Going 50-50 only in finances is another patriarchal tactic

I see many people now have opted to go for 50-50 where women feel proud about it however, this 50-50 is only in finances but not in household chores and other roles & responsibilities. I see it as another patriarchal trap where men and women with patriarchal mindset were extracting women’s unpaid labor earlier and now they are getting their finances also due to rising cost and greed. For eg., how is it 50-50 when women still have to go for kanyadaan, vidaai, dowry, always has to stay with in-laws (instead of with her own parents/siblings) during festivals or forever. She has to cook cuz in-laws or husband don’t like cook ke hath ka khana. She has to cook while visiting husband’s relatives to perform sewa where she has gone as a guest. Most of the time, husband’s family stays with married couple permanently still, she has to give 50% finances and not allowed to give her salary to her own parents. She has to navigate mentally calmly even if she is badly treated by in-laws that’s added burden. Talking about child birth where only women’s body gets affected physically and mentally with sleep deprivation, cuts in private parts, stomach and internal organs are for lifetime.

Guys these days look for only those women to date/marry who opt for 50-50 in finances however, they don’t understand that we are asking for 50-50 everywhere that is in behaviour, companionship, roles & responsibilities, fidelity, beauty etc. They still look for beautiful women or atleast someone who looks much better than them (even though they look like a pig), how they will contribute 50% to beauty and aura. They bash woman if she also wants handsome guy if she herself is beautiful.

Society wise, people think that husband has bought the home/car and other assets, even if she paid 50% for it, there is a gender pay gap, pink tax, world is more expensive for women to ensure safe places to stay, commute and look beautiful, women are the first to get laid off or get low performance ratings due to cost cutting since men are still considered as prima ry earner (that’s not the case in practicality these days). When I talk to senior leadership women, they tell there is a humongous difference in women’s savings compared to men during retirement.

What is your opinion on this?