What is wrong with men? Why do they hate women so much? A question that has long kept us in the dark. Let me try to answer it.

In men, there's an underlying base complex. And it is something more fundamental than an inferiority complex. I would call it a "creation complex", that is, someone who, figuratively speaking, was created by someone else, but does not have the creative ability himself. It's hard for women to imagine this - we don't have this self-perception and can't have it. But for men, it is the cornerstone of their entire male psychology.

Man is born of a woman, but he himself is not capable of giving birth and yet he is not some fundamentally new organism, but a half-woman, the likeness of his mother. He looks at the woman as his First Cause, the one who created him, but he himself cannot be the same First Cause for anyone - he is only a creature, but never the Creator.
He experiences it as ontological subordination to the Woman, as dependence and predetermination of his existence. Man is both absolutely self-centred and at the same time deprived of his own, independent “him”. He experiences a deep irrational fear of woman.
Jealousy, the desire to equal his Female Creator, to destroy her in order to become her himself is an integral part of the complex.

Man does not want to be just a son of his Female Creator, he wants to be the Creator himself.
This is the psychological background of patriarchy and the explanation for male hostility, envy and hatred of the female sex.

There is a reason why patriarchal culture is built on the dehumanization of woman - the destruction of her personality and the denial of birth from Woman ("life is given by the father") - this is necessary for the realization of masculine "identity". Patriarchy is essentially an artificial system built to maintain an artificial "masculine self".
But no matter how much power a man seizes, he has no confidence in his position, he remembers who and what he really is. Woman, by her existence and appearance, always reminds him of his true origin.

Men, for example, are so afraid of abortions and constantly try to prohibit them, because Woman, who decides for herself whether or not to bring a new creature into the world, causes men superstitious terror. She, who freely decides to bring or not to bring someone's life into the world, destroys men's religions, patriarchal ontology - everything that men have been composing for centuries and presenting as the truth in the last instance. And the man himself turns from the "crown of creation" back into nothing.
Men have a hard time with their power. They live in hatred of the female sex and are doomed to the constant fear of being exposed.

Father's right, deification of "manhood", systemic misogyny - the fruits of men's "creativity", infinitely dear to men, but still unable to satiate them, because it is all based on lies and violent leverage, and men understand this.
Man cannot rest: "inventing", working on artificial intelligence, fantasising about cloning people or humanoid robots - he wants to create life and be its sole ruler. He longs to surpass Woman, to finally redefine her. Even if he has to destroy the whole world to do so.

In patriarchal mythology, literature, and creation in general, there are often different versions of the story of the rebellion of creation against its creator. A rebellion that always led to catastrophic consequences.
It is not difficult to understand now where this archetypal plot comes from.
It is a kind of reflection of the male collective path, of how men themselves have gone against Women.
The article is about how male psychology influenced the main features of patriarchal culture.
The primacy and primogeniture of women is a biological fact, a law of nature. Complex explanatory theories are not needed here, just as there is no need to prove that the sun shines. There is cause and there is effect. Woman is a human being, the basis of the species, man is an organism derived from woman.

For a very long time primitive man has looked upon woman as his Creator, as an inscrutable superior force. The basis of male psychology is a sense of his own secondary and inferiority due to his inability to create life.
The man led an unremarkable life and apparently harbored dissatisfaction and anger for a long time.
The turning point was his realization of his minor role in conception. The man decided that it is he who creates life, that a woman gets pregnant only thanks to him. The problem is that paternity itself is a vague thing, it is quite difficult to define it and establish exactly. And this next mockery of nature apparently became the last straw.
Rape, forced insemination - this is, you could say, male revenge. A man wants to believe that at least in this way he has the upper hand over a woman.
Phallic cults, rape cults and misogyny flourished in men's unions - groups formed from antisocial elements, which apparently played a significant role in the establishment of patriarchy. Male power was established through armed takeovers of matriarchal communities, during which most likely all adult women were killed, and little girls and adolescent girls were taken captive, treated accordingly, forced to give birth, and made slaves and commodities of the daughters they gave birth to.

Patriarchy is, first and foremost, the sexual and reproductive exploitation of women. Sexual exploitation and appropriation of a woman's children by a man is the very traditional marriage, the cell of patriarchy. But it is wrong to think that men were interested in the economic side of this relationship, that they calculated in advance that it would be a favorable basis for building society. I don't think they could have had any far-reaching plans and thoughts about development. The main male goal is self-assertion, a sense of power over a woman. That is, by keeping a woman in sexual slavery and making her children his bioresource, a man thus devalues a woman, he convinces himself that he has finally risen above her, made her secondary, and put himself in that cherished first place. He turns heterosex into a hierarchy, a dominant-subordinate relationship. In the masculine paradigm, man becomes "the creator transforming passive matter" - that is, woman. He creates life through woman. The penis is an attribute of the subject, lord, master. It is a rod of power, a pointer that can also be threatened and "put in its place". To insert a penis and ejaculate into someone means to fulfill an act of power, to subjugate. The one in whom the penis is inserted, who is "fertilized" is subordinate, dependent, secondary. Within the framework of this construct, a man projects his natural role, of which he himself is the bearer, onto a woman; he transfers his entire complex, his unconsciousness, onto her. He longs in this way to get rid of the feeling of his inferiority, with which he has to live and from which he does not know where to escape. He cannot deny himself the desire to get even, to make the woman feel her own worthlessness.
Throughout patriarchal history, man self-consciously convinces himself that he is really more important than woman, that he has managed to swap places with her. But the very existence of woman and man's dependence on her treacherously betrays the truth, that means man's torment continues even after gaining power. He wishes so much that the woman did not exist at all. He is constantly torn between the desire to destroy her completely and the impossibility of doing so. The hatred of women is the real male religion.

If it is impossible to get rid of women, it is necessary to make them objects, not subjects, not people in order to provide the illusion that women as human beings do not exist. In patriarchy, a woman's subjecthood, her human nature, is completely denied and replaced by the object characteristics of a sexual or aesthetic object, a commodity, a thing. Her natural physiology is tabooed, her body is equated with an incubator. Her experience is being denied. Her slave labor and position are being denied because it is impossible to exploit the object just like you can't exploit your chair or bed just by using them. Various myths, legends, theories, and later scientific justifications of Her second-classness, of the meaning of her existence just for male use, are composed. All these ideas are immediately consolidated in all spheres of life and fields of knowledge. For the sake of emphasizing the difference in status, many prohibitions and restrictions are introduced to mark women as a category and keep them under control.
If we talk about the most vivid examples of the depersonalisation and denial of women in male culture, in fathers’ patriarchy, it is the covered head, clothes and veils that hide the female body. The woman should be invisible, she should not have a voice, in this type of patriarchy there are not even mothers, their children are "born" by the father. There are also very popular male spaces where women are forbidden to enter. Fathers’ patriarchy is generally the most sincere expression of men's feelings towards women.

A distinctive feature of modern patriarchy, sons’ patriarchy, is the obsessive presentation of women as decorative objects.
Sexualising clothes and shoes, make-up, all other beauty practices are designed to emphasize subordinate status, commodification of a woman. Pornography, objectified female images - this is the standard humiliation by the status of a sex object, this is how they try to show us our "sphere of application". The image of woman is distorted to the point of caricature, and this artificial image in the cultural space has completely replaced the real woman, to the point where make-up and styling are taken almost as secondary sexual characteristics, without which a woman is not a woman, and female reproductive organs are seen only as aesthetic objects or sex toys. Any reminders that it is actually just a human body, reminders of its natural processes such as menstruation, aging, etc. are met with violent male protest. That is, a man is simply disgusted by the slightest hint that a woman is a living being, not a thing for sex.

The tabooing of natural female physiology, the prohibition of its presentation as a universal human body, is nothing but a male defense against an agonizing trigger. After all, it is he who wants to be the only standard of a human being, and a woman's physiology and body always inexorably reminds him where he came from, it directly tells him who really occupies the place he claims - the place of the Creator. To recognise a woman as a subject and a human being for a man is tantamount to self-destruction. If you hide a real woman from view, forbid her under the pretext that she is something indecent, then somehow it is easier to live like that.
Men react to us real ones like ghouls to the sun, they literally can't bear to look at us. Even the very word "woman" does not leave them indifferent. Both ignorant old patriarchal t@libs and the "progressive", "liberal", "equal rights" West with its trans agenda are afraid of it.
Feminophobia is an incurable male disease.

Humiliation by sex and sexual objectification of women is a male defense. A man tries to humiliate a woman through sex, because sex, sexual perversions are his element. Threatening with a penis is basically the only thing he has been able to oppose us with.
If female supremacy is a natural order of things, an axiom, then male supremacy is an illusion, which can only be maintained by violence, lies, turning the whole society into a system of sexual relations, polluting the whole world with misogyny.

Male power is a rebellion against women and against nature, a fleeing from oneself.
The devaluation, erasure of female subjectivity, systemic violence against women is an expression of endless male hysteria at the realization that nature cannot be changed. This is a man's revenge on a woman for his dependence on her, for his incorrigible second-rate nature.

The parasitic, inferior essence of men directly affects their power and determines the principles of functioning of the patriarchal system.

Power for men in general is violence, unpunished violation of others boundaries, appropriation of other people's labor, but first of all it is power over women. Life at the expense of a woman and self-assertion through violence against her is the main general male necessity. To satisfy this need, to maintain this condition, to devote all other resources to its preservation is the primary task of the system.

The male state is one big pyramid with female slavery at its base. The superstructure has changed over the course of history, but the object, extra-legal status of women and our unremunerated reproductive and domestic labor is what patriarchy has always been based on.
The unit of the male system is not the individual man, but rather the individual male group organized on some additional feature. Men have always preferred to huddle together, to split into groups, not only because it is easier to survive and carry out their activities, but also for a purely psychological reason: groupness, the feeling of belonging to something bigger than oneself, compensates a man for his inner emptiness and insecurity.

Constant struggle, clashes, confrontations of groups - a consequence of common consumer interest. This is how states were formed - by men's unions fighting for resources, capturing captives, and turning them into slaves.

Slavery, feudalism, capitalism - variations of how men throughout history have divided power among themselves. Men who rose to the elite, that is, to the top of the conventional pyramid, regularly relegated other groups to the lower levels of the system. It was always in men's interests, roughly speaking, to eliminate extra mouths, to exclude them from the social contract so that there would be fewer rivals, and at the same time to make them work for themselves. But the initial principle - exploitation of women - has been preserved in all groups.
The state is a large male union made up of its smaller versions.

Each little grouping with all its goals, needs, notions, etc. is just a smaller copy of the larger one.
Division of spheres of influence, rivalry, opposing each other, hypocritical co-operation and shaking hands, which is in fact just a non-aggression pact - this is the principle of relations within a particular male group, between groups, and between unions of groupings, which are states.

Male groups live, as a rule, according to several established scenarios, cycles.
Complete entrenchment, closing their borders from the encroachment of other groups - found in all kinds of national, religious minorities, authoritarian regimes.

Emphasized caste, isolation, maintenance of the conquered sacral status: the most vivid example is the clergy. Art and science workers are also quite suitable here - they are also peculiar male castes with an established territory. As a separate example of isolation, male political elites, which have behaved in a similar way throughout history, are very revealing. They are characterized by isolation up to complete inaccessibility. Just as men in general deny women's subjecthood and needs, in a similar way political elites have always denied the subjecthood of other exploited groups. At a certain point, the elites would finally lock themselves into their own narrow circle, deny the fact of class violence and their responsibility for it, and become squeamish when reminded of the existence of slaves, peasants, workers, etc. This behavior very often led to people's anger, revolts and uprisings.

Struggle for supreme status, seizure of resources of other groups directly or indirectly - political parties, criminal gangs, major businesses, and states themselves exist in this mode.
Summing up, we can say that the male state, like its organizer, is sharpened for consumption, and therefore it will always siphon off internal resources one way or another, milk subordinate groups or go to seize neighboring territories, which is perfectly visible in history: one after another change of slave social formations and incessant military clashes.

Progress in patriarchy is the seizure of new territories after exhaustion of already developed ones or internal coup. At the moment of a coup or expansion, the system, conventionally speaking, loses some of its rigidity, and phenomena out of control occur, which then have to be reckoned with, tolerated and incorporated into a renewed version of the system.

Patriarchy is very similar to a certain pathological neoplasm that has spread all over the planet.
Banditry, wars, riots, revolutions, inequality and injustice, social upheavals - these are the inevitable companions of patriarchy, a direct consequence of the lifestyle and interests of male groups, the exploitative, anti-human nature of male power.

After studying feminism, all this grandiose universal history with its scale and significance bursts and turns into an exclusively masculine story about how the man himself regularly created the same social problems and disasters and then marveled every time - what is the reason for everything that happens? He composed various philosophical and theological concepts and theories, trying to explain what it is - human nature and why there is this damned inequality, why this world is full of suffering and violence, while to answer this question he only needed to look in the mirror.
It is believed that the role of a woman in the Palaeolithic and Neolithic periods was insignificant. Men did everything, and women gave birth to children and "kept home". But this is another patriarchal misconception. A man has never been a breadwinner or a protector of a woman. For more on the myth of the male protector, see the feminist author Accion Positiva (1).
For a long time it was believed that archaeology proves the validity of the myth of the male hunter-defender and the inconspicuous female "keeper at home". But it should be added that archaeology was then a tool of sexist men, in most cases religious, who automatically attributed any remains of a man engaged in hunting or warfare to men. However, with the development of modern methods in archaeology, because of the influence of women on archaeology, it has become clear that women hunted, fought and foraged for food just as much as men.
According to the study, "41% of the remains of ancient hunters found in the Americas dating back about 9,000 years ago are likely to belong to women. Until now, it has been assumed that hunting in prehistoric times was predominantly practiced by men. However, a number of burials from the same period in different parts of the world, including Siberia, show that there were many women hunters in primitive society" (2).

In the Stone Age, the women of Central Europe cultivated soil, grain. They threshed grain by hand from a very young age. The hands of these women were stronger than those of rowing champions (3). It was women who did the grueling manual labor for thousands of years. Women tended livestock, processed milk and meat, crafted textiles, carried water, planted crops, and cultivated soils. To do this, women made their own tools.

Overall, women were a powerful economic force in the ancient world, according to Elizabeth Wainland Barber. It was women who owned the clothing industry. Thread spinning and weaving were women's crafts for 20,000 years, which influenced the development of civilization. Weaver, seamstress, and spinster were prestigious positions.
In addition, women in ancient societies worked in mines, extracting ore, salt, and minerals. "The results of such studies show - for millennia, women's hard manual labor was the decisive driving force behind the economy of early agriculture".
Women were engaged in warfare, hunting and fishing. This is evidenced by analyses of the remains. For example, five thousand years ago, in the hunter-gatherer culture in what is now California, women were trained in martial arts and warfare. In ancient Mongolia, women also trained in martial arts and performed combat tasks.
New archaeological research shatters the myth that women's role in building civilization was small. Women were the engine of the economy. And that's not taking into account the reproductive labor that women performed.




Modern patriarchy and analysis of the situation.

It is necessary to characterize the current position of women as truthfully as possible, because the modern patriarchy with its realities creates the ground for a large number of misconceptions, which are very confusing and lead to false conclusions and hopes.
"Are women free now or not? Why were women given rights? How does the fact that women have been given rights characterize the system? Maybe things are not so bad? Maybe we just have to wait a little longer and everything will be wonderful? Progress is in full swing - women's status and progress are linked, right?"
When discussing women's issues today, one often hears something like this. Each of these questions is fragmented into many of the same speculations and assumptions that can lead women to the wrong place.
We can wander endlessly in conjectures, deceive ourselves with illusions, try to somehow explain the logical inconsistencies, but in order for the whole picture of the past, present and possible future to appear with astonishing clarity before our eyes, we just need to recognise three simple facts:
1. There are no regularities in the development of social processes in the world and no logical sequence of stages in history. There are no third forces that influence the world, nothing that happens because it is supposed to. It is impossible to designate the present or predict the next historical period in relation to some general plan, a programme that society has and according to which it seems to develop, because there is simply no such programme.
2. Patriarchy is a social order that was purposefully established by men at a certain time;
3. Progress is a concept that applies only to the technical side of life, i.e. it is the gradual improvement of technology that improves the quality of life. Progress in no way refers to improving the quality of relations between people, to increasing humanistic tendencies in society.

Many people have great problems with recognising these simple facts. But all those who doubt the above will inevitably come to some contradictions in their reasoning. Logical holes disappear only when these three points are taken into account, and then it is possible to look more soberly at the modern patriarchy and at the status of women in general.
The social processes taking place in the world are created by those who live in this world, and we have only two large groups: women and men. There is not and cannot be any prescription from somewhere from above for certain events. There is no predetermined vector of development of society, which exists in isolation from the will and psychology of groups. There are more or less predictable phenomena arising from the interaction of some groups with others, there are regular processes in the psychology of the masses, occurring at the systemic level and leading to some actions, but there are no external forces that predetermine the history of society. It is created by people themselves.
Progress can be called only the mastering and accumulation of knowledge about the surrounding world and improvement of technologies that make life more comfortable. Technical progress may have a regularity: each next generation uses the experience of the previous one, i.e. does not waste time on what has already been mastered and invented and supplements it with its own developments, and so technologies become more and more perfect, and the necessary result is achieved more and more quickly. The development of technology affects life, creates some new conditions, gives new opportunities, and groups consciously use them to their advantage.

Progress can affect the culture of relations between people, but it affects only external forms of behavior. Code of ethics, etiquette, politeness - for men it is all rather a disguise and hypocrisy. Laws, criminal codes help male power to keep men themselves under control, and to some extent protect women as well. However, if they disappear and men gain total impunity, there will be no sign of their civilized and progressive nature. You don't have to go far for examples: two world wars in the last century and subsequently many local military conflicts all over the world - as soon as educated men from developed countries find themselves in conditions of total impunity, they do the same things that men did a thousand and two thousand years ago - mock civilians, commit terrible atrocities, rob.
Patriarchy was established by men solely in men's interests, has been maintained by them all along, and is being maintained now. And the fact that women had to pull out their rights with their teeth shows that once these rights were purposefully taken away. The fact that women did achieve some rights within the patriarchal system does not contradict the general picture. We just have to look at the big picture, taking into account the three points mentioned at the beginning: patriarchy was established by the will of one group that united to realize its interests. Basic women's rights were beaten out at the will of the exploited group, which united and realized its interests. The ruling class sagged - it simply had nowhere else to go, as it was dependent on the exploited class, but the existence of the system itself was not affected by the wrestling of women's rights. Men tried to adapt to the changes as much as possible. The patriarchal system continues to exist now, simply because it is favorable to its masters, but it can cease to exist at the will of the group to whom it is unfavorable. But for the moment, the ruling class can turn the course of history as it sees fit, based on its own interests. And if we take this into account, the reclaimed women's rights cease to be seen as a feminine achievement that is incapable of being canceled because of the alleged "progress" that has supposedly taken place. The edifice has remained standing, it has not collapsed from women taking back their rights. And what happens next will again be decided by groups - women or men based on their interests. Nowhere is it written in the divine tablets: "patriarchy is a judgment, it will exist forever, get over it" and similarly nowhere is it written "the 21st century has come and from now on women and men will live in peace and harmony because that is the logical course of history"---

The masculine system is an exploitative system in which always some classes have lived at the expense of other classes. Male elites have always lived at the expense of women and other men. That is, the masculine system, we can say, is a living mechanism, always depending on the human factor, or, more precisely, on the human and the masculine. The human factor is women striving for freedom and the restoration of justice, and the male factor is men from the exploited classes dreaming of taking the place of the elites who suppressed them.
Men's history is a constant division of power between male groups, a change from one exploitative system to another. And capitalism is simply a variant of the redistribution of power between men themselves, which they have come to at this point. They have simply created social lifts in their hierarchy, enabling the lower to become the upper, regardless of the class, which used to be unchanging throughout life. This is simply the current version of the male redistribution of power. Exactly the current one. It does not mean that the next system will be somehow more just and convenient for all. Men could not and will not be able to build socialism, because male power and a just society are incompatible. Neither can it be assumed that men will stop at capitalism and will not invent some further variants of hierarchy and try to establish them, subordinating new technologies to this intention.

The position of women in patriarchy has always depended on the relations between male groups. Traditional marriage and the presence within patriarchy of similar rigid exploitative subsystems (slave system, feudalism) are the two most important interrelated tools that helped men to maintain power over women. The consequence of these two factors was women's isolation - the inability to build bonds with other women, the internal fragmentation in the women's group that made it impossible to see the commonality of situations and problems.
When men once again divided power among themselves and the result was the capitalist system, women were also affected. Women began to work somewhere outside the home more often, socializing. Women's isolation was interrupted, and women took advantage of the conditions - they united and, albeit with great difficulty, wrested their basic rights from the male system.

Men make up all kinds of lies, constantly referring to God, nature or evolution, not only for propaganda - they themselves want and have always wanted to believe that their being in power is the natural order of things. They are trying to have their cake and eat it too. As invaders, of course, on the one hand they like to emphasize their "right of the strongest", they are proud of their brutal power, and at the same time they want very much to believe that their power is literally from God, that they themselves do not make any effort to keep it. Also, men just can't take full responsibility for their power. It is extremely advantageous to them that women don't see the exact source of their problems and are controllable and vulnerable because of it. Therefore, responsibility for men's lawlessness is shifted to some external forces, the course of history, the natural order, etc. How does this all look from the outside? Men sitting in governments pass laws, including anti-women laws, men start wars, men continue to deliberately commit violence against women, and men explain it to us: "It's all a natural evolutionary process, humanity is moving forward! Everything is going according to plan, don't worry!"
Modern patriarchy or neopatriarchy (sons' patriarchy)is an updated version of the male system that has existed for about the last hundred years in the so-called developed countries. The main feature of neo-patriarchy, which is what characterizes the system as updated, is that women have reclaimed their legal rights and are no longer the property of their fathers and husbands, but the female class has now been completely taken over by the male class, i.e. the state itself.
The marriage relationship is no longer as faithful an instrument of the system as it was all through the past centuries. Women now made their own decisions to marry or divorce, and could be economically independent of their husbands, but reproductive and domestic labor was still not rewarded.
With the loss of the old levers, the male system has become more sophisticated. The most important manipulation of modern patriarchy is precisely the discourse of advancing progress and coming equality. It is to this accompaniment that men continue to do their work.
The subtlety of this technique cannot be underestimated.
"A new stage in the history of mankind has come, a new era. The bloody, cruel and unjust past is over, people have changed, developed, become kinder and more civilized. There has been a natural development of society. Once women were disempowered, treated unfairly - it was just that society was not developed enough, but now technological and humanistic progress has come and injustice has been eliminated by social efforts. Now there is nothing stopping women from living the life they want to live-"
Women have never dealt with such large-scale gaslighting before.
In other words, male power has remained as it is, men are still sitting in their royal armchairs, continue to define everything, continue their anti-women policy, substitute concepts, juggle with facts, present their male opinion as the truth in the last instance, but at the same time pretend that it is not them, that patriarchy as a system does not exist and, moreover, has never existed at all.
The piling up of lies, gaslighting, denial of women's struggle for their rights - these are not all components of neo-patriarchal propaganda.
The theme of progress is another trick, another objectification and dehumanization of the female sex. Again and again they want to tell us that women are not real people. A free, independent woman who is in charge of her own life is not a natural phenomenon, it is a decorative element of the "developed, technological world" (and she owes her freedom to some external circumstances, not to herself).
Since women's rights and freedoms are an attribute of the progressive world, it means that violence and injustice against women, the status of powerless property, is a kind of norm too, something taken for granted for "natural conditions" - without education, technology and social organizations.

This is how patriarchy once again absolved itself of responsibility for its own actions, objectified and dehumanized women, normalized violence against them, and on top of that tried to convince everyone that this violence and injustice does not exist now, and that if someone thinks it does, it is not violence, it is everyone's personal choice.
"Prostitution and pornography is a job! Women now have a big choice of where to work, and since they are in these spheres, they want it!"
"Women are still fewer in politics, business, science, sports and there are still no great achievements, even though equality was achieved a hundred years ago - everything with women is clear, the weaker sex is the weaker sex, why give them these rights at all?!"
"Feminism is no longer needed, women already have everything they need. Feminists are already stepping on men's rights. What about equal rights?!"
"Women need quotas in politics, business, science? What about men? It's already a violation of men's rights."
"The objectification of women's bodies is an art! We're a liberal society, who dares prevent creative expression?"
"How can women be a separate group and have specific problems and discuss them without men's participation? What about men! We are one society and problems can only be solved by joint efforts".
"One should respect the rights and freedoms of all human beings and living beings. If a man feels like a woman, his feelings are also important, this must be reckoned with, he, or rather 'she', must have all the same rights as other people."
And so on.
Men's propaganda is working hard.
Even among feminists there are often opinions that the main part of women's problems have already been solved with the acquisition of basic rights, and it is only a little more work and everything - and there will be full equality. Those who argue this way are either insufficiently informed or simply afraid to face the truth. There is a surprisingly large number of things that need to be "just a little bit more work" for an equal society. Porn culture, prostitution, unequal pay, reproductive pressure, anti-abortion policies, domestic violence, persistent crimes against women, objectification and misogyny filling the media, internet, arts and entertainment, discrimination in employment, the glass ceiling, harassment, aggressive imposition of increasingly perverse beauty standards, and much, much more. All this is pouring out like a garbage bucket... How strange that the world has realized that women should be given basic rights, i.e. has matured to such a progressive thought, but has not realized that all the above mentioned abominations are also a violation of rights?
This is information for those who still believe in fairy tales.
It should be clear to those who have taken off their rose-colored glasses that all these misogynistic phenomena, constructs and institutions are designed to compensate for the loss of old levers, and they are supported by men quite consciously. Many of them are not new, of course, but have existed throughout patriarchal history, but now these tools have taken over entirely the "work" (dehumanization and control of women) that marriage and the legal disempowerment of the old system can no longer do.
The economy continues to be held together by the unpaid labor of women. Women are also now cogs in the male capitalist machine as well. The most prestigious, high-paying fields and positions are occupied by men, women are pushed into the service sector, where salaries and prospects are not so high. Most organizations and companies are run by women, but the management ranks are occupied by men, and they, just as in marriage, parasitize on women's labor, appropriating other people's merits and disposing of the produced resources with an important look.

The main tool for dehumanizing the female image in these times is pornography, which is available to everyone from any device connected to the Internet. Under the influence of porn culture, beauty standards are becoming more and more unrealistic, and the perception of real women and their physiology is becoming more and more distorted.
Through the porn and beauty industries, as well as through objectification in the media, the symbolic status of women as public property, an object for male entertainment, is maintained.
The myth of romantic love, sacralization and romanticization of the topic of intersexual relations is also one of the vivid characteristics of neopatriarchy. All kinds of content, from children's cartoons to psychological training or fortune-telling services, carry the same message: love for a man is an integral part of a woman's life.
Hetero-relationships and motherhood are being romanticized and aggressively imposed.
Marriage and relationships with men have been, and remain, an insecure and unprofitable project. Wives, and especially mothers, are sinking to the "social bottom". The male state forces women into reproductive labor without giving them anything in return, not even adequate medical care.

In modern patriarchy, the way men actually view their fatherhood has become especially evident. They are interested in children mainly as an instrument of power over women. If a man has no economic, legal power over his wife and children, he easily runs away from the family at the first difficulties and does not participate in the children's lives in any way. Men have little interest in the care and upbringing of children.
Women's social activity is growing, and feminist thought is growing and developing in parallel with it. Of course, men cannot like it - they are trying to sabotage the feminist movement in every possible way. They have already seduced liberal feminism, and created other offshoots like intersectional feminism. These branches are concerned with anything but women's issues.
Radical feminism is marginalized in society. Systemic women's problems are devalued, they are tried to mix them with the problems of other oppressed groups, that is, to depersonalize women again, to present them as a part of something, but not as an independent group. The average person ends up with a strong belief that feminism, LGBT and BLM are one and the same.
Likewise, the "most oppressed of all the oppressed" - "women with female penises'', i.e. transpersons - are similarly distracted by the "most oppressed of all the oppressed". At their whim, women are easily deprived of women's spaces, and even the very word "woman" is in question - the trans person is oppressed by it as well. In the West, in order to erase the female group and its identity, men are ready to do anything, to any absurdity - for example, to recognize biological sex as a social construct, as well as to any mean and inadequate antics.
Men interfere in feminist discourse, twist any female thoughts and proposals, ridicule feminists, create their own movements like masculism, etc., whose goal is the same - to shift the focus of attention to themselves, to confuse women.
Nowadays, against the background of increasing feminist activity, we can observe a noticeable surge of misogyny and various conservative, misogynistic counter-movements in society.
Thus, we see that due to the loss of its former leverage over the exploited class, neopatriarchy replaces it with new tools for implementing its policies and realizing its needs, which do not change over time: to live off women's labor and appropriate its results, to sexualize and objectify women, to continue treating women as things designed to meet men's needs, to carry out violence and mock in every possible way, to prevent women from separating themselves from men and gaining the power of men, and to prevent women from being separated from men.

Neo-patriarchy is also characterized by ever-increasing hypocrisy and a multitude of propaganda techniques, the main point of which is to convince women that there is no male power, that men in governments are just people, that there are no specific male interests that harm women and never have been, that violence is not violence but a woman's choice. If there has been any injustice, it has no specific perpetrators, it just happened by itself, and it's about women themselves - they are a category of specific beings.
Men continue to pass off their evaluations as some universal notion, a universal standard of objectivity, to demonstrate their power, but at the same time they claim that there is no patriarchy. They set a bar for women, the achievement of which should prove that women are equal to them, but they themselves either deliberately hinder women, or evaluate the results as it suits them, i.e. as unsatisfactory, again confirming that women are not equal to men.
Problems like unequal pay, domestic violence, and the "glass ceiling" hang in the public discourse as something currently intractable, when in fact these problems still exist only because they are purposefully created by men. These are men's positions that they simply do not want to give up out of principle.

There have been events that have forced the system to reorganize. And men are trying to keep things the way they were before with minimal loss to themselves. They continue to go along their old beaten track and pretend that nothing has happened. But in fact it has.
Women are no longer cooped up, they are now working, achieving their goals, winning in spite of any backstabbing from men, and with their accomplishments, shattering all the grandiose misogynist heresy that men have been concocting for centuries.
And most importantly, women now communicate friend to friend, share experiences, give their own assessments of phenomena, and draw their own conclusions. This trend is what formed the feminist movement.
Radical feminism tears off all its masks from the male class. The human face they are masquerading as is falling off, and men, because of their anger, do not even have time to realize that their real face at such moments becomes visible to everyone.
Men, if I may say so, have begun to stumble. They pollute the information space with all sorts of triggers - pornography, misogynistic "humor", they turned social networks into a misogynistic dump, wanting to show women their place, but in the end they only gave women something to think about and increased the number of potential feminists.

Men organize some traditionalist movements and groups, publish their "philosophy", talk about what kind of men are supermen and what they would do to women if they could, thus clearly showing what patriarchy is and always has been, making it easier for feminists working on the theory.
Men run away from families at the first hardship and are rarely involved in children's lives, and this only emphasizes who is really the parent and whose name the children should bear.
Men pry into women's spaces, spit on non-objectified women on screens, write nasty comments and messages - and all this is left in plain sight as evidence of true male feelings, as a refutation of all illusions about the male gender.
Therefore, women should continue in the same spirit - communicate, work, take every opportunity to strengthen the women's group and clearly recognize who the source of women's problems is, as it is now more visible than ever.



written by Male Death
translated by aless_gut