Hmmmm - I am going to counter you here, which I have before and you haven't responded haha. THe problem is the idea that “provision is a man's patriarchal role, while housekeeping is the woman's patriarchal role.”

Um - yep. That's the patriachy. Feminism is about questioning the bargain where 'men provide, women do housework'.

If they've decided together he'll provide money and she'll do the domestics, fine - if it's freely agreed. Not 'I give her money and she doesn't 'fetch'. That's not equality - that's a a transaction based on gender roles.

You've forgot that money isn't the only contribution here - people can contribute in other ways. If they don't, that's a relationship issue, not a failure of feminism.

Feminism doesn't say women have to reject the benefits that come from a relatiaonship with a man, but have the freedom to negotiate it rather than 'what, dude, I give her all this stuff and she doesn't 'fetch'* - a massively patriachal attitude. If she doesn't want to do that, fine - that's something he then has the freedom himself to go 'well, that's not the kind of relationship I was after - I wanted a sex slave and a cook'.

If you're honestly going to use the language of equality, you can't ask 'what's the women's patriachal role that she MUST perform', but 'what agreement has this couple made that's fair to both of them'.

There's a million ways that two adults can organise a relationship and a household. Maybe for him it's 50/50 financially and domestically. Maybe she's entered the relationship for love, not to pick up his socks.

What is funny about this piece is you start with the argument that feminism is about equality then you go into definiting equality as “he performs his patriarchal role, therefore she must perform hers.” 😂

That's just patriarchy with an invoice attached. Lmao.