The fact that Maria Goeppert-Mayer did much of her research unpaid while her husband, also a scientist at the same university was paid, and a million other examples do not support that assertion. The patriarchy did very little to allow brilliant women to pursue anything other than support roles. She was one person. Feminism robbed millions of men of the ability to believe in love.
What you're suggesting is asking - demanding, really - half of the population to accept second-class citizenship.
Yes.
To give up their expectation of self-actualization as fully formed human beings.
For the greater good, yes, a small portion of women will have to make sacrifices.
I'd argue that this is a much greater sacrifice than some men not being able to find a "partner of equal SMV."
It’s not the deprivation of the sex itself that’s the sole issue, it’s the knowledge that you were robbed. Knowing that you’ve worked hard all your life to accumulate wealth and knowledge and humanity and your partner is only offering a sliver of her best. It drives married men insane and scares away unmarried men from marriage.
Most people in 1st world countries are wealthy enough that, say for the top decile, if you has shrunk their income by 10%, it wouldn’t make a huge impact on their lives, but if it was the result of some conspiracy between their boss and the other employees in the company to cheat them, they’d cry bloody murder.
I still don’t know what’s being sacrificed. A few female geniuses can’t win shiny medals and have their pictures on the front page of the newspaper? What’s the value in that?
If you’re going to denigrate the transcendental experience of making love to a beautiful woman with “getting your dick wet,” I can play that game too.
I know men who chose to be with women of what you would consider "lower SMV" because they found their other qualities compelling, and are happy with their choices. Some of them even agree with aspects of RP.
Mother Teresa is happy with a mansion and Prada bags. That doesn’t mean that people were just as happy in the Soviet Union as they were in the US. That doesn’t justify someone robbing you of all you own.
...
Where do you see society going? I think the empirical claims of RP are true, and you don't deny it, you don't deny the Ratio, etc. Without the patriarchy, men will all try to turn themselves into plate-spinning chads, to the detriment of men and women alike. I'm serious, where do you see the dating marketplace in 20 years? Do you think RP will just magically go away? That's its growth will just plateau or even decline? Even though it's true? (And again, I keep trying to get you to contest its empirical claims, and you never do).