So this has been sort of a high-level theme that I've been thinking about over the last few months.

That women want all the benefits of being a man (and a woman) with none of the responsibilities.

They also don't want any of the responsibilities of being a woman, either.

At its surface, feminism seems to kind of be like a revisiting of the roles of women in our society. However, they don't expect men to revisit their roles.

One of those, I think, has been no-fault divorce. That a woman should be able to get divorced anytime she wants.

But if that's the case, why is a man still expected to give his life to protect his wife? Like, if an intruder breaks in or an animal attacks her, he is expected to defend her. Even to the point of giving his life.

... And then a week later she can decide she wants to get a divorce.

But why then can't a woman give her life to protect her husband? And what I mean by that is that once they're married, they're married for life.

So we're supposed to revisit the role of a woman and give her rights and allow them to abandon their previous responsibilities, but we don't revisit the role of the man.

It's supposed to be sort of a 50/50 trade-off. Like men give up something and then women give off something, but together we are a better team. At least in terms of marriage.

But this is not how feminism evolved. Feminism evolved to only revisit the roles of women, often at the detriment of men, but we are never expected to revisit the roles of men.

Women want men to remain traditional while they are not.

I think our counter to this should be, "fine, if women give up their traditional role, then men also need to give up their traditional role. "