What class are you in?

Attractiveness (of a man) has a lot to do with basically being a higher class, such as having resources, dressing well, good education, which are traits that basically come de facto with being in a higher class. There are other advantages as well, such as the social status of whatever your parents do reflecting on to you, as well as rich parents don't hesitate to negotiate with their kids against the school or whatever institution to get what their kids want or reduce consequences for bad behaviour, whereas poor parents generally view their roll as partnering with institutional authority to help discipline their kids resulting in (surprise, surprise) rich kids learning way better negotiation skills which is the basis of being rich (doesn't matter what you can do if you don't get a good deal for doing it, or you lose all your money to people taking advantage of you anyway).

Another fact about people is they generally only compare themselves to their own class and above; so upper-middle class and upper class people generally view their life-style as normal.

Keeping all this in mind, the main argument against the historical victories of feminism is that it has disproportionately benefited upper-middle-class and upper class women. For instance, women in the work-force givesricher women the choice of continuing their career or staying home and raising kids (with easy avenues to do something in parallel or then get back to a career after children are raised); whereas women in the work force for poorer women means generally that two salaries are needed to raise a family, if affordable at all, which does not benefit poorer women nor their children, compared to "subsistence wage" of a man (of fatherhood age) having family raising priced in to that subsistence-wage.

I will admit there's a lot of complaining about feminism in the manosphere by men with essentially zero political or historical knowledge, just assigning everything they see as bad in women culture to feminism, which has no basis in anything any real feminist has said; but there are legitimate arguments as well such as the above one.

Feminism is an intellectual movement that turns out to disproportionately benefit intellectual women. Some countries it is observed (and I would agree with) have shown it's a path to benefiting all women once the intellectual class has more women in it (resulting in better policies for poorer women too), but until that happens I think the criticism is valid and issues of poorer women are often ignored or well meaning policies are actually harmful. I also feel that feminists (usually in the US) fail to understand that being equal to men in a shitty system with a shitty deal isn't necessarily prize worth fighting for (i.e. that the plight of women cannot be separated from that of society as a whole, and in such cases feminism can serve a distraction for deeper structural issues that affect men and women; again, why it's so attractive for rich intellectual women to "fight for women's rights" if it means having zero questions about the political system that keeps them rich and the poor in their place).