Honestly the feminist theory I subscribe to is that gender roles were created to specifically keep men and women in their place and keep men in power and that by raising women/femininity to equal status you can begin to dismantle gender roles as a whole, making it safe for everyone to be the people they want to be
if this isn’t the path everyone wants to walk, sure, as long as we’re all headed to the same place in the end— equality
like if egalitarian people want to focus on dismantling gender roles on both sides first and let specific feminist/mra issues sort themselves out, okay, it’s just a different approach.
if mras want to focus on dismantling the gender roles surrounding men cause they don’t want to wait around for feminism to eventually work out for them, okay, sure. i don’t entirely agree with that method, but you only have so much energy for so many things and it’s okay to focus on the issues that matter to you and your life sometimes
as long as these groups of people aren’t taking anything away from each other, i’m okay with all of them existing peacefully
I think this may be a little left of your point, but I would like to throw in some interesting stuff about gender roles (because I got a degree in this junk and I like to use it for stuff).
Gender roles weren’t actually created, they stem from a division of labor that began sometime ages and ages ago. We don’t actually know why the division of labor went the way it does—pop science will say that it has to do with hunting and gathering, but we don’t show the necessary sexual dimorphism to make this any more than an interesting pet theory right now.
Gender roles as we do understand them stem from economics almost entirely. Everything else surrounding gender roles as they come “naturally” is flavor text. So we may not know why women almost always get private-life roles while men almost always get public life roles, but we do know that what gets designated as public and private life change because of economic structure of the culture. This biggest for instance I can think of is how wives in America are traditionally seen as not “smart” enough to handle the house’s finances, while wives in Japan are expected to handle the house finances because men don’t have money smarts. Both are fairly rigid roles, and of course exactly opposite from each other.
This has to do with how shopping is done, the amount of work to money (Japanese men work longer hours than American men, and therefore sitting down to do the budget is a drain on stretched time, so it gets delegated), and amount of disposable income. You can actually look through recent history and watch the shifts in how this role is defined based on economic factors. In the US, when we had wars and women entering the workplace, then the idea of the man being the only one to balance the budget without his wife’s input started falling out of fashion. Japan went through a huge economic boom and then bubble burst, and the role went lax and then rigid again through those periods. You’re seeing a huge rise in unmarried women past the age of 30 right now as the economy picks back up.
(There’s another example in Brazil, where it is a woman’s job to determine what kind of second job her husband will get, how many hours, that sort of thing. However, I don’t know enough about Brazil overall to say how stiff of a gender role this is. I read about this in a few articles about straight men who take up gay prostitution for rich tourists.)
Economics actually determines a ton about gender, including “acceptable” marriage types. You get monogamy when the economy is good, and polygamy in different types of lean times. Polygyny is the rule when labor is needed in an agricultural context, and polyandry comes up when there are too many damn people in too small an area (and is really uncommon).
I think that’s why poly relationships are coming up so often in the younger generation right now, personally. We’re going into a really terrible economic situation, and consolidating households is a really good way to handle that. We reject gender roles because we ALL have to work. It is my personal belief that people who hang onto gender roles for “moral” reasons are either misguided or know that they’re the ones being kept in power by those roles.
It’s not very often nowadays, but there have been plenty of cultures that had more rigid gender roles but then also had a lot of respect between genders. Fun fact, a lot of those cultures also have very prominent third genders or nonbinary folks. Gender roles seem to be a tool to fulfill a need, in their most hands-off form. They make work easier for everyone involved, limit the number of skills that an individual needs to have on hand for day-to-day survival, and build community. They’re not bad in and of themselves. It’s the folks who get pushed into power for one reason or another that say that gender roles MUST be the only way to do something that screw it up for everyone.
I was not fucking ready
I have this saved as “me too buddy”.
"nothing beats a jelly-filled donut before a fight!"
I looked like a mage today but I couldn’t properly document that.