You bring up double standard for females?
If a woman slept with a ton of men, she'd be a slut or a whore, but if a man sleeps with a ton of woman, he's a legend. I call that double standards, and it's all around more than woman hitting men.
Well it certainly requires more skill to achieve the latter.
Anyways, the question at hand. For me, the problem lies in the fact that feminism has come to embody things which are unrepresentative of what it set out to achieve, which as far as I come to see it was the ability to be offered the same opportunities available to men providing that one has the talent to take advantage of said opportunities.
The problem I think now is that feminism for many has manifested itself and taken on many uber materialistic and dare I say it selfish characteristics.
Take a show like Sex and the City for example. For years, a lot of woman have peddled this as some kind of feminist bible. The women all work, are successful in what they do, and achieve much of their goals without the aid of a man.
However, ignoring the fact that its heroine is nothing but a spoiled brat, the problem with SATC is that at its heart is a rather dirty materialism. The women are obsessed, literally obsessed with material goods. It defines them, and men are placed in a position of being almost inanimate objects collected by women on their rise to the top. Those who can't afford the lifestyle are essentially looked down upon. The same can be seen in many women's magazines, from low brow to high end. So much is placed on having this, having that, having it all essentially. I don't really think feminism was built on such principles. It was simply built on giving women the chance to achieve the same things men do (in terms of achievement, not in material possession).
This obsession with having it all (job, husband, kids, money) also seems to have become a talking point in recent years. However, I can't for the life of me understand why. The concept of "having it all" is in many cases little more than a pipe dream, yet many women seem to have grasped onto it like some kind of holy grail, a summit which they all must seek to attain.
I don't understand why this is. It seems pretty obvious to me that in ninety nine percent of cases, this ideal is not reasonable. As much as women would like to believe it possible, I don't see how one can fully devote time to a job, children and husband and still be at the top of their game in all three. This applies to men too. So many men just seem to chase working goals, or see children and a wife as a notch on the belt. Having it all is built on selfish often unobtainable ideals. However, a lot of women do need to appreciate the strain that getting pregnant puts on a small private business.
As for dating etiquette, it's better not to get me started. I have found most women to be complete morons and essentially misandrists in that field.
Oh, and the term feminazi is not a red herring. A lot of women simply hate men and build their own sex up to ridiculous levels, something not helped by the waves of sexist advertising around in the world today. Men are useless lulz.
And "wining" about it brings the problem to light. Imagine if women were paid equally and how much more money families would have across the country. Think about the money being lost when one of your parents isn't as valued as a worker.
What an erroneous train of thought this belongs to, especially if we take the fact that as you mentioned earlier re. women working in the public sector.
If public sector wages escalate out of proportion, nobody really wins. Wealth is not generated, and the very families who would "have more money" would in actuality suffer from raised taxes and higher living costs to plug the financial gap created by overpaying public sector workers. Men work in the public sector too btw.
To be honest your whole private/public argument was sexism masked as feminism. Teaching and Nursing is "women's work" hey? If I was a tool I'd be a little bit offended at that banal analysis.