This election has been characterized by vociferous debate surrounding a number of purportedly critical social issues. The Republicans have spun themselves into a tizzy looking for solutions to immigration reform, abortion, Obamacare and gay marriage. Problem is, those issues are beginning to look less like issues and more like inevitabilities. We cannot—and will not—deport every single illegal immigrant; Roe v. Wade will not be overturned; no legislature will ever take away ACA insurance from an estimated 16.9 million new enrollees; and gay marriage is now the law of the land—ask Kim Davis. On the Democrats’ side, social inequality trumps (topical verb) the list, but Millennials’ dream reform candidate Bernie Sanders remains far out from the presidency, despite daily front-page Reddit posts about him polling well.

I say this not as a call for reformers to lay down their arms but as a congratulations that the demographic scales have finally tipped against intolerance and oppression. There are still a number of struggles remaining, but they remain either too distant to tackle or too minor to rally the nation.

As an example of that first “too-big” type problem, I proffer climate change. Those of us who know climate change is a threat, well, know. Those who continue to disbelieve science—as if someone can choose not to believe in scientific theories—will continue to do so. We can shop at farmers’ markets, buy a NEST thermostat and build LEED certified campus buildings, but the country remains years away from mustering the will to fight businesses, “the right,” and ourselves to effectively address climate change. Fight ourselves? Yeah, combating the catastrophic effects of global warming is not compatible with hybrid cars and sustainable facial scrubs: halting the effects of climate change primarily involves undoing the industrial revolution.

Another too-big problem remains inequality and workers’ rights. They are fashionable to discuss on Slate and Vox, but real change will require a revolutionary realignment of our social structure. Silicon Valley is leading the way with annual diversity reports, a living wage for even the caterers and year-long maternity leave. But those hyper-profitable tech companies remain in a realm of their own, in which they can use their extra money to champion trendy causes—and pay $4,000 a month for a studio apartment in San Francisco. For the famed Average American, higher pay and workplace protections remain a distant dream.

And what about the aforementioned “too-small” causes? I offer a controversial example: government funding for gender reassignment surgeries. It is certainly a fashionable social ill to address in the Caitlyn Jenner era, but the relative dearth of transsexual individuals makes grassroots support problematic.  Everyone has a homosexual friend whose right to marry will be defended by frat bros and feminists alike. But nationalizing the plight of transsexual individuals will prove difficult—and a number of New York Times exposés on bullying have already tried.

I close with a reminder that as a country we still have a ways to go before achieving the utopic Land of the American Dream in which true equality reigns. As liberal arts students, we must continue to advocate for reform that lifts up the oppressed and marginalized. But at the same time, I cannot help but to think that further progress will be even more difficult than what we have already achieved.