I didn't get that connection to "spinsters" until this comment, so thanks for that.

Second, after WW2 and up until the Arab Oil boycott of 1973 most working class/Union jobs in the US paid enough for the wife to stay home

Note that that's only a 30 year window. Before WWII was the great depression. Before that, working couples couldn't make ends meet without both partners "working". In some cases the women were doing unpaid or informal labour at home rather than working in a factory or something. But, they were definitely doing a lot of labour.

The post-WWII period was an anomaly rather than the norm. The labour protections from the New Deal were still in place, and unions were still strong. Plus, the US manufacturing sector was the only one that had come out of WWII unscathed. Every other country from Germany to France to the UK was having to rebuild their factories after they'd been smashed in the war. So, to get back to a post-WWII economy you wouldn't just need strong labour protections and high marginal tax rates like you had after WWII, you'd also need a devastating world war somewhere else in the world that the US could join halfway through.

and they are saying things like, what women say they want and their actions don't seem to be aligning and a lot of them are either done dating or at minimum have no intention of long term commitment. "Women say equality but not when the check comes. They want men to be open with their emotions but it gives them 'the ick'. Men shouldn't approach women in public because it's creepy, but now the internet is flooded with women asking where men went and why they are being so effeminate. " That's the kind of thinking I'm seeing in those circles.

You don't have to be a "red pill guy" to point out those inconsistencies. You did it yourself:

there's a lot of sentiment from women expressing disdain for the idea of going 50-50 with a man, and a lot of preference for men that out earn them. That's inconsistent from a financial independence mindset.

It's kind of destructive to promote this cultural mindset where pointing out logical inconsistencies is seen as toxic. You can remove gender from that equation and it would still hold true.

No one who says guys showing their emotions gives them the ick can truthfully call themselves a feminist. That's toxic masculinity. The same applies for women who still insist that men should pay for dates.

Women can promote patriarchy and toxic masculinity, and many do without realizing it, while calling themselves feminists. "Gaslight, gatekeep, girlboss" would have bell hooks rolling in her grave. Likewise, men can be harmed by patriarchy, and toxic masculinity arguably harms men the most.

What people so often miss is that simply pointing out these common logical inconsistencies, is not the same as generalizing them and accusing "all women" as some abstract concept of doing it. People are quick to ridicule someone for saying "not all men are toxic assholes," but the "not all women" argument is implicit in the whole "how dare you point out anything wrong that any woman has ever said or done?!?" mentality.

Wondering why men don't approach women anymore isn't really promoting toxic masculinity, but it is kind of silly since it's just a logical consequence of treating every man who approaches a woman as some predatory pickup artist. And pointing out that the men who ignore that obvious disdain and do it anyway are the men who don't have respect for women and boundaries, shouldn't be viewed as "incel" logic, because then you're basically focusing your ire on the person who says "Oh, women don't like being approached. Okay then, I won't approach women."

Of course, people will probably call me names for this, because how dare I express an unpopular or uncomfortable opinion? In my view, the taboo topics are often the most important to talk about. Society won't benefit from more misandristic circlejerks, if it would we'd be living in an egalitarian utopia by now.

100 years ago my grandmother ran a whole train station as 'secretary', while the 'station master' came, smoked, read papers, and pretty much just chilled all day - and getting paid many times her salary.

When they said, "women fought to get paid", they meant, "getting paid commensurate to their work". And in many ways, they are still fighting for it.

So did mine.

you know what they didnt have? A bank account without their husbands name on it.

My grandmother had to marry in secret because married women weren't allowed to work. That was considered taking a job from a man who needed to support his family.

She wore her wedding ring on a chain around her neck, and one day it fell out when she leaned over. She was fired that very day.