I know a man who believes that men and women are equal, but women should be treated as though they are special. So doors are held open, restaurant bills are paid and surprises are planned, with no expectation of home-cooked food, perfect ironing and hordes of male heirs.

But that’s quite unusual. Twenty first century women are invariably finding that sinister inequalities are lurking in surprising places and are facilitated by unlikely people. Boyfriends, bosses, clients, colleagues, friends, family. It can be difficult to see when we are humouring a harmless romantic tradition and when we are inadvertently perpetuating inequality.

Running in Heels asked 45 people if, in 2009, it is still ok for men to open doors for women and for women to let them. None of them even suggested that this would present any kind of danger to female independence, and a large number, male and female, said it was common courtesy to hold doors open for anyone, regardless of gender.

So the thinking seems to have evolved from ‘ladies first’ to a general expectation of courtesy, which probably becomes less reciprocal when a man and a woman go on a date. So what? I’m the 46th person to say that’s fine.

Can it be, that as one of our successful 40-something respondents concluded, we have arrived at a time when it’s ok to enjoy the nice things about being female, without having to give up our independence? When it comes to doors, we can rest assured that this is the case.

But things change when it comes to other traditions, such as women changing their name on marriage. The UK Deed Poll Service now estimates that just 50 per cent of women take their husband’s name, while more and more couples use double barrelled names, have the man take the woman’s name, or ‘mesh’ their surnames into something new that is based on both. Clearly, women are becomingly increasingly uncomfortable with connotations of ownership in relationships and it’s easy to see where these nagging doubts stem from.

The old perceptions of women, and the traditions that go with them, may seem harmless and a lot of them are, but we’re still in a situation where rape victims are judged on the length of the skirt they were wearing when they were attacked. And women are agonising about how to dress for work to avoid being stereotyped, leered at, ridiculed or simply ignored. What’s worse; to wear a dress or a floral blouseand risk being dismissed as a bimbo/slut, or to concede that feminine and serious can’t go together and so deliberately dress in a more ‘masculine’ way and be branded a lesbian instead? It’s a tough call and we shouldn’t have to make it.

In the IT industry, where only 16% of the workforce is female, nine out of ten women believe they have been the victim of sexism. Whether it’s comments about their appearance, assumptions that they don’t have technical knowledge, or lack of exposure to networking opportunities because they have to be home in the evening to relieve childminders, they are being made to feel ostracised and are struggling to be taken seriously.

Gender diversity is no better in the City, in politics, or in engineering, and so the pay gap persists and the issue of women being measured according to their appearance continues.

“It’s extremely problematic because it undermines the position of women in the workplace,” said Kat Banyard, Campaigns Officer at The Fawcett Society.
“It moves the emphasis away from abilities towards a focus on superficial elements like appearance, when women should be able to get ahead based on the quality of their work,” she said.

“Despite the fact that pay inequality has been illegal for 30 years, women working full time are still paid 17% less than men. We’re calling for mandatory pay audits because otherwise it’s practically impossible for a woman to find out if she’s being paid less than a man in the same job.”

“The culture of secrecy allows sexism to continue under the surface and companies won’t take action unless they have to. Women are particularly vulnerable at times of recession, because existing discrimination, such as discrimination against women of childbearing age, can flourish under the guise of the recession.”

British women have had the vote for 90 years, and we may think we enjoy equality in most areas of our lives, which allows us the luxury of pondering such questions, along with ‘is it ok to let the man pay for dinner if he wants to,’ and ‘should I be embarrassed if I need a man to change my light bulbs?’

Even if we may have come a long way in Britain, perhaps our energies should be better put to trying to tackle ongoing issues like genital mutilation, rape as a military weapon, escalating reports of ‘corrective rape’ attacks against lesbians in South Africa, stonings of young women in Iran and forced marriage in Saudi Arabia. Even in Britain, we have to endure bum pinching in nightclubs, and cat calling in the street, which frequently turns nasty if we don’t ‘play along’ in the way we’re expected to. And worst of all, there has been an increase in domestic violence against women as a result of the recession. The battle is far from done.

We’re on the third wave of feminism and most people don’t know what that even means. A generation of women has emerged, and many of us don’t see the issues addressed in the first and second waves of feminism as part of our lives. We take so much for granted in what we wear and how we conduct our relationships, that we can appall the older generations of women who fought just to earn a decent wage and vote.

Erma Bombeck, the American humourist who died in 1969 summed up this attitude in a memorable quote.

“We’ve got a generation now who were born with semi-equality,” she said. “They don’t know how it was before, so they think, this isn’t too bad. We’re working. We have our attache cases and our three-piece suits.”

“I get very disgusted with the younger generation of women. We had a torch to pass, and they are just sitting there. They don’t realize it can be taken away. Things are going to have to get worse before they join in fighting the battle.”

Of course we should enjoy the freedom to respond to these issues in our own way, but it is important to understand the significance of the work that has been done in the past to give us that freedom. Things like going to the gym, cycling to work and going backpacking alone seem like less of a given when we look back at how hard women have had to fight.

So thanks to the Rational Dress League and The Lady Cyclist magazine, in the early part of the 20th century, for helping to eliminate bustles and frou frou, and campaigning for cycling bloomers to be acceptable, so that women could participate in sports without injuring themselves.

Thanks to Paul Poiret for introducing a new silhouette in female dress, helping to rid us of the corset that made our great grandmothers ill. And to Clare McCardell for making practical women’s clothing fashionable. Thanks to Yves Saint Laurent for his marvellous workwear for women.

Thanks to Mary Wollstonecraft, Rebecca West, Germaine Greer and Harriet Harman for talking about this stuff and making us think, without fear of disapproval.

Thanks to the rights groups, like the Fawcett Society and Take Back the Night for continuing to fight the hard fight on behalf of all women, including those that can’t or don’t join them.

And thanks to the suffragettes, for enduring imprisonment and risking their lives so that we can vote.