How does sexual inequality benefit women?

I suppose I need you to clarify: do you mean gender inequality, such as in employability, income, etc., or sexual inequality, as in inequality in sexual decision-making, roles in physical intimacy, etc.?

Well, to follow the stereotype, women get to spend more time with their children. Yes, this can be stressful at times, but IMHO most women would rather spend more time with their kids than not spend enough.

men might get paid more, do less work, have lowered expectations, less stress, more of a sense of fitting in, etc, etc.
MIGHT is the key word there.

It does not benefit anyone. It is a non-question unless you live in the dark ages where the man needed to hunt and the woman needed to keep the kids safe until food was obtained. Are you all wacked out by the media? Conforming to society from the Victorian age?

Joli, the fact is: there is sexual inequality.
If someone uses inequality to their advantage (and at least one person will), it will benefit them.
Your response is not only wrong, but stupid.

you contradict yourself. “It” meaning sexual inequality “does not benefit anyone”.
if you really feel this way…
then why bring up the dark ages, and victorian age.
By bringing up those time periods of even greater sexual inequality, you imply that during those times, inequality was productive, even necessary.
If sexual inequality doesnt benefit anyone, why do you mention the male role of hunting? Hunting, as a historically male dominated profession, is incredibly unequal, but you seem to be saying that the unequal roles was a necessary thing for the family and social productivity.
Your arguments are contradictory to your conclusion.

also “are you all wacked out by the media” has very little bearing on this question. from what I have seen, there is no overwhelming consensus on gender manipulation (in terms of if anyone “wins” from it).
In my opinion (and from my experiences), Men will complain that women have manipulative powers over thier boyfriend’s/husband’s/single male co-workers, while Women will say that men are unrestricted in professional settings.

Implying I am, “stupid”, because you disagree with my opinion, or didn’t like my answer, implies arrogance on your part. You misunderstood my answer, which means you misunderstood my answer, but that doesn’t mean I’m STOOPID! Have a joyous Sunday.

No need to be offensive to each other, fluther is a community site and we shouldn’t say things to each other that bring down the discussions to a 10-year old maturity level.

”...Women will say that men are unrestricted in professional settings.”

Unrestricted, indeed.

My follow-up question to this is: if women truly desire to be equal, then why don’t they get drafted into combat? Sure, there’s the argument that troops can’t handle co-ed quite as well as blowing away enemies (but we can handle it everywhere else just fine?!) ... or that women can’t handle a rifle as well or march as fast (I dunno, the Israelis seem to do pretty well here). So, why don’t we have the military equivalent of the WNBA? Is it that women can’t, or simply don’t want to, handle Iraq and Afghanistan on the front lines?

Let’s face it: if NOW pushed as hard for the accountability aspects of equality—not just the easy/good stuff—then we’d see many more female coal miners, construction workers and troops.

Sexual inequality is more an artifact of culture than a biological reality. If this were false, then men couldn’t be successful teachers and beauticians and women wouldn’t spit, drive truck and wear pants. And until our culture gets over the idea that women are the only objects of desire and need to be protected as “special” (i.e., news flashes containing the mantra: “Women and children particularly affected”), men will continue to die younger, the birth rate will continue to plummet in the West and there will be no true sexual equality.