>>103422355>you are talking as if we don't live in western countries in 2018You're talking as if we don't have the same psychological makeup as humans have had for tens of thousands of years. What's this "+200 year old ideologies" business?
>now women can, and are able to fuck as much as they wantDidn't you read my last post? That has generally been the case. It's men who have had to work to get access to sex, generally speaking. This is not the first sexually liberated time in human history. It's just that sexual liberation is not conducive for the advancement and maintenance of civilization, due to the incentives involved being at odds with each other.
>individuals who the rights to be equals in societyAnd since men and women are psychologically different (temperament, interests, etc.) providing men and women with equal rights and opportunities produces unequal outcomes. And these outcomes become more different as opportunities become more equal, because men and women are then freer to follow their interests, which happen to be different. There are actual consequences here that are relevant for the claims of certain ideologies. For example, since men are more interested in climbing social hierarchies than women, a disproportionate number of men in leadership positions is unsurprising, and does not necessarily reflect discrimination or "the patriarchy". Therefore, quotas to enforce equal numbers of women in leadership are themselves discrimination that operates against free choice and meritocracy. And considering that, in a sexually liberated society, a small number of men have sex with a lot of women (due to the men wanting lots of partners and women wanting a partner with high status - part of which is approval by other women), we should not be surprised that dating apps and such have built an approximation of harems, with many disaffected men becoming dissatisfied with the status quo, and sexual double standards becoming more pronounced.
