Up until about 1970, there was an unspoken social compact between men as a group, and women as a group. It's just reality that men are larger and stronger than women. Most men can kill most women with their bare hands if they wanted to. Most women have the sexual access most men want. But we can't have that access if we kill them all, now can we?

So: Men treat women with a base level of courtesy and politeness. No, they won't get to sleep with most women. But they'll be polite and kind. They won't be complete and total assholes to women. When women reject them, they accept it and quietly move on.

In return, women treat men with a base level of respect. No, they're not falling all over themselves being obsequiously or profusely polite. They're not being deferential or submissive. They're just being polite and not overtly doing anything to piss men off. In the very, very likely event they have to reject a man or rebuff an unwanted sexual advance, they do so quietly, discreetly, and firmly, and they remove themselves. They don't nuke reject. They don't broadcast it all over town.

Men's kindness and politeness to women was a thin blanket of protection for women which served to keep other men in line. Women's base level of respect was a form of unspoken gratitude toward men that served dual purposes of social lubrication to keep things running smoothly, and incentive to men.

Men are to help women when necessary. You help get them out of the tight spot. In return, the women do what the men say, and display a small modicum of gratitude. This is the only time women are to submit to "men" they're not married to - when that woman needs that man to help her out of a tight spot. If she's relying on a man to help her, she needs to do what he tells her to do, and say "thank you" afterwards.

That was the compact. That was the unspoken agreement. That was the deal.

Women broke that deal when they decided all this was evil patriarchy and they didn't need it. They decided they could do it all themselves, and they could do it as well as or better than men could. They didn't need men, and they didn't have to be polite or show bare bones levels of respect. They sure as hell aren't going to take orders from men, especially icky unattractive men. They sure as hell aren't going to thank a man, especially icky unattractive men. Women are just entitled to whatever they want or need from a man, whenever they want or need it.

So, now we have the new male-female compact. What does that look like?

Women can do and say anything they want, when and how they want, to whomever they want. The only limitations on women are the ones they impose on themselves. It is men's job to facilitate that status for women by either stepping up to enforce and protect it; or stand aside while women exercise it. Men are divided into two groups: High value men, and males. HVMs divvy up women amongst themselves. HVMs can do and say what they want, when and how they want as well, but have more limitations consisting mostly of observing social conventions and some legalities.

Males are allowed to exist and subsist, as long as they keep to society's margins and don't try to act like HVMs. When around women, they are required to avert their gaze, look away, and speak respectfully and obsequiously (but only if spoken to). Males can interact with women only if serving them. Males are required to serve any woman who demands it. Any male who refuses said "service" is derided as an incel or a misogynist. Males are not allowed to tell any woman "no" or condition their "service" on anything. Any male who does so is immediately shouted down and canceled. Any male who steps out of line in any way will find himself reported to his employer and to police. Any male who tries to act like a HVM will be accused of "harassment" and reported to police.

That's our new Male -Female compact.

As between the old and the new compact, which do you think worked better?