>>70274798
Under what condition does the patriarchy dies then?

>>70274798
>Implying /pol/ fights a "patriarchy"

>>70274872
when women are treated equally in society.

>>70274948
you clearly do not know who the guy in the pic is, or what OP meant

>>70275045
So it just decides to kill itself and the suffragette movement started when the patriarchy was already dead? I'm pretty sure you're wrong.

>>70275131
enlighten me

>>70275161
It seems that we have a different opinion of what the Patriarchy means.

>>70275161

the fact that women even got suffrage is evidence that there was not really a patriarchy holding them back

if there was, they never would've been given the right to vote. it's that simple. everything that's come after simply ignores this very basic fact

>>70274948
>>70275251
>having the audacity to post on /pol/
>does not know who Bezmenov is

you are the cancer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3qkf3bajd4

>>70275316

to give some perspective of what a patriarchy actually looks like, women were not granted suffrage in Saudi Arabia until 2015, and this was only done at the behest of the king. women still cannot drive in saudi arabia.

For patriarchy to exist it must control women in every aspect of their lives, and whatever privileges they have must be given to them by men. No such thing exists in the west, not by any stretch of the imagination - though radfems will stretch their imagination to impressive levels to pretend that it does.

>what is burden of proof?

prove the statement right first, faggot.