This was something that bothered me since the start of fourth wave feminism. I have heared the claim that women are underpriviledged even in liberal western societies countless times. That all differences between men and women are because of the patriarchy. That the system of men in power is oppressing women and that therefore women are barred from reaching positions and status in society that would allow them to change that.

Education is stem is hard and challenging, however it also gets rewarded with higher paying jobs. Education in stem is the most influential kind of expertise you can attain in modern societies. When I pointed out at the time that I couldnt remember single time in my upbringing, whether in school nor elsewhere that girls were actively discouraged or disadvantaged in comparison to boys, that despite a lot of girls recieving better grades on average and doing better academically, that despite a larger portion of women going to university than men, the amount of women in stem, mathematics, technology was still significantly lower. I was told that this was also due to the patriarchy and internalized gender roles, that women soaked up growing up, through there environment, parenting and socialization such that even if there was no overt discrimination, they would still internalize their patriarchy defined gender role over time and choose not to go into stem. I find that incredible.

Ime girls recieve a lot more encouragement than boys in school, girls are a lot more shielded and often recieve a lot more attention. Young boys have a lot more energy which is not accounted for, instead they get scolded for having difficulty to concentrate and focus and for acting out in class. Boys are harder to control, without doubt, but that shouldnt justify them being punished for it. Unless you genuinely believe that men are inherently dumber than women, the fact that girls do better in school and more girls attend university overall should be a significant indicator that its boys that are disadvantaged in the early years of their life.

The reason I believe women choose not to do stem is has multiple facettes, gender differences and differing preferences in aggregate may play a big role, however I also believe a significant contributing factor is that the burden of financial independence has not been branded as heavily on girls as it has on boys. A lot of people are more lenient, there is less pressure to be the bread earner, there is less pressure to choose something that is hard but pays. Daddy will always pay for his little girl. I believe a lot more women study what they "like", whilst a lot more men study "what makes sense". And I believe that that is the result of expectations implanted at young age predominantly by women.

After 100 years and 4 waves of feminism I really dont think the whole internalized misogyny argument is credible. In aggregate I simply dont believe their is any genuine interest to liberate boys of gender roles, whilst on a societal level there is wide push to empower girls. This hypocracy is the reason that whilst many men would agree on paper, a lot simply dont trust feminism to have their best interests at heart.

I have had this argument for the first time in the 2010s, and have never recieved a satisfying answer. I do believe that a lot of gender expectations have been lifted of boys, especially in terms of behaviour, looks and self-expression, however I dont think anything has changed fundamentally about the financial aspect or the way the education system is structured to accommodate boys and help them do better academically. I still see a lot of encouragement and help for girls and women, whether thats stronger consideration for internships and junior roles, access to scholarships or generally easier admission rates or mandatory quotas on boards and teams, independent of the underlying demographic. The argument being to force equal (not proportional) representation. In essence that means that life is made arbitrarily harder for men. The assumption is; the only reason there is no equality in the first place is discrimination. Other factors are not considered, not of interest. The same logic is never applied when men are underrepresented. That is neither just nor fair.

How do you justify this?