There's a time and a place for everything, and that includes being mean.

Tell son.

Women will often tell you not to be mean and will try to guilt you for it. They appoint themselves moral arbiters of when it is and isn't appropriate for a man to be mean - and they always deem it inappropriate to be mean to them.

This is false. Exercise your best judgement.

Being mean's a spectrum of ferocity from "making you feel uncomfortable by chastising you" to absolute ruthlessness.

As disciplinarian, it's your task and duty to determine a severity of punishment fit for her crimes.

Empathising without punishing sets you up to be a doormat.

This is to say, the correct way to behave is to punish first, and then when the necessary discomfort has been endured, to debrief the punished, explaining your actions as you empathise, without being apologetic for what you've done. This is how good behaviour is cultivated.

Yet a conceited woman will in her role as "moral arbiter" try to push you into an empathising role, chastising any punishment you levy as "abuse." This is dishonest. To discipline is not to abuse

A good woman is accepting of her punishments, and does not tell you how to be a man

Women are so free to do as they please today, they quite literally view any checks, balances or discomfort inflicted upon them for poor behaviour as "abuse".

It is utterly ridiculous.

By this logic, children are abused by their parents.

But alas, the modern woman is an idiot.

Does a child tell its parents how to discipline it?

"No, you should not deprive me of this, or say this mean thing to me for that, you should understand me and care for me and be patient with me when I misbehave!"

No, a child is not so manipulative or conceited

But a woman is.

By behaving poorly, she necessitates punishment. But when that punishment is inflicted, she becomes critical of it, fundamentally rejecting its correctness, and bringing into question the man's character. This is how she willfully deflects her wrongdoing, and it is reprehensible.