"Radical feminism views patriarchy as dividing rights, privileges and power primarily by gender, and as a result oppressing women and privileging men."
Mmm, see, I don't think that's an accurate representation. I'd put it more as "Radical feminism views patriarchy as dividing rights, privileges and power primarily by gender, and as a result oppressing both women and men in different ways."
It's basically a blatant oversimplification that usually lead to completely flawed reasonings. Beside it's argue to argue that the oppression of women is something that come from "above" when feminism is so broadly accepted and is recognized and empowered by so many western governments and power structures. You cannot really argue that you're being suppressed when you have your entries in the White house, the European commission and the UN.
Oversimplification? Not really. It's not the whole picture, no, but it's an important part of it. I don't think feminism is as widely accepted as you say. It may have such positions, but that doesn't mean it has the influence to match. And besides, are we talking about feminism or radical feminism? Cause there's no way the second is anywhere near that influential.
Reducing gender role to a social construct is a bit pointless given the gender dimorphism of our specie and the abundance of gender roles in nature. Reducing gender roles to injustice-causing practices is also short-sighted, and you disagreed already on the fact that is only privilege men.
I think we have a fundamental misunderstanding here. The conventional view is that there are two restrictive gender roles. People seem to think that feminism wants to merge these into one restrictive role. That's not the case. The idea is to recognize that people do not fit into neat roles like that, and that any roles need to take into account this variety.
To me traditional gender roles are short sighted and obsolete, but I wouldn't say that every gender roles should be abolished or that historically they only privileged men.
If they're short sighted and obsolete, then why shouldn't they be abolished? And no, I wouldn't say they only privilege men... But they mostly do.
Also I don't see them as a major problem right now. Most of our stuff is made by peoples that are basically slaves, and worker's rights are being restricted left and right while the states are expending their surveillance network at a frantic speed. I find those problems to be way more concerning than the remnants of the old patriarchy.
I think those are concerning too, sure... But I don't think they're the only issues worth talking about. And I definitely don't think that pursuing feminist goals harms such things in any way.