he's clearly jealous that he's not getting any high class pussy and walk away.

That was unexpectedly crude, b_b. Anyway the equation of "high class" + "pussy" = ? remains to be computed. The entire focus on "fucking" is indicative of a superficial view on these matters.

Feminists--for whatever reason--seem to overlook this point.

The reason is simple: Patriarchy is a human invention that is based on a social contract between the sexes, and the basis of civilization as we know it. It is clearly correct (and should be obvious) that there could be no patriarchy without the consent of women. The organic order in the 'wild' is matriarchy. Why would "feminists" want to delve into that and have the conversation become adult and informed? (It clearly weakens their position.)

Fatherhood and Motherhood are the oldest institutions of civilized [humanity]. (And that is why prostitution is called the oldest profession and why the earlier temples had temple prostitutes.) Simply being a mother is a fact of the animal kingdom. And there is no such thing as "father" in the wild.

The people who are pushing "feminism" are intent on weakening the Family. Per our earlier conversation regarding BNW, you should know precisely why they would pursue such a reckless agenda. They seek power.

So if there is any kind of "fear", it is positively the concern for the continued flourishing of human civilization where everything is not reduced to an equation involving the genitalia.

That there are men who fear the sexuality of women is a given. But that is hardly the root or end of this matter.

You mention "Islam" and "submission", which requires a response to address your misunderstanding. The fact of the matter is that the religion of Islam -- which is explicitly directed to men AND women -- clearly conveys the command to "never submit to tyranny". That is a baseline. "Submission in marriage" boils down to an agreement by the woman to give up the right to have the last word, in service of the harmony of the said social unit. A second governing baseline is avoid that which is shameful. So, in a marriage where the woman is tyrannized by the husband, both parties are not following God's guidance. The woman has either submitted to tyranny, OR, it is entirely possible that her brothers, her father, and her community have failed to address her rightful grievances. In such a case, the so called "man" of the unit is both a tyrant (the worst of crimes in Islam, just a step below hypocrisy) and the entire community of the units is bearing "shame". (And yes, I am aware that the Muslim Umma is not currently living up to these exalted standards.)

All things considered, the state of the unit ranges from sublime to tyrannical based on the individuals involved. Even if women ruled the roost it would not be otherwise. Your millage may vary and your concern should be to attend to your own affairs: are you tyrannizing anyone in your social circle? have you hurt anyone? are you careful to insure there is mutual respect in all your social interactions? &c.

"You must be the change you wish to see in the world", remains sound advice.