If I might make an interesting aside without fully derailing any conversation here:

At the time of Islam's foundation, women's rights in Arabic areas took a turn for the better. It was quite interesting learning about Islam in my World Religions class due to how progressive it sounded around the time of Muhammad. I am copying and pasting this part from Wikipedia because it will allow you to look at the sources used:

"Majid Khadduri writes that under the Arabian pre-Islamic law of status, women had virtually no rights. Sharia (Islamic law), however, provided women with a number of rights.^[24] John Esposito states that the reforms affected marriage, divorce, and inheritance.^[13] Women were not accorded with such legal status in other cultures, including the West, until centuries later.^[25] The Oxford Dictionary of Islam states that the general improvement of the status of Arab women included prohibition of female infanticide, and recognizing women's full personhood.^[26] Gerhard Endress states: "The social system ... build up a new system of marriage, family and inheritance; this system treated women as an individual too and guaranteed social security to her as well as to her children. Legally controlled polygamy was an important advance on the various loosely defined arrangements which had previously been both possible and current; it was only by this provision (backed up by severe punishment for adultery), that the family, the core of any sedentary society could be placed on a firm footing."^[27] Muhammad also emphasised the importance of the mother figure and it is reported in many Hadiths^[which?] in which Muhammad has stated the mother is of very high status.^{[citation needed]} One hadith records that Abu Huraira reported that a person said: Allah's Messenger, who amongst the people is most deserving of my good treatment? He said: Your mother, again your mother, again your mother, then your father, then your nearest relatives according to the order (of nearness)"

If you ask me I would say that a lot got lost in translation. Isn't it funny how these early women's rights rose out of Sharia Law, but stoning of women under pretense of "adultery" is justifiable by many under that same law today? So many people can look at a text and understand it in so many different ways; and based upon whom you consult when learning about said texts you can be groomed to understand one explanation of it only.

I love this part of feminism studies that all that men excell is either because of patriarchy and opression and need to be demolished and if it's genetics needs to be addressed and made better for women. While any thing women in studies is believed to do better (without real world counterproof because they don't happen on real world and is fault of the patriarchy) it's absolute and undisputable. Funny thing is that those studies do nill in making the world better. While the hideous engineering are always making solutions for a better world.

I'm happy being a man. And the straight woman I know neve wanted to be a man. Maybe the feminists want. And that is the reason they hate and fight so much. Women have been threated like trash but men have been the exterminated gender, very curious. And I never saw any feminist trying to fight to enter the militars on the war, and even nowadays they mostly want to complain of militarism in general instead of offering their lifes for the country.

Are you maybe disappointed in Dilma Rousseff?
“Her brain is too small for what’s needed to govern this country,” said Alberto Cerqueira Lima, 72, a marketing consultant who was among the protesters.
That still happens...

In some areas women have a tendency to do better in, same as men have a tendency to do better in other areas. Not all women are better at X or all men are better at Y.  And sure, there are enough people around to find enough competent men to do all the tasks, yet why ignore a pool of equally competent people with a diferent view and perhaps more effective solutions to certain situations. http://fortune.com/2015/03/26/the-trait-that-makes-women-great-leaders/

Bias is still a real thing, as in a study I linked earlier on judging creativity between men and women. Same set of ideas, in a blind test, men and women's ideas were judged equally creative. With the sex of the writer known, the men's work was judged as more creative. I've been conditioned by society too at early age. I love reading sci-fi and also enjoyed books by U. K. Le Guin. Always assumed it was written by a man, my brain didn't even consider it was possible that women would write sci-fi.

There have been plenty famous female scientists and leaders in the past to show that females are just as competent as men at these tasks. Did they not make the world better? How much proof do you need?

Wow, a gender discussion that went for 20 pages, and no childish insults?

(Slow clapping)

My problem with Dilma isn't because of her gender... I don't supported Lula or FHC before him, so please get the anti-female narrative of my dislike for Dilma, she is incapacited as leader independet of her gender. And a comment from Eneas Carneiro shows it isn't because of gender when he said when talking about Lula "Lula não tem capacidade intracromossomial inata para dirigir um país" (Lula lacks genetical capability to run a country)

The proof I need, is when you say some trait is greater in a gender or race that should translate to similar show in "uncontrolled enviroment", but them you to validate your point show the odd case to say it exist.

It's still an odd thing to say, lacks genetical capability and can easily be misinterpreted as sexist referring to the lack of the Y chromosome in women.

Anyway did you read the article I linked? That shows what trait favors women. (yet can be learned by men too)
http://fortune.com/2015/03/26/the-trait-that-makes-women-great-leaders/

What’s most striking about the 15 women in our new ranking of the World’s Greatest Leaders is how strongly they exemplify a new model of leadership. It’s a model in which leaders must influence a wide range of groups over which they have no direct authority, while those groups typically command much power of their own through their access to information and their ability to communicate with practically anyone. That kind of world demands a new kind of leadership, and while plenty of men on the list have mastered it, every one of the women has done it. And that’s no surprise.

Am I really saying that women on average are just better at this kind of leadership? Yes, that’s what I’m saying. Many of the women on this list hold no direct authority over anyone. Johnetta Elzie promoting peaceful protest in Ferguson, Missouri, human rights activist Beatrice Mtetwa in Zimbabwe, leadership apostle Frances Hesselbein – none of them can be effective by giving orders.

Even the two women on the list who do have formal power over large numbers of people – General Motors CEO Mary Barra and Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf – achieved their greatest effectiveness by influencing others. Barra had to deal with the faulty ignition switch crisis, Sirleaf with the Ebola epidemic, both of which required the cooperation of many constituencies.

Extensive research shows how women are better suited to this kind of leadership. They’re better than men at empathy – sensing the thoughts and feelings of others and responding in some appropriate way. They value reciprocal relationships more highly than men do. Even at early ages, the way girls talk is much more cooperative and collaborative than the way boys talk; girls show more concern for fairness than boys do. There’s no need to debate whether these differences are innate or learned; they’re clearly both. And in a world that favors leadership based on skills of personal interaction rather than on authority, women have a head start.

These two kinds of leadership parallel Harvard political scientist Joseph Nye’s distinction between hard power and soft power. I’ve always thought this extremely useful concept would be more widely adopted under different terms – instead of calling it hard and soft, let’s call it hot power and cool power. We’re moving from an era of hot-power leadership to an era of cool-power leadership. Women don’t have a lock on the new leadership. Because the newly valuable skills can be learned, men can adapt, and many are doing so. But don’t be surprised to see more women on lists of effective leaders. In the era of cool-power leadership, they have an advantage.

Patriarchy basically is a man at the head of the houshold who "Works, Pays for everything, Protects his wife, Protects his children, Takes a bullet for his wife, Takes a bullet for his children and is seen as strong and fearless."

Patriarchy basically only gave these role to women, be pretty, stay at home, take care of the kids, cook, clean and be helpless in the face of danger until a man does everything for you.

What are qualities that men can attain in their lifetime to show women that they are "Strong" "Financially Stable" "Fearless" "Courageous" and other qualities that are seen as coveted in patriarchy?

Muscles, Height, Financial Wealth, Alpha Male Personality.

What are the qualities that women can attain in their lifetime to show men that they are "pretty" "feminine" "Motherly" "Domesticated"?

Dressing like a classy woman, Being clean, Being pretty, not being loud and argumentative.

Patriarchy has been responsible for a lot of this. Just look at how since feminism has been coming along a lot of men aren't alpha males anymore because they aren't forced to be like they were in say the 1940's.

We can respectfully agree to disagree but I honestly think destroying patriarchy is more beneficial to us males. You have males committing suicide because they aren't able to meet the requirements of a male in the "patriarchy system". 

You must have missed all the insults directed at the author of the list or anyone who agrees with him. Apparently they are virgins (as if being a virgin is a bad thing) among other lovely adjectives they used against them.

People using virgin as an insult are sure the most * put any adjective to say they have no brain here * people, passed the college ( 15yo here), it's kinda pathetic

The original article is full of shit pretty much, but there are a lot of valid ways that women are favored in society now that should be mentioned (not an exhaustive list)

men get 63% more jail time for equivalent first time offenses
men make up over 40% of domestic violence victims and yet less than 10% of DV shelters even accept men
women receive over 75% of cancer research funding
women are favored at every level of the court system for divorce and custody, not filing a prenup at this point is pretty much economic suicide
men make up almost 90% of wartime deaths (this is civilian casualties not just soldier casualties, also someone tried to convince me once that this was male privilege since dying is apparently not as bad as losing a loved one, so lol)
75% of homeless people are men (it's a lot harder to be a male with no employable qualities than a female with no employable qualities)
97% of workplace deaths are men
77.9% of suicide deaths are men, and yet women receive more funding for shelters and such

Theres a lot of problems with being either female or male in todays society (not tryna pretend like everything is bad for males), but I find that feminists likes to just push male issues under the rug so they can concentrate on "real" problems like the victorias secret fashion show. Honestly if feminists were complaining about conditions for women in 3rd world countries I would be fine with it, but all they do is complain about dumb stuff nowadays like how some dude looked at her the wrong way and it was basically rape. Not to mention they throw around thoroughly debunked statistics like the wage gap that just shows they really couldn't care about facts.