I'd like to thank Scott Dimmich for reiterating all those vast, male-centric generalizations about feminism in Tuesday's column ("Feminist society would dissatisfy many women," Nov. 8), without bothering to consider the movement beyond its destruction of his love life, or lack thereof.

I wonder if Dimmich, with all his white male privilege, ever considered that there might be some issues more salient for women (and men) than getting free drinks in bars and having doors opened at the mere suggestion of our approach.

It's true, feminism certainly does not "hold reign" over this country, but if it did, I'd certainly exchange the "effect of feminine sexuality" for equal representation in governmental bodies; for the ability to walk myself home without the threat of sexual assault or male violence; for the right to safe and affordable healthcare and reproductive choices; for equal pay for equal work; for the confidence that I will not be sexually harassed on the job; for the freedom to marry whomever I happen to love; for the knowledge that in a world where equality truly prevails, there would be fewer wars in which our "daughters, sisters and mothers," not to mention sons, brothers and fathers, would be required to fight on the front lines.