’s authorities had no problem with this stance. Click.



Our relative privilege doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be aware of the ways in which our gender affects our economic wellbeing. In my next column, I’ll discuss some practical ways to avoid having that happen – whatever label you choose to wear.