> The central structural issue is that by and large, both sexes now unquestioningly accept the flawed premise that men and women are the same. It is, after all,

> The central structural issue is that by and large, both sexes now unquestioningly accept the flawed premise that men and women are the same. It is, after all, a special case of the central liberal delusion that all people are the same: a dogma so central to the modern world that elaborate systems of law and social dogma exist to encourage compliance. This is interesting coming from someone in the UK (who I'd expect less to have such an American view of "liberals"). No, the point is that women and men should be treated the same wherever physically possible, to get as close as possible outcomes. Not that men and women are the same, which obviously isn't true. Part of it is biology (which can be changed, before any transphobes jump in), part of it is education and expectations. As an example, the average woman is weaker than the average man. That doesn't mean that a random non athletic man can win a fight against a female boxer, obviously. But it doesn't make women less human or less worthy of whatever or incapable of being firefighters. Pregnancy is also an obvious example - women obviously need more time around birth than their partners do. That doesn't mean that only they should do all childcare. Honestly, none of this is rocket brain surgery, I'm shocked anyone still struggles or manages to misunderstand what feminism (by and large, not fringes) wants, or what "liberals" (I'm assuming this to mean social progressives) have as a worldview with regards to women and men.