When you think about it, framing patriarchy as "male privilege" makes it sound pretty good for men

Imagine that men's rights activists went to women and said, "Blarghs make life easier for women and prevent them from being discriminated against. All women benefit from blarghs in some way. Now help us destroy blarghs." What kind of response would you expect?

Now replace "men's rights activists" with "feminists" and "blarghs" with "male privilege." The term "male privilege" doesn't even imply that something is bad for women, just that it's good for men. Why would a statement like "all men benefit from the patriarchy" make men want to abolish the patriarchy? If anything, it makes it sound really appealing.

Yeah feminists also have talking points outside that, but once you frame your ideology that way, everything else is trying to dig yourself out of a hole.

The reason it works is because most men have innate urge to protect and provide for women.

This is the irony behind it.

Another irony is that patriarchal societies are brutal on men. Men are expected to bottle up all emotions and illness, never take a sick day off and end up with mental breakdowns or bei g abusive (and this victimises women and children of course).

So, what is actually optimal is something I can dub as soft patriargchy andnis what some ofnthe west is ending up with.

Soft patriarchy happens because even when equal opportunity existe far less women want high stress or high physicality work.

Notice that 99% of construction workers are men and 0 women are complaining.

Notice that when STEM other then nursing ends up with heavy male sway, women do complain and even men do, trying their best to force 50/50 by a variety of ways, some forceful (affirmative action) others subtle (constantly pressuring girls to grt into STEsm if they want to feel fulfilled as women ans feel they did all they could for their gender).

The reality is even when we talk pure hierarchy, the stresss it takes to endnup as an executive of a company truly attracts much more men that it does women.

Not only that but men barely ever seek out high career achievement in a spouse whereas many women want either a high flying career man or at least a poorer man that is dedicated and has some form of stable income and job.

This means when men and women full do fight against patriarchy, you will find that women themselves suffer with a system that makes men less appealing to them on average and pushes them to experience stress levels only men are designed to endure.

Which is what feminists want ironically, but they frame themselves in opposition to this. They don't like the damsel in distress stereotype and complain about video games about men saving women. But then they also want men to protect women from the evil men raping and killing them and say there need to be more positive role models for men. Most of the work is done for them with men wanting to protect women, but then a lot of feminist thought leaders shoot themselves in the foot. They could be stroking mens' egos to get the support they want, but instead they die on hills they don't have to.

I was with you all the way to this literal last line of your #3.

I don't think men have a clue to the stress level reached by delivery of a child. I though my kidney stones were the worst pain and stress I ever felt, but woman have them, too, and most I've spoken with about childbirth and kidney stones say the latter is a walk in the park by comparison. Having witnessed my wife in childbirth [and, fortunately for her, has never had kidney stones] but her stress in the former was off the chart. No, women's capacity to experience and sustain stress and pain is far superior to men.

There's a joke that when God was handing out relative responsibilities to Adam and Eve, and God described the necessary tasks of farming and husbandry [domestication and carer of animals], hunting, and so forth, and childbirth and primary care provider of children, Adam said, "I was created first, I'll take the farming and husbandry." He knew his design and endurance limitations.

However, as for feminism, I think that's just women who aren't up to the strength they have. That is buying into limitation. 

They do have to in a way.

You may not realise how sexist things used to be, to realise why feminists then raised their daughters to think that way (and sons too).

Basically, if you trace the lineage of most of the 3rd wavers or 'fourth wave' nuts, I am actually sure almost all have at least 1 radfem ancestor. I think the attitude of severely fighting patriarchy was passed down because it actually was needed before.

None of my lineage were significant feninists as far as I know, therefore I never got this style of feminism ingrained into me. I think the women in my family are generally second wave but some have certain 3rd wave elements.

That is a small period of her life.

In non patriarchy it is often worse btw. If you truly have no man breadwinning or guarding you whilst pregnant then the stress is basically tripled or quadrupled.

Good husbands do more chores when the wife is sick or pregnant (or they hire help with their earned money).

This is also why Islamic style 'marry them off young' does not work well. You want to wait to mid 20s generally, especially for the male as a minimum. That wsy he has had time to be unstable and then secure income.

Yes, I agree with your #7. I fit the paradigm you suggest. I was one month from my 25th birthday when I married. It is typical for men of my faith to return home from their missionary service from, in my day, 19 to 20 years of age, coming home at Christmas of 1970, to be married within the year. When. my Mission President in our final interview of my 2-year service suggested I go home and marry within the year, I knew the suggestion was coming and told him "I will marry when I find the best companion I can find. If that takes another ten years, then, so be it. I will not marry just to marry. I know who I am looking for, and will not interrupt my plan with the first woman I encounter unless she meets my list of ideals." "Sounds like you have a plan," he replied. The woman I found to whom I have  been married 53 years, met every expectation on my list, but one,  the last on the list. I wanted her to be musical [play an instrument]. My bride does not, but that turned out to be insignificant. She appreciates the same music I do, and that's fine. I'm a lucky guy.