Off the top, the problems with the "privilege" arguments frustrate the hell out of me.

The point isn't that being a man is all it takes to be privileged in a society-wide way. Is a female Black lawyer in Manhattan more privileged in almost all ways than an unemployed white male coal miner in West Virginia? Well, of course. That's a meaningless comparison.

The question is, all else being equal, who's got more privilege. The answer is men. In a married couple, the husband "outranks" the wife, whether they be dirt poor, elite, or something in between.

How can we solve problems when we can't have an informed and honest discussion?

The point of my piece isn't that women are perfect and men are evil. It's that women are advancing and men are retreating. White Christian men would rather burn it all down than give up their privileges, and I am unsympathetic.

You can offer men role models, but they choose which ones to follow. Any man who prefers, say, Andrew Tate or MAGA isn't fit to live in an egalitarian society, and they're admitting it loud and proud.

Again, the point of my article isn't that women are perfect and men are evil. It's that the world is changing and men have to make steps to keep up.

What do we do if men refuse to improve their trajectory? It reminds me of Christians. In an increasingly diverse country, they can either step back and share power, or they can double down on bigotry. That so many have chosen the latter speaks volumes. They don't want to change. Churches that preach tolerance and unity get smaller and people shift to the Christian nationalists and grift palaces who preach creating a religious apartheid state where they hold the power and screw everyone else.

You can't force people to change. Before things can get better, men have to accept they have to share the treehouse. In the meantime, can we continue to ask women to give up their lives to prop up men who can't get with the times?