I feel like this is not always the case. For instance in the case of the right to vote. I think everyone agree that both women and men should have the right to vote. But if my understanding is correct, then some sort of equality was upheld before women got the right to vote. The deal was, men are forced to go to war and fight for their country, therefore they are granted the right to vote. Women did not have to go to war, but then they also did not get the right to vote. This was an attempt of equality. Then it is of course relevant to discuss whether this type of equality is "fair" or not. It is then completely reasonable for women to want the right to vote, but if equality should be upheld they should then also forced to go to war. This is however not what happened. Women got the right to vote while it is still primarily men who fight in wars and only men who has to attend to military service. Then the equality balance is tipped in the favor of women. In this example I think it is reasonable to say that by women gaining the right that men always had, they "oppressed" men in the process (maybe oppressed is not the right word but maybe "inequality" is a better word). I think this is type of thing happens quite often. I read a paragraph from a feminist once that I think I agree with. She wrote something about that every time women wants to have a "right" that men have (because men have more rights than woman), men often say that men have it harder in some situations and therefore women should not gain more rights to make it even easier for women. This is a bad situation because women feel like men invalidate their struggles to get the same rights as men, and men feel like women invalidate their struggles because they only want the same rights as men and not the struggles men have (have the right to vote but not go to war etc. I think that most men want equality for men and women, and most men want women to have the same rights as men, but in order to have equality in rights they also want women to undergo the same struggles as men do, and I feel like (based on my severely restricted knowledge of feminism) that feminists fight to gain the rights but do not fight to gain the struggles. Therefore every time women fight for equal rights, men do not feel it is equal if they only gain the rights without the struggles, and therefore "they feel oppressed when another group gains the rights that they have always had". To sum up I feel men feel that there is some sort of equality now where men have more struggles than women, but men also get more rights than women, and women feel there is inequality because men has more rights than women. It is then relevant to discuss whether men in actuality have more struggles than women or it is a feeling based on a false premise. I also feel like it is critical for women to understand the male situation and the struggles of a man. For instance many women rights movements fight for equality of leadership positions on the job market. Yes it is true that more men have leadership positions than women, but it is also true that society put more pressure on men to have leader positions than women. Men are "afraid" of woman wanting equality in work place because this makes it harder for men to get leadership positions (or other positions with high amount of prestige) and men who does not get these positions feel they are failures, feel they are not able to get a girlfriend, feel like they are not men etc. potentially leading to depression, anxiety, suicide. I know many feminist groups say they also fight against the societal pressure for men to be "alpha-men" because that is a part of patriarchy, but I feel like feminists tackle the situation wrong. The good way of dealing with the situation would be to reduce the pressure on men so they do not feel they have to me "real men" in order to get respect, girlfriend etc. but the feminist way is to make women quota that pressure businesses to hire women without regarding the patriarchal pressure on men. I think if the pressure on men in this example were reduced they would be more willing to fight for more women in leadership positions (men from the MRA often complain that they have it harder than women because they are pressured to get leadership jobs, so I would think they would be welcoming the suggestion of less pressure on men to be "men"). It is a little bit equivalent to what happens to women in relation to body image. Women have an unfair amount of pressure on them to look good, compared to men. The good way of solving the situation would be to reduce the importance of weight, beauty etc. for women in society. The bad way of solving the situation would be making a quota on make up and healthy food so that it just get harder for women to look pretty. All in all I think the quote in the picture on this thread is wrong in some instances, and I feel like the whole feminism vs. MRA is a lot about miscommunication. I feel like the MRA is a lot like: "oh look at this situation where women have it easier than men, they should not got more rights" and the feminist movement is a lot like: "oh look at all the rights men have that make them privileged" But i genuinely feel that most of the MRA is for equal rights, but they feel it should go both ways. Omg it is a rambling post. English is not my first language so sorry if my english is crude. Also if you disagree and are going to comment please do it gently. I am quite young and my opinions change daily, so if you are good at commenting then you might just change my view, I don't want to fight. Also TrollXchromosomes are awesome so maybe it is not the place to discuss men vs. women.