Yeah, that's what it should be.
But often it's not.
Say a marriage goes to shit. Who will get to pay the bills? Almost all the time the man of course. Who is keeping the children? The woman of course, almost all the time. And the man isn't even able to see his kids unless the woman allows him to do so. Is this equalism? Is this fair? Not at all. And that's not even new.
Genital mutilation done to young boys is totally allowed in my country, even in case of religious reasons. Of course it's forbidden when done to girls (which is totally fine of course, but it shouldn't be allowed in any case).
I mean even here, I have to ask myself what the goal is. Yes, there were way way more males as protagonists, especially in the NES/SNES/N64 days. Why you ask? Because almost all the gamers back then were male (*). Especially personal computers were 100% nerd-territory, the "cool kids" didn't touch them, 99.9% females were not interested in them at all. The latter changed in the last maybe 10 years. But still even nowadays software development for example is almost exclusive to males, almost all females just do not want to do this job. But the game situation is getting better, because more and more females are starting to play games, which results in publishers asking for more games with female protagonists.
For example if Mass Effect was released 20 years ago, I definitely don't think that FemShepard would have been included. Not because of misogynous behaviour, but because it would have made no sense to do so, because almost no female would have played the game - having a gender selection in that game costs plenty of money. Nowadays it makes sense money-wise, that's why it's done. It takes time of course, it's a process.
Although what should be the final goal? 50:50? If 10 games are released next month, 5 should have a male protagonist and 5 a female one? Should it be made mandatory? Or even better: Why not prefer females all the time, just like laws in some countries (like mine), so that way more female protagonists are in games (maybe 60-70% or even more?), just like way more females get jobs in public service (like in my country and not just since a few years, this is the case for over 10 years now)? Doesn't that sound great? But it doesn't sound like equalism to me. It sounds like discrimination of males.
Even equalism in this case. What would that be? A fixed 50/50% rate?
And I bet that even if the total rate would be 60% males/40% females, people would still complain. Funnily I bet that noone would complain, if the rate would be 40% males/60% females. The public service job situation in my country is even worse than that and noone cares. And those laws were demanded by so called feminists. Laws that prefer females all the time, which is definitely not equalism.
(*) - I personally wouldn't have cared in any case, but just look at sales of Ico for example. I bought it, but protagonist is a little boy with a stick == sells like shit.