Well, I'll give you a hint: You guys try to suppress any ideologies that combat the institutional sexism against men which is clearly a very real issue by dismissing them as "anti-woman." Do you really think that denouncing any movements that try to take a different approach to the institutional sexism against men is going to look pretty in history books?

For example, I literally tried to reason with you, but what did you do? The typical feminist tactic of just dismissing any dissenting opinion. If you look at the hard facts -- Women are much more advantaged than men because they have had millions of people working to elevate them for the past 60 years whereas men have stagnated since the 50s.

People in the future are going to see the absurdity of the claim that only women are oppressed. They are going to see the absurdity of calling this institutional sexism the "patriarchy" because that implies men are in control of it when they clearly are not. If they were, they would not struggle with choosing not to be a father, custody courts wouldn't automatically hand over custody to abusive mothers who go on to kill their children.

People are going to see the absurdity of feminism in the face of these very real disadvantages of being male, on top with the barbaric practice of circumcision on male infants when it has absolutely no benefits whatsoever, when it literally diminishes sexual pleasure, when it should be the penis owner's choice not the parents.

But NOOOO rape culture, slut-shaming, and the debunked wage gap! Men have LEGITIMATE disadvantages, and people in the future are going to acknowledge feminists as the ones who tried to suppress any ideologies that actually tried to combat that. How on Earth can you even delude yourself in believing that will reflect well on you guys in history books? Hindsight is always 20/20 my friend.