Playground Tactics and Feminism

Reading MacKinnon's Feminism Unmodified (besides garnering perplexed glances from across the library table) has been enlightening and frustrating in many ways. For starters, MacKinnon's distinction between feminist analysis of male and female as fundamentally different or the same is an important one. Whereas arguing from the principle of sameness almost necessarily implies existing behind a veil of ignorance where gender is not considered, arguing from the principle of difference requires constant modification of rules, laws, traditions, etc. to "equalize" the differences. Therein lies the fundamental misunderstanding of feminism, I think. That feminists have argued from both sides makes it very confusing as to what exactly a feminist wants. The answer is equality, but how this is brought about is rather tricky.

I'd like to draw attention to feminist philosophy at a meta level, and pose the question:

Does the existence of feminist literature and philosophy promote and further this cause of "sex equality," (which MacKinnon points out is in ways an oxymoron) or does it actually hinder its own progress?

MacKinnon's philosophy is very straight-forward, and though neither apologetic nor accusatory, outlines this gender disparity in a very objective manner. In so doing, however, is she undermining her own goal? In many ways, the legal system is equal when it comes to gender, or at least has the intention of being equal. Of course, there are many problems, especially when the sameness-as-basis and difference-as-basis ideologies collide. Most of the problems that even MacKinnon raises are grounded in historical inequality and circumstances that cannot be changed. The fact that quilt-making is not true art the way a Picasso painting is--or that it is not acknowledged as such--is something that is embedded in our social consciousness based on the way we have been conditioned into believing what constitutes art. Is this more subtle form (though still powerful) of gender inequality to be fought with direct philosophy?

Part of what dealing with this question brings to mind is the playground tactic of "playing it cool," and addresses many regular conflicts we have between feigning ambivalence and confrontation. Perhaps this suggestion even seems sexist in itself in "silencing" the voices of the feminists, but that is far from my intention. We all want power, but power is also directly correlated with responsibility. As the client of this dominatrix [credit to Paige Simmons and Facebook for making this information available to me] would tell you, the pressures on "successful" men of being in positions of power are not always so pleasant. My objection is simply the fact that some of the evocative language used in MacKinnon strikes me as distancing women from men. What is truly the best method in which to pursue this gender equality?