The only sentence here in this article that I don't completely understand and has ambiguous meaning would be that one. But tell me honestly, was your initial comment only referring to that particular sentence? You didn't highlight it, you left a generic comment and you called the article believing in absurd things like female superiority and you even wrote thing like men built this civilization, women are taking advantage of it to bully men into some kind of sadistic submission. I am sure you already heard tons of arguments dismantling this illogical claim of yours, so I won't elaborate but just would point out two things, one being, women, even now, are largely not given entry to the outside paid jobs, the inventory jobs etc. and historically the case has been even worse, ans the second one being, there still have been and are a few women who manage to invent and contribute, caused by a combination of sheer luck, rarely obtained support and a very strong will and heart to walk the unconventional way, but they also face various challenges, and I think we should work and change this situation. So, given you wrote these, that too, even after reading the article which apart from that one sentence, clearly talk about equal oportunity, cooperation, collective well-being etc., make one think you were using "writer's intend of female superiority" etc. as a deliberate accusation to discredit the entire article.

In your response to my comment, you write I used expletives, that I had an accusatory tone. I would admit that indeed I did so. But that was to address your initial comment which was accusing the writer of this article demanding female superiority, that was after you called the women (or, maybe more specifically the women feminists) oportunists by saying we intend to use "men's inventions to go after men". I explained above how both these things are wrong. And I explained in my previous comment about how I notice a trend of anti-feminists and supporters of patriarchies using these unfounded accusations to discredit everything a feminist points out. I stand by that point. Now I know two wrongs don't make things right, and hence your initial accusatory comment doesn't justify my accusatory comment, so I would like to apologize for my accusatory tone, I hope you also do the same to the writer of this article.
But lastly, about you mentioning blocking and things, feel free to do so if you can't handle the truth or can't bear the taste of your own medicine. What medicine? Accusation. I believe yours to this author was wrong and you knew that, and mine to you is right and justified but you might think otherwise. And yes, I know once again, I use unpolished method here just now, but as I wrote, I really think one should taste their own medicine. Okay, I'll stop here.