Jiraya

So to explain this question, lets take an example of the much famed wage gap -- 77 cents to 1 dollar, obviously that's because of factors like more hours of work and choice of more riskier work etc etc. if it wasn't, under a free market if you could get a cost reduction for same work by hiring exclusively females -- there would be no one hiring males at all ---

The fact is, if feminists want the entire society to be equal -- then in a free market that is simply not possible unless females perform the same risky tasks for the same long/extra hours on a full time job similar to males ---

But that has one problem, under "equality of opportunity", on average most females wont make it as security guards,police officers or fire fighters etc. if there was no affirmative action in place ---

So does a business have to give up its effectiveness and efficiency for "equality" in turn causing problems for the entire society both males and females ?

I just want your opinions on this video, especially from people that say that "anti feminists" or MRA's promote hate etc.---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkspPmm-WVI&list=TL...

So here are two recent questions which were posted --

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Au9_v...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhQKp...

So the analogies are that women are similar to a physically damaged man,whose on a wheel chair and a 15 month old baby, and how people do not react to them even if they instigate violence so similarly the rule should apply on females as well since they do not "pose areal threat to them (men)"

Now I would like to know from these two people as well as the ones on the forum, that what if the same analogy is used and applied in favor of men in a work place setting, as a reason to pay men more, as a reason to advocate no women in the military,fire fighting,police forces etc ??

Do you consider me a misogynist for essentially using the same analogy which goes against your school of thought ??