Per the usual, it’s all men’s fault.

Yes and that includes feminism too.

The MF is feeling the repercussions of the standard man’s disengagement … send the societal message that a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, and that man will riiiiide on out.

Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

Men don’t particularly like women, anyway.  Got ‘im kicked out of the Garden, so there’s that.

But Pandora’s Box is powerful magik, and few men can withstand it (about 10 percent of the population, if the stats are right) so that will continue to be a fair and ongoing problem.

Unless he’s into PopTarts … which solves most of his problems except the really really big one but digress

But in retrospect, if men had been better at … menning, then women would have been satisfied with their role, and we (the collective male/female we [and yes there are only two]) would not be in the current gender mess.

Feminism is like labor unions.  Wait!  Wait, hear me out (or not, but this is interesting … or not)

See, men in the days of yore were like business owners, some of whom treated their laborers with respect, others who did not.

And for those that did, labor unions were unnecessary … workers were satisfied with wages & conditions, no need for collective bargaining, work boycotts and strike calls.

But the problem stems from those that did not … those who wanted to pay a pittance, maintain unsafe working conditions, generally treated the folks doing the work as a liability rather than an asset … well, hello collective bargaining, hello boycotts, hello strikes, because something has to give when the worker gives everything for so little in return.

Same with feminism.  Some husbands were true heroes … consistent in the role as provider/protector, restricted the penis to the confines of the marriage, didn’t force the wife/kids to catch hands … good dudes.

And then … there were not.

And women/wives/mothers had to live their lives in fundamental freefall, hoping that the man/husband/father kept up his end of the bargain, and taking the hits if he didn’t.

Most mothers don’t abandon their kids.  They usually suffer right alongside them.  {Genesis 21:16}

Men, on the other hand … deadbeat dads alliterates for a reason.

Anyhoo, if men had held other men accountable then perhaps women would not have sought out feminism as a stopgap to marital misbehavior. 

Men owe(d) a debt to women to be/live/embody the ideal.
When he failed to pay that debt, she defaulted as well.

Troublesome not being able to own property or get credit or a job, while the man to whom she is betrothed is working on his jerk. 

AND, and, keep in mind that men did not fight feminism in the ‘60s, coz they got free box … not required to give marriage or commitment or even a last name to women empowering themselves by laying it low and spreading it wide.

Men benefitted too, I s’pose that’s why there wasn’t much protest against MFs back in the day. 
Sex without obligation or reproductive risk?  Men stood in line for that.  Twice.

Men did not inform women that they wanted to neither bride nor breed sexually-indiscriminate women, and that men still prized virtue and virginity in a wife. 

Men did not convey the message to women that they could choose vanity (i.e., independence and freedom/promiscuity, á la single and childless), or virtue (that is, marriage and family), and that men will not accept women who seek the former yet covet those who embrace the latter.

Men did not tell women that, yes, they have a choice, and they must choose.

Now, however, standard men see the monster of the modern female, and shudder. 

Men consistently claim that chivalry is dead, and women killed it. 

Same same for them.

What happened to all the traditional women? they ask.

You did, sir.  You did.