I do advocate for women's rights and I have actually participated in programs to help women. For several years I was part of a program to try to get young girls interested in STEM and I used to show classes of college girls around our facility. I just don't advocate for "feminism" because it seems to me that that represents so much more.
It seems that you take issue with the name because advocating for women's right and equality is feminism.
being a single income household is really tough and all the other couples now have two incomes and can out-compete us on the property market so we aren't able to buy a nice house despite my good salary. Now I appreciate that this isn't feminism's fault and that it's perfectly legitimate for women to want to work. But on the other hand a side effect of it has made the choices of those who choose not to live that lifestyle much harder.
I'm having a lot of trouble here. If I'm getting this right, you're saying that the choice that women have been given to stay home or work has led to their increased participation in the job market since most women choose to work rather than stay home. The consequence of more people (women) in the job market is increased competition as well as increased median and mean income (since most households are two-income households). You're saying this puts you at a disadvantage because unlike those households you have one income coming in? I guess I'll ask you what you think the solution would be here. I can think of a few "solutions" that follow your line of logic:
A. Women are excluded (via legislation or social barriers) from the work place. Only men work.
B. Every household can only have ONE working adult (whether it's a man or woman) so that the playing field is rightly even.
C. Pure Socialist/Communist/Marxist systems where free markets (and competition in that sense) just doesn't exist.
I mean, I think you see my point. Especially for the situation you described, you don't seem to have a problem with feminism, but you take issue with people working more for greater resources. Because you don't have a two-income household (as your wife chose to stay home -- her absolute right to do so), you're resentful of others who do. So, you think the solution to that is to ... what? Take that option away from them?
Perhaps you can imagine that I don't like the idea of on the one hand supporting my wife at home and on the other accepting positive discrimination at work so that women are not competing with me on a level playing field. I say this as an example, my current workplace does not have positive discrimination policies but it does alarm me that some places do.
Now I had to do a little Googling! It seems that "positive discrimination" is the British term for "affirmative action" -- policies favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination. So, it seems on top of your resentment of two-income households - which you don't have - you resent that women may be given advantages in the workplace which could hurt you (and your ability to retain resources -- money, property, prestige). Again, you can see the flaw in this logic too, right? I mean, when we talk about positive discrimination/affirmative action we aren't talking about playing favors, we're talking about making the playing field truly level. Anti-discrimination laws (especially in employment) are in place for all genders, races, etc. If you think you've been unfairly treated because you're a man, you have just as much of a right to file a suit as anyone else. And I can go on and on about this, but let me break the logic down here for a moment to address what I think is really at play:
Feminism's goal is choice. You're wife exercised that right by choosing to stay home. This choice she made may be contrary to the choices of other women. So, while other households have two incomes coming in - thanks to feminism - you only have one. It seems as though you think if only women had to stay home, you'd all be in the same boat -- you wouldn't feel disadvantaged.
On top of feeling disadvantaged because you're running a house on only your income (while others have two incomes), you find it harder to compete in the job market because there are women being given a leg up (or so you perceive). This makes you resentful because not only are they getting the advantage over you in jobs (again, or so you perceive), but their very presence represents their home's financial superiority. That, you find threatening.
More women choosing to enter the job market means more competition for you, less jobs for you, greater financial insecurity for you.