You know, I've heard the rant of "Stuff sucks for women, and it's all the fault of old white men" a number of times, and it really bugs me. First, I'm a white man, and, if all goes according to plan, will eventually be an old white man. It upsets me certain individuals, whom I have never met and against whom I have committed no offense, have decided that I am among their victimizers simply because of my race, my gender, and with time, my age, three things over which I have no control. A person who says that the inequalities faced by women are caused by old white men are being ageist, racist and sexist. Not only that, they're harming their cause by lumping people who would be their allies in with their enemies.
The second thing that bothers me is that most discussions about the challenges faced by women seem to ignore the possibility that some of the inequalities may partially be caused by the women themselves. (The discussion here, which seems willing to at least touch on the issue, appears to be among the minority in this regard.) People don't like to bring up this idea because the uber-feminists immediately lump them in with people who say that it's a woman's fault if she gets raped and other such nonsense. Maybe it's just my personality, but when I have a problem, my very first question is to ask whether I am causing any part of it.
For example, it is true that the upper echelons of business are still dominated by men. While I am sure that the glass ceiling still exists to some extent, I wonder if at least part of the reason that those upper ranks don't see more women is that women may be less likely to want to make the sacrifices required to get there. Many of the men who got to those positions spent so much time at work that they had no social life or put off finding a spouse or having a family. Those that did have spouses and families often spent very little time with them. A lot of them went through a divorce as a result of spending so much time at work. Are men simply more willing to put work above family and friends, or are women perhaps simply more aware of what all that time at work will cost? I don't know. The point is, part of what's going on might be caused by the women themselves, but nobody wants to talk about that.
The thing that probably bothers me the most, however, is that while there are still inequalities faced by women that should be rectified, there are a number that exist for men that I perceive to be getting next to no attention. For example, in 2009, the U.S. federal government gave out $872 million in funding for breast cancer research (which overwhelmingly benefits women), while prostate cancer received a comparatively paltry $390 million, despite the fact that its prevalence and lethality are comparable to breast cancer. Heck, to get an indicator of their relative "popularity," just take a look at Google results: 30,400,000 for "prostate cancer," compared to 107,000,000 for "breast cancer." Mention "breast cancer awareness," and you think of pink ribbons, fundraising walks, commercials on TV during "Breast Cancer Awareness" month; a wide array of things and activities designed to call attention to breast cancer. Now mention "prostate cancer awareness," and your mind comes up comparatively blank. People just plain don't care as much about it, despite the fact that it kills just as many men as breast cancer kills women.
That's just one example, but there are more. A man insulting and belittling his wife on a TV show is emotional abuse, but woman doing that to her husband is comedy. A woman who takes the time to talk with a small child is caring and friendly, a man who does so is probably a child predator. But women's issues get all the attention.
*sigh* Okay, I've unloaded my Martian rancor. Were were we?