The problem with this idea of the patriarchy is that it's an altogether nebulous and yet omnipresent which, seemingly, everything can be blamed on. If you want to take a restrictive view of "patriarchy", it's very easy to knock down. For instance, women hold 60pc of all wealth and 51pc of all stocks, and run 40pc of all private businesses. And, of course, women control the household finances too. The fact simply is that society seems to be altogether lacking in systemic, institutionalised “glass ceilings” against women—the number of Fortune 500 CEOs who are women is at a historic high, and (controlling for exit rates and background) women are paid more and promoted more aggressively—doesn’t bode well for this orthodox definition, either.

So, in order to find a more agreeable definition of "patriarchy", we turn to Wikipedia: "Feminist theory defines patriarchy as an unjust social system that enforces gender roles and is oppressive to both men and women."

So, at least now we know what we're talking about. The (subtly) coercive enforcement of gender roles. Yet, this utterly fails to account for the fact that in more gender egalitarian countries like the Netherlands there is still a significant deviation in risk-tolerance between men and women. Actually, there is a general trend for more gender egalitarian countries to have a higher degree of auto-segregated professions. And indeed, we've seen the same data from the US as well, where differing degrees of competitiveness between individuals goes a long way in explaining the disparity. In fact, personality differences are central. Women and men differ all across the globe, but most of all in egalitarian, developed societies.

But, let's actually look at the gender roles the "patriarchy" is supposed to be enforcing in one way or another. Using Planned Parenthood, we get these lists of traits. Masculinity: independent, non-emotional, aggressive, tough-skinned, competitive, clumsy, experienced, strong, active, self-confident, hard, sexually aggressive, rebellious. And for femininity: dependent, emotional, passive, sensitive, quiet, graceful, innocent, weak, flirtatious, nurturing, self-critical, soft, sexually submissive, accepting.

So let me introduce you to Camile Paglia, a passionate feminist who celebrates freedom, opportunity and individuality while acknowledging the idea that gender roles spring from basic truths about the human condition. She decries the "whiney", white, middle-class feminism for going off-track and not sticking to the message of independence, self-reliance and responsibility. And what do those words signify? A good person. A responsible person. One of her most inflammatory statements is that were Western civilisation left originally in the hands of women, we would still be living in grass huts. And the few matriarchal societies on Earth, like the Khasi people, actually support this perspective.

And yet, the personal ideals that Paglia support are commensurate with the masculine traits that Planned Parenthood listed: independence, competitiveness, self-confidence. . . But this isn't about masculinity and femininity. It's about prosperity, and the general well-being of society. Society is ultimately a meritocracy, and the ideals that feminists have set themselves against essentially define this meritocracy. They are complaining about a system which allows those with the correct personal traits to rise to the top, where they fucking belong. It may be true that men are more pre-disposed to the traits which bring success, regardless of gender "oppression" or coercion (as the sources I've provided would suggest), but the truth of the matter is that people with this capacity will have a greater propensity for success.

If you want to call this capacity "masculinity", then go ahead. But you're twisting the nature of society to fit your ideology. If feminists want to try and complain that they're being "oppressed" because of societies enforced "gender roles", it is really nothing more than a function of "masculine" traits to produce results and the likelihood of the people with such traits to rise to the top.

+1 for Camile Paglia.

If I were to ever describe myself as a feminist, then it could only ever be in the likeness of Paglia.