Turns Out, Both Sides of the Feminism Debate Can Agree on This

World War Women has a chokehold on the national conversation. Tradwives versus girlbosses . Left versus right. Men versus women. At the center of it all? Feminism. The Free Press brought that battle to the stage for a debate. I was invited to attend and ask a question. In this day and age, we can recite why the "other side's" views are trash before we can recall what we had for breakfast. (Try it now, I dare you.) Pick a fight in the comments section, fire off another hot take, bask in the applause. Finding common ground takes more effort, gets fewer Instagram views, and has a terrible PR team. What if we focused on what we actually agreed on? Could we get something besides another diatribe about why everyone else is stupid and wrong? What if we're so invested in our side winning that we're missing the potential of what we could be? This was a microcosm if I ever saw one: two women with opposing worldviews, debating what would make women's lives better. I came armed with theoretical popcorn and a triggering Sydney Sweeney question. I expected disagreement. What interested me more were the glimmers of humanity, the common ground revealed, and whether any of it would survive beyond a closing handshake. What if we're so invested in our side winning that we're missing the potential of what we could be? CBS News' Kelly O'Grady moderated, asking if feminism still had a purpose in 2026 and what that should even be in the land of endless opportunity, and even more judgment. It covered controversial topics often addressed here at Evie. In other words: the Super Bowl. At the podiums were Allie Beth Stuckey, the Christian conservative author and host of Relatable , and Deja Foxx, the progressive Gen Z activist and former Arizona congressional candidate . Allie was blonde, white, and very pregnant. Deja was young and Filipina. I chuckled, wondering if we were living in a real-life algorithm of archetypes. Their worldviews were equally distinct: Allie, married and carrying her fourth child ; Deja, raised by a single mother. Those experiences weren't footnotes, and clearly shaped what each one considered urgent, valuable, and possible. No participation trophies here, but I was impressed by their command of big topics with no teleprompters. Late night could never. My head occasionally spun like Beetlejuice when hearing Allie's very hard lines on IVF and abortion, or Deja's on trans inclusion within women's rights. Conservatives can be awfully aloof about modern economic realities, like they're living in a la-la land I'd love to visit. Progressives can be equally flippant about culture-war issues they claim shouldn't get "oxygen." Until, of course, they hit close to home. There were times I deeply agreed with each. Allie argued that a movement for women loses its footing when it won't recognize what makes women… women. Deja's concern for the little people landed with me, unless it becomes debilitating. Paid maternity leave shouldn't require an American Horror Story séance to summon common sense. Even Allie agreed. Their steadfast views mostly hailed from different galaxies, but I found a way to unite them. Of course, it was over Sydney Sweeney. I asked why women who fought for sexual liberation were unraveling over a blonde holding a football in an ad . Allie vehemently opposed self-objectification. Deja raised concerns about pornography, gambling, and struggling men. Different routes, same destination: disapproval of Sydney Sweeney. I couldn't knock Allie's consistency. Deja's concern was valid, but her objection still felt hypocritical. Would a trans person, plus-size woman, or woman of color swinging basketballs around their ass cheeks get the same treatment? I'd like to hear that one. Nevertheless, common ground. Happy to help unite the cause, I guess? Beneath the branding were shared priorities. Now that we've established everyone and their mother has strong opinions on evicting Sydney from the internet (future column incoming), there were far more important agreements worth focusing on. Beneath the branding were shared priorities: supporting motherhood, pursuing passion and calling, and improving dynamics between men and women by helping men, too. Watching those moments unfold was more reinvigorating than my last Groupon facial. Both recognized men are struggling , dating is in shambles, and saving both isn't just worthwhile, it's crucial. When a man asked about wanting to find someone , they reminded him that you need one right woman, not a thousand. At last, math that was mathing for everyone. Then a self-described feminist said her friends shamed her desire to stay home with future children while her husband worked. Both women agreed that choice deserved respect , not ridicule. Allie described motherhood as a high calling while also valuing her writing and debating. Deja recognized its deep value, reflecting on her own mom and wanting to become one herself, saying motherhood and other ambitions aren't mutually exclusive. Kelly spoke candidly about her own struggle wanting to start a family while building her dream career. The room's response felt like a collective amen. Kelly emphasized that feminism fought for choice, yet opposing camps have approved checklists most of us feel every day. This was the night's clearest moment of unity: recognizing the desire to navigate motherhood, ambition, and fulfillment in a culture gone sideways. Allie's underlying question mattered: Have women become happier? She pointed out how our society has increasingly defined worth through traditionally male-centric values around work, money, and status. She cited women's higher antidepressant use and argued the happiest American women are married with children . When the audience was surveyed, its relationship with the feminist label was complicated. Mine included. As I told TFP, you can walk the walk without tattooing the label on your forehead, an ideal Dolly Parton also valued. In Dolly we trust. Especially in her house: Nashville. Afterward, Deja and I chatted about outfits and my Playboy story: both posing and being featured as a writer in celebration of freedom to be more than one thing. She said that was the conversation we needed. Allie and I briefly talked pregnancy, as I instinctively reached toward her belly before remembering she was a stranger. When the cameras are off and it's woman-to-woman, you remember who all this is supposed to be for. There was something exciting about being in a room where women could passionately argue about what our lives should look like. I think about Iran's Parastoo Ahmadi, who reportedly faces 74 lashes for performing without a hijab. Or the women under Taliban rule in Afghanistan, who are banned from using their voices in public , political participation, and the workforce. We have extraordinary power and freedom to use our voices. Surely that deserves more than the next installment of partisan Mean Girls . Who won? In a way, we all did by getting to witness it. But watching them shake hands and part ways, I doubted either left less convinced. If anything, they probably left more so. Their shared values warrant more than a polite nod before the next ideological cage match. This is why common ground matters. Everyone thinks they're doing right by women while calling the other side destructive. We've gotten so lost in our respective tribes that we're stuck in circles on an It's a Small World ride that won't end. If one woman's version of "winning" comes at another's expense, is it really winning? Our differences are legitimate and matter. But if the goal is a society where women are healthy, empowered, and equipped to build fulfilling lives, isn't it worth getting there even if our ideal paths look a little different? There's precedent. The civil rights movement brought people with different politics, faiths, and backgrounds together around shared goals. They didn't resolve every disagreement before working toward something bigger. Conviction motivated them to act, and cooperation helped turn that action into lasting change. That possibility isn't out of reach here. Paid maternity leave, affordable childcare for working women, and support for mothers returning to the workforce are common-sense, concrete places to start. We don't need to settle the entire feminist argument here and now before helping a mother give her family a great life. We should always preserve our freedom to disagree. Equally important is how we use it to move the needle in ways we can collectively benefit from, even if that requires some sacrifice. Sydney Sweeney's private parts cannot be our only bipartisan breakthrough. If one woman's version of "winning" comes at another's expense, is it really winning? Giving more women a shot at building lives they love is worth more than winning every argument. Women's lives are so much bigger than the boxes we've chosen for them.