After Donald Trump pulled out of the Paris Climate Accord earlier this week, perhaps the dumbest hot take on it was from liberal feminist Amanda Marcotte, “Trump and his followers are excited by the idea that ruining the environment will make liberals, especially women, sad. That's all this is.”

Hate to “mansplain” here (Wait, no, I don’t), but it’s worth examining this statement because it’s wrong in the way that so many other feminist ramblings are off.

First off, it’s no secret that conservatives don’t agree scientifically or politically with the conclusions liberals have reached on global warming. Yet, this feminist’s assumption is that, yes, conservatives do agree with the idea that global warming is going to destroy the planet (It’s not), but conservatives don’t care. Like most of modern feminists, she willfully ignored obvious facts. From there she assumes conservatives would want to destroy the environment out of spite. What sort of lunatic would want to do that? This is the same sort of twisted thinking that leads feminists to constantly accuse men of perpetrating “rape culture,” as if men generally support rape. Then there’s the idea that all of this is targeting women because….patriarchy or something? When you combine nuclear grade dumb with an inability to think critically and a healthy dose of misandry, it produces a lot of nonsense.

Sure, sexism exists, but most of the major issues feminists label as sexism come down to obvious differences between men and women.

It starts with the fact that men and women tend to be drawn to different things in the opposite sex.

For men, the starting point is looks and for more than a few men, that’s the ending point as well. Why do many women focus more on looking attractive than becoming CEOs? Why are women’s magazines full of beauty tips instead of career advancement advice? Why do so many women tend to be focused on things like hair, make-up and clothes? There are multiple reasons, but the starting point is because men like it.

On the other hand, women also value looks, but place much more emphasis on things like money, power and willingness to provide for a family. Why are there more male politicians? Why do more men do the grueling work it takes to rise to the upper echelons of a company? Why are men more willing to do dangerous and dirty jobs that pay well or work long hours when they’d rather be at home? There are multiple reasons, but the starting point is because women like it.

So many people don’t want to acknowledge these kind of things because it’s easier to blame the patriarchy than to acknowledge that there are differences between men and women that may produce outcomes that liberal feminists don’t like. For example, as Walter Williams has noted, “Male geniuses outnumber female geniuses 7-to-1. Female intelligence is packed much closer to the middle of the bell curve, whereas men's intelligence has far greater variability. That means that though there are many more male geniuses, there are also many more male idiots. The latter might partially explain why more men are in jail than women.” If there are 7 male geniuses for every female genius, is it any wonder that there are more male scientists, inventors, engineers and CEOs?

We see so many people moaning over a large imaginary pay gap (If you adjust for professions and hours worked, it’s actually around 5%) because it’s easier than admitting the truth, which is that men tend to work longer hours in more difficult professions. A big part of that is because women are the ones who have babies and the ones who feel more of an urge to nurture the children. Putting in the work to rise through the ranks often means that your home life gets the short shrift. In other words, it’s not the patriarchy holding women back in the work place; it’s mostly kids.

Feminists insisted that we move women into combat units with men even though we know that it makes our military worse because we don’t want to admit that, yes, men are generally better warriors than women. Why wouldn’t they be? There have been studies that show that even untrained men are stronger than college level female athletes. Couple that with the fact that the average man is 5 inches taller, 40 pounds heavier and has grown up in a warrior culture that glorifies men who fight and it’s not shocking that men have an advantage in combat. This isn’t sexism; it’s Biology 101.

Feminists have become so easily offended that it’s apparently part of “rape culture” to suggest that there are things women can do to lessen the chances that they will be raped. I know this because when I wrote my first book 101 Things All Young Adults Should Know, I was told by someone at my publishing house that I should be very careful about writing a chapter telling women that they should have someone looking out for them if they go somewhere and get sloppy drunk. Yet, if you’re a guy and you pass out at a frat party, you might wake up to find someone drawing on your face with a magic marker. If you’re a woman in the same situation, you might wake up with a strange guy on top of you. This is not conjecture because I’ve known multiple women who have been raped by scumbags in situations like that. Has it gotten to the point where we’re perpetrating “rape culture” and “victim shaming” when we warn young women that there are dangers they may face that men don’t?

There’s always going to be something for liberal feminists to complain about because let’s face it, being offended, hating men, complaining and playing the victim is at the root of modern feminism. Old school feminism was embraced by women and eventually men, but it just said men and women should be treated equally. Modern feminism is a different animal. It seems to appeal to women who don’t feel as pretty, as feminine or well suited to succeed in the world as it exists. So, they want to rewrite all the rules so that man-hating women’s studies majors will be at the top of the totem pole. It’s never going to happen and it’s sad to see so many women ruining their lives with the warped thinking that passes for “feminism” these days.