This is an argument I’ve heard a few too many times when I’ve talked to men I assumed to be red pilled. They make the traditional arguments about how men have been the builders and providers throughout history and women relying on them is the natural order of things. They’re so sure of themselves and are quick to take credit for the achievements of an entire gender even if they themselves haven’t contributed anything to modern society. They often talk of how men dominate fields like STEM and that if all the men suddenly went on strike women would be totally helpless without them because they wouldn’t want to leave the house. But when I correct them and tell them that there are in fact engineers, doctors, and scientists of the highest order who are “female” and many more achieving degrees every day it usually goes something like this:

RP Dude: “Women get paid to do what comes second nature to them like nursing and teaching. They have no interest in doing the things that keep society running like politics and construction.”

Me: “You know there are women in those fields already right? And the number of women attending to college is growing every day.”

RP dude: “Yeah but they get degrees in things like social science which are completely worthless. Sociology isn’t a real science. You need us to survive because we do all the physical labor. If we were in the woods, my superior male grip strength would be what provides you with food.”

Me: “Yeah whatever dude”

I understand they’re just trying to keep women in a subservient position and many of them are afraid of being useless (even if they are not actively providing and protecting), but this constant caveman comparison is just a new low. It’s just the latest excuse to invalidate the work we’ve made as a society by reducing human needs to their most elementary state. We don’t need your “superior grip strength” anymore. But them holding those views is a perfect example of why we need the social sciences to understand this misguided perspective.