Beyoncé’s silhouette backed by gigantic pink font reading “Feminist”. Patricia Arquette rallying equal pay for women in Hollywood in her Oscar speech. Jennifer Lawrence penning an essay expounding on the issue of salary, both in show business and far beyond.

Feminism in America is upon a stepping-stone towards its pinnacle. No longer seen by many as a crotchety and academic faction that toes a thin line on extremism, it has reached broader audiences than ever by utilizing public figures and online media to truly receive a wider appeal. This doctrine that all men and women should be socially, politically, and economically congruent has become more and more widely endorsed in several sectors of the public.

So why is the movement’s immense success being stymied by its own advocates?

Consider this scenario: I am a male self-identified feminist who openly shares his opinion on women’s rights and listens to arguments, discussions, and the anecdotes that come with such a movement.

Suddenly, a feminist friend, a woman, tells me that I should voice my opinion less because, as a man, I am taking away a woman’s opportunity to speak her mind. This is due to my “disposition, being a male and feeling as though my opinion is automatically validated”, as well as the “incidents not endured” because of my lack of experiences as a woman.

This argument, while ostensibly persuasive, only acts to the detriment of the feminist movement, and perhaps any movement that actually utilizes this axiom.

For starters, feminism is often marketed as a multifaceted campaign, a lobby that expresses the ideas and thoughts of all. While I, and every other man, will never be able to speak to the experience of being a woman, several self-identifying male feminists, including myself, often experience an occurrence that galvanizes them to seriously acknowledge and join the feminist movement. These stories, along with ideas that are borne out of the natural process of contemplation and discussion, must be shared to further the crusade for gender equality.

In 1919, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes testified to the power of free speech when the government persisted upon limiting that First Amendment right through the Espionage and Sedition Acts. He likened free speech to a free economy (the “free market of ideas”), proclaiming. “The best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.”

Essentially, Mr. Holmes argued that the free market system has reaped its success due to everyone’s input, and the same should be encouraged said for deliberation and philosophy: everyone should contribute. The silencing of male feminists by people within their own movement does nothing but stagnate the flow of fresh thought.

That is only one negative of repressing men’s voices. In an ideal world, women could speak out sans the fear of backlash or undue sexism. They would never be shrunken nor shushed, and they would always have the opportunity to explain their notions. However, we unfortunately do not live in this world.

Constantly women’s voices are subjugated, both in America and abroad. Despite meteoric success in several aspects of the feminist movement, they still face challenges. One way this can be approached? By enlisting men to speak out in the name of feminism.

This does not mean substituting women in place of men; women are the indispensable necessity, the driving force, and the strength behind this effort. However, the addition of a male voice to a majority female undertaking can be valuable.

In a society gripped by the pernicious claw of patriarchy, if men in charge begin to ally themselves with feminism, the leaders of the world will surely take notice.

Take Carrie Chapman Catt, a suffragette of great courage and conviction, Ms. Catt was a leading force in the struggle for voting rights. She realized that by enlisting men who backed her battle, even the most misogynistic of leaders’ views could evolve.

Her approach was tremendously successful: the president at the time, known chauvinist Woodrow Wilson, came out in support of a 19th Amendment, evoking early feminist paradigms within a notorious sexist.

And this isn’t the only instance of outsiders’ importance: White supporters assisted in the civil rights movement, and straight people played roles in the gay rights movement and the eventual fight for marriage equality.

This is not to say that white and heterosexual people should be solely credited for these successes. The eventual victories achieved were due to the intelligence of these lobby’s leaders, turning one group’s endeavor into a human rights undertaking for all.

If women refuse that men share their experiences with feminism, then their own cause is disadvantaged.

And this isn’t based off of a singular discussion with a friend. This new idea that men’s voices should become devalued has flowed through liberal periodicals like wax, dripping over blogs, Tumblrs, and Twitter feeds. In an article entitled “No More Male Feminists” by guerrillafeminism.org, the writer declares “If a man says he’s a feminist, tell him no, he’s not allowed to claim the title.”

Feminists far and wide, women and men, need to be heard. Women should criticize men’s approach when they feel there should be changes, as progress from within is as prized as progress from without. But lambasting a man’s voice as a refutation of a woman’s idea is only counteractive.

As Emma Watson pronounced during her UN He for She speech, “I want men to take up this mantle. So their daughters, sisters and mothers can be free from prejudice, but also so that their sons have permission to be vulnerable and human too—reclaim those parts of themselves they abandoned, and in doing so, be a more true and complete version of themselves.”

With everyone’s involvement, the strides towards true equality become immeasurable.