The root of this is that having a daughter was less culturally valued, people chose sex-selective abortions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-selective_abortion#China), which led to a skewed gender ratio for the population. Many rural men struggle to find wives because of the shortage. If women/daughters were more valued, there would be more women, and poor men would have an easier time finding a wife. So even though there are more men on the bottom, it was caused by valuing men over women.
I think a large part of the reason that men are more likely to end up "on the bottom" of society is that men have smaller support systems/friend networks than women. Some of the reasons for this are stigma against men expressing vulnerability, stigma against men seeking help, homophobia around close male friendships, gender expectations that women should do more "emotional work" than men, and stereotypes that women are social and men are not. Feminism seeks to dismantle all of the above, so in that sense, it would make it possible for men to have much stronger support networks.
Additionally, many (most?) feminists believe in "intersectionality", the belief that sexism, racism, classism, ableism, and heterosexism act in intersecting ways, and that all need to be dismantled together (for instance, this is why most feminists support reform of the US prison system, even though this is something that primarily effects men). Dismantling these oppressive systems would very much help those on the bottom.
The exclusive-focus-on-more-white-woman-as-CEOs brand of feminism is actually a minority of feminists (although they seem to get the most coverage in the popular press) and is widely critiqued within feminism.
> "Additionally, many (most?) feminists believe in "intersectionality", the belief that sexism, racism, classism, ableism, and heterosexism act in intersecting ways"
Yes, of course they intersect, at their core they're all the same thing; judgements made based on human traits.
What does it matter whether people are judged based on gender, skin colour, etc... ? The point is, the judgements are being made whilst we build a picture of the world around us. The danger only comes when irrational traits are associated, when those being judged are not careful about self-fulfilling prophecies, and when people forget that stereotypes are a shortcut, never the whole picture.
It has the double-barreled utility of both sufficiently explaining the term I wanted to introduce to you and provide a reasonable critique of it at the same time.
Yet it seems to be feminism that clouds the mind by being everything and all at the same time, with about 1000 different subtypes and OF COURSE you are following the right ones.
How about we drop that stupid feminism label and movement and start to actually talk about the issues at hand?
