In her October 7th article, “7 Reasons I’m Not a Feminist,” writer Kellan Monroe criticizes the modern feminism movement. I would like to take the time to respectfully disagree; feminism, in my view, is not at all as she characterized it: it is not exclusionary, misinformed, or misandrist. Indeed, Monroe’s argument stems from several fundamental misunderstandings. Contrary to Monroe’s statements, I am a feminist precisely because feminism is universal fight for equal opportunity; I am a feminist precisely because equality demands the same concern for men as it does for women.

1. Feminists care about all women.

In her original article, Monroe states that “feminists constantly attack and degrade other women,” citing inflammatory language on social media. Her point, however, indicts merely the unacceptable rhetoric used by individuals who identify as feminists, and not the ideology of feminism itself. Unfortunately, inflammatory language is not unique—it is part of a broader trend to shy away from substantive issues and speak with harsh insults and gross over-generalizations. Internet flame wars occur on both sides of the political spectrum, and verbal degradations have been a consistent feature in the ongoing presidential election cycle.

Kellan, I’m sorry that you had such unpleasant interactions online. I’m sorry that so many debates have devolved into argumentum ad hominem, that so few actually discuss the issues at hand. In the passions of argumentation, humans unfortunately have a tendency to insult rather than explain—at times, the means by which people rush into action are detrimental to their very goals. But if I eat a sandwich too quickly and end up choking, is it right to blame the sandwich? No, we blame the human for eating too fast.

Thus, if the means by which the argument happened are detrimental, the argument itself may still be true. Such is the case for feminism. Its values—equality and respect for all women, regardless of race, creed, or identity—remain. At its heart, feminism cares about all women. We support those who have been victims of injustice, those for whom doors closed because of their gender. In a world where women are grossly underrepresented in high-level executive positions, where women are viewed as “bossy” and unfit to be leaders, feminism fights for equal treatment. And I am proud to support a movement that guarantees equal opportunity regardless of one’s gender.

2. Feminists spread education and awareness.

Monroe states that the wage gap is the result of women’s choices—that women’s lower wages are “based on the fact that women tend to choose lower-paying jobs such as teaching and nursing or choose to go home and raise children.”

Her argument, however, relies on a multitude of assumptions. She forgets the powerful effects of social pressures against choosing otherwise—she forgets the enormous forces that prevent women from pursuing careers in science, engineering, business, and law.

My mother was one of only four women (out of one hundred) who graduated her college with a science or engineering degree. A decade later, she was the only one who continued to pursue engineering. Because science and engineering fields are so male-dominant, those in the field may distrust a woman’s work or credit her achievements to a man. My mother herself reported feeling discouraged when she saw so few other women succeed in her field. In these circumstances, women who leave the field are not so much choosing but being pressured to leave. The thought process is not so much “I would like to independently choose a non-STEM field” so much as “STEM is hostile to me.” Indeed, recent research (discussed here on NPR) shows that implicit bias in elementary school teachers often causes teachers to give boys higher marks. Ultimately, beginning as early as sixth grade, the bias discourages young girls from studying math and science.

The wage gap is not a choice. Women are 25% less likely than men to get a pay raise, and, according to the Harvard Business Review, receive lower ratings when they do not display typical “feminine” qualities.

Therefore, I am proud to be a feminist because I stand for giving women the choice that Monroe claims is so paramount—because such a choice barely exists in the status quo.

Monroe’s further argues that women “have had the right to vote in the U.S for 95 years, the right to own property for over 100 years, the right to citizenship for 93 years, and the right to equal pay for 52 years,” and therefore patriarchy does not exist. She forgets, however, that equality on paper does not necessarily mean actual equality. The law may theoretically say that all are equal, but certain groups, such as African-Americans, are still overwhelmingly profiled and assumed to be “dangerous.” We may claim to have a “meritocracy,” but the previously-cited statistics—women’s tendency to get fewer pay raises and lower ratings—are proof that the patriarchy continues invisibly. Indeed, invisible domination is perhaps the worst of all; it operates under the guise of fairness, yet builds ceilings of glass.

Finally, Monroe argues that rape culture does not exist, and that “no parent encourages his or her son to rape, and contrary to popular belief, men are being taught not to commit it.” Unfortunately, Monroe accounts for neither media nor unconscious influences. In media, for instance, men are told to “get the girl,” and dating is portrayed as a game, for which women are the trophies to be won. Moreover, while parents do not tell their sons to commit rape, they may tell them to “act like a man,” “man up,” or “stop being such a girl.” In this way, masculinity becomes a quality to be earned and kept—which contributes to a culture of dehumanizing women for the sake of maintaining masculinity.

Monroe further mentions that the term “rape culture” functions to “gives rapists a pass, for it implies that their actions are the fault of society and not themselves.” I argue, however, that it demonstrates the ways in which our entire society is responsible for the many instances of sexual violence that occur. The perpetrators are absolutely responsible for their crimes; in fact, it is rape culture that blames victims for “skimpy clothing” and praises men for defending their masculinity.

Feminism calls these facts to attention—it allows women to learn that they are not, in fact, destined to be “bad at math;” that they belong in positions of power; that rape is not their fault. And I am proud to be a feminist because it represents education, and therefore awareness; because awareness is the first step to breaking down barriers that stop women from fulfilling their potential.

3. Feminists care about problems worldwide.

Monroe argues that feminists do not care about issues that women face in countries such as Lesotho, Belgium, and Saudia Arabia. This may be because she has centered her critique on “the modern, western, feminist movement” rather than on feminism as an intersectional idea. As a woman of color myself, I believe that feminism necessarily demands equality regardless of race, religion, and other forms of identity. Feminism is not complete until it incorporates the unique experiences of each intersecting group, and it is unfortunate that the “feminism” discussed in media is too often a limited conception of the idea as a whole.

Indeed, only a global conception of feminism accounts for the unique issues that women face in each of the countries that Monroe listed. There are entire Wiki pages with information about women’s rights movements in Saudi Arabia. The fight for women’s rights—and, by extension, human rights—is a global one.

4. Feminists fight for men’s rights, too.

Monroe argues that feminists do not care about men—in particular, male victims of rape. Quite the opposite is true. This article on Everyday Feminism seeks to educate the public on male victims of rape; another article explains that, when people accuse men of “fabricating the rape for publicity” or dismiss “the feasibility of a man being raped by a woman entirely,” their denial is precisely “the type of victim-blaming that the feminist movement has been fighting against for decades.” It’s unfortunate that information about male victims of rape is woefully lacking, and it is tragic that victims often do not seek help. However, these are the issues that feminists are working to solve. We are working to aid all victims, regardless of their gender, for at its core, feminism believes strongly in equality.

5. Feminists empower women.

The first part of Monroe’s fifth point is bewildering to follow. She states that “Feminists tell women that they are victims, and as previously mentioned, we are really not.” Her description could not be more inaccurate. Feminists are not “crying ‘sexism’ at every turn;” we are pointing out instances of injustice and taking steps to resolve the issues. Indeed, the very point of empowerment is that, per the Bridge definition, it “cannot be defined in terms of specific activities or end results because it involves a process whereby women can freely analyse, develop and voice their needs and interests, without them being pre-defined, or imposed from above, by planners or other social actors.” As women voice these various needs and interests, they bring society’s inadequacies to attention. This is empowerment.

The second part of Monroe’s argument is that women’s demand for increased reproductive services—i.e., free hygiene products—forces them to be dependent on the government. However, Monroe fails to account for the fact that basic hygiene costs much more for women than it does for men, and that phenomena such as the pink tax charge women more than men for the same products. For many women, the burden of expensive hygiene products can be financially difficult. By virtue of being female, a woman with the same salary as a man would be forced to have a lower standard of living. The idea behind providing hygiene products to women, then, would be akin to providing free toilet paper in bathrooms—it’s a requirement for basic cleanliness. Certainly we don’t call using free toilet paper “dependence on the government.” The goal is simply to level the playing field so that low-income women do not have an unreasonable burden in achieving the same standard of living as their male counterparts—to me, that’s empowerment, not dependence.

Even from an economic point of view, the government has an obligation to solve the problems that the free market creates—hence, there are laws in place to prevent monopolies (which charge people unreasonably high prices for goods) and to prevent child labor (which are horribly unethical). Thus, why should the government not account for the market failures that unjustly affect women?

6. Feminism allows women to make informed choices about their bodies.

I will not spend too many words here, since Monroe’s statements about abortion require a far more detailed response than I have room to give. Monroe’s rather strong rhetoric (“Feminists claim to care about human rights. They lie. They do not care about unborn children”) is blatantly false and a gross misunderstanding. Abortion. Is. Not. Murder. There is no malicious intent with abortion; there are only tough, deeply personal choices with a myriad of considerations—including, at its center, the life and rights of the mother. Indeed, efforts to bar abortion have only resulted in far worse health consequences, and we cannot deny women a fundamental right in favor of causing much more dangerous (and deadly) results.

The mother alone understands the situation best, and we are in no position to judge otherwise. For when we respect human beings as equals, we must also respect our equal rights to make personal decisions. Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.

7. Feminists are insightful, responsible, and want to make the world a better place.

It saddens me that Monroe characterizes feminists as screeching maniacs. Because, no, I am a feminist and I am not screaming. At its core, the movement holds a set of principles that define its goals quite clearly. For feminism, the principle is equality.

Monroe’s argument mainly relies on examples in which the core message of feminism has been obscured in translation—instances in which either she or the people she claims to be “feminist” were sadly misinformed. And because her argument is built upon only a handful of cases, she ultimately commits the fallacy of hasty generalization. Monroe never critiques feminism’s underlying principles. In fact, upon closer examination, feminism’s principles solve the very problems she enumerates—it leaves women more informed, more empowered, and more attentive to global issues.

If anything, Monroe’s article indicates that we need more education about feminism—we need more feminism because we need more women to join us in making the world a better place.