PeerReviewedorNot

The comment assaults my confidence. I am bleeding doubt. I do not have the background I'd like, the one that would better enable me to discriminate useful arguments related to oppression from those piggy-backing on the well articulated junk expounded by those that "just don't understand." Perhaps I am missing something, but I thought the article was a rewarding read that shifted my perspective.

The article starts on the preference for women as children.At least that is the preference of those affluent enough to select the sex of their baby.
Why wouldn't people. The male identity is incompetent (any father in most sitcoms and especially animated shows) and dirty. Machoism is often portrayed as a manifestation of ignorance and as being destructive or at least unproductive or unnecessary.

Rosin argues that the preference of the elite for a female offspring is significant because in the past it was the opposite. The past preference for male children was extreme (foolishly tying testicles, killing women who "won't" bear sons, etc) and purposeful in perpetuating patriarchy.

She loses me a bit on the discussion of hardwired personality traits in men and women. Evolutionary biology is pseudo-science! But, I can argue that men are more often endowed with greater physical strength and any person usually pursues techniques that are easily extended from even marginally inert advantages. And, as Rosin points out, if the strong-and-hardy characteristic is less important in the up and coming paradigm of a global environment and the service industry, the advantages and then techniques of men are less useful. Ultimately this argues patriarchy is a function of environmental necessity (hunting, farming, manufacturing) and the environment has changed enough (to service/administrative) to call for a modified social order.

She is of course not saying that patriarchy is defeated or even less oppressive. Though women have more jobs, many are working in roles that are traditional (though this is where culture is going .. away from man dominated jobs) and for less than their male peers (it's hard to recruit a guy for a nursery job). And though many have degrees, the male-female ratio e.g. in engineering is not near 1:1. Equality is not here. Female superiority is not approaching. This is not the argument.