Responds to Betty Friedan's 1964 interview and Margaret Sanger's "The Morality of Birth Control"

After reading Margaret Sanger's “Morality of Birth Control” and then watching Betty Friedan's interview, I thought it was interesting how much the feminist movement had changed ideologically, but at the same time the opposition to it had remained relatively consistent. When Margaret Sanger was advocating the use of contraceptives, she spoke about the claim that advocating such a thing would degrade the morality of women in society. She was quick to make the point that this has always been the claim by the church and other patriarchal institutions whenever there was a push for advancement in women's rights. This is similar to the opposition that Betty Friedan talked about, when the media depicting feminists as all being “bra-burners” and how they portray feminism as something that poses a threat to men.
When I think of what it means to be a woman today, I rely on information that woman's rights advocates as well as female friends and family of mine for understanding. One of the things I feel conflicted about is the division between the more pragmatic equal rights advocacy that is mainstream, and the more complicated feminist theory that seems constrained to the world of academia. I felt like I was more sympathetic towards Betty Friedan's interpretation of what a woman goes through, in that she included men and children as victims of the ongoing discrimination. She seemed to have advocate a more all-encompassing interpretation of woman's equality, in that we are all impacted by discrimination against woman.
As a man, I've noticed how advertising in particular tries to exploit a (in my opinion, misguided) fear that men are not only loosing their value in society, but that we need fight back against this. This is my favorite example of this, run during the Superbowl:


Now, I can relate to only one of the things listed in this ad. This ad is very effective in this way, because out of the entire list, there is bound to be one or two things that a man can relate to. Yet, it's presented as all of the annoyances listed off are things that all men put up with on a regular basis. And then there is the implication that all of these things are not manly (Personally I eat fruit in the morning because, well, I like fruit. I also shave because I look stupid with facial hair. I have had girlfriends whose mothers I got along with fine, I didn't feel forced to act civil with them.)
This is exactly what makes Betty Friedan's comments important not just for women, but for men and children as well. With the media constantly implying that I, as a man, should be able to relate to its definition of masculinity and how I should resent my girlfriend when she will inevitably try to oppress me, this has led a lot of tension between the two sexes, that in reality aren't even real problems in the first place. For my part, I think advocating awareness of this not only benefits women, but I think will liberate men as well from the damaging feelings of being inadequate in their performative role.