It is long overdue to reconsider the absolutely ridiculous idea that you have the innate and inalienable right to determine everyone else's rights and the laughable premise that circumstances of birth give you any such qualification to do so. Such practices have never been anything but self-serving nonsense from spoiled idiots who would happily let society crumble just to preserve a limited sense of personal status that the ability to dictate terms ensures they cannot be surpassed on merit. And by the same token, to be the ones that determine merit.
Your willful ignorance of history is one more piece of evidence against your premise, as one cannot claim to make a fully informed and rational judgement if they self censor information that embarrasses them and prioritize pride over sense. WW2 stands as a testament to this, for if things had been handled to your preferences and women had not stepped up both on the battlefield directly and pehaps even more importantly on the homefront manufacturing needed goods and keeping the economy and supply lines from collapsing - which we men had assumed beyond a woman's physical and mental capacity incidentally awarding ourselves the merit to call the shots for being the workers and breadwinners while preventing this notion from being tested- it would have spelled the end for the Allies.
You do an infuriating disservice not just to women and the history you refuse to honour honestly but to the soldiers who survived because of kit a woman manufactured, soldiers who had a home to return to because a woman paid the bills, soldiers who took glory because fortifications were bombed by the Night Witches, soldiers who had their lives saved by sniper bullets out of nowhere, by intelligence passed along by unassuming and overlooked women treated like scenery risking everything should they be outed as spies for the resistance. Are their lives so meaningless to you that you will deny women the recognition they deserve for making sure those soldiers you invoke to inflate your sense of value by equating yourself to them through gender rather than any personal merit came home alive, victorious, to a country that didn't collapse in their absence because the women you belittle did everything expected of men and even more?
You insult me as a man, claiming your egocentric grandstanding to be the mark of masculinity rather than any show of maturity or integrity. This constant fearful social posturing is stoic? Whining about your low desirability and how offended you are women seek more self-sufficient lives and skills is not an emotional outburst? Your very territorial nature, threatened as you are at the idea that your "domain" is no longer exclusive, you don't see that as counter intuitive to your argument?
And you glorify a history of resorting to physical and social violence if ever put to the test, undermining all claims to confidence that our supposed superiority proves itself and instead impressing the image and mentality of a bratty child hitting his playmates with a stick if they don't let him make and change the rules at will for their games. And trying to do the same to the adults that come to straighten him out. This is especially galling when I refer back to your indignation that women aren't satisfied with the submissive role of wife. Your demand of women is that they simply accept "the greater good" and conform to your notion of how they should act but all of your rhetoric would suggest you think the rational, manly, and therefore superior course of action would be the exact opposite. To escalate to blunt force, which is actually basically how they got suffrage. Can you reconcile this inconsistency?