That pretty much seems to be the argument, as far as I understand it: The Patriarchy Is Everywhere, even in mundane things like shaved armpits. Except that every single one of us is not being oppressed equally, some people are more oppressed than others.

I mean, I sort of see the point they're making... If you say "Let women choose whether to focus on their career or their family, either choice is valid", and you just leave it at that, that overlooks the fact that existing social structures push women into this either-or choice and make it difficult for them to do both.


And that is when they argue that women who want things that aren't beneficial to them are deluded. And that is when I have problems. I mean, I strongly disagree with the Catholic Church's position that birth control is immoral, but I do not believe that Catholic women who adhere to this position are deluded, oppressed, or brainwashed. I think they're wrong, but that's different.

That's not social structures. That's the constraints of being one person. Once we can upload into computers and split/merge, then raising kids won't conflict with an intense career.

No, that's the constraints of being one female person. Employers assume that men will always prioritize their jobs and that their wives will pick up the slack at home, whether it is true or not. Plus there's the fact the economy is built around the assumption that employees are able to delegate their familial responsibilities to someone else for free.

I've often heard that employees will take a pretty stiff cut in pay and work a fair bit below what they'd normally demand if the job in question offers daycare and other child related services as one of the benefits. Raising children is hard. If you want them, someone has to be a stay at home parent or the earning power of the two parents combined must outweigh the costs of raising a child as well as paying for a sitter to watch after the child. The sad fact is that most times you actually earn more in the long run if one parent quits their job to look after the child.

Hence the 'projecting motives' part of my statement. And now I come full circle. If a person does something because the say they want to and still fights for your rights to not do that thing, then what could you possibly gain by excluding them from your cause? This is as annoying as women who won't accept that I'm a feminist simple for not being female.

Show me how a typical man can do both.
...
Nope, that can't be done either. The problem you're highlighting is that women are expected to do both, while men are expected to do one.

My point wasn't that social structures don't push women into the choice, but that it isn't social structures make it impossible for them to do both.

An idea that just opped up in my head, i have not thought deeply about it yet:

To be overly concerned about what to wear, and strongly connecting your dress style with your identity seems to be mostly steretypical female to me. Some of the discussions if certain dress styles are compatible with feminism, give me the impression, that there are feminists, who still stick to that attitude, only that they have some dress style for empowered women.