I agree with what you're saying. I think the real question here becomes "what's the point?" - on both sides of the argument, what point are they trying to make in these books, and what point is Schaffer refuting.

The point is that men in general have a demonstratable proven pattern of denying rights and status to women, and typically use shoddy argumentation to do so. Schaffer is refuting the authors who would continue this pattern.

It cracks me up to see people deny the pattern of sexism and pretend that men no longer have this desire to be sexist pigs. Just because men no longer claim outloud that women deserve to be chattel property is no proof that their control-freakiness has stopped.

If you want to prove that men aren't sexist pigs, then put your money where your mouth is and pass the ERA. A constitutional amendment recognizing the woman's right to an abortion without anybody else's input would also be mandatory.

Put your money where your mouth is, or STFU, you sexist freaking jerks.