I fear there is an almost aggressive attitude towards women rights that verges on women being treated as superior to their male counterparts. Even down to traditional etiquette, some women seem to find it offensive when men behave in a chivalrous manner towards them.

While you may find that with Radical Feminism, Socialist and Marxist Feminism and occasionally Eco-Feminism, you generally don't find that with Liberal Feminism, Cultural Feminism. While Radical Feminists (not referring to them as radical, I am simply using the term for that form of Feminism) tend to be the loudest, they are certainly not in the majority.

When it comes to the more serious issues of domestic violence, divorce, childcare and criminal behaviour, again it seems as though women are shielded from the harshest of treatment and can expect to receive greater support in tribulation in a way that a man cannot.

Some forms of feminism actually oppose that very situation you are referring to, though I admit others (such as Radical and Eco) support it.

and can expect to receive greater support in tribulation in a way that a man cannot.

Only in some very, very narrow circumstances. More often than not in our society, we are given greater deference over women. Many men become outraged when they look at the few examples in which women receive preferential treatment, to the point where they speak of them as if they are greater issues than the far more numerous examples where we receive the preferential treatment.

Surely this isn't what the founders fought for?

The Founder's fought for a land that would be ruled by white land owners. They did not believe that women should be able to vote, or be able to play much in the way of a significant role in our country's ruling, let alone receive something as basic as a decent education. So why don't we leave them out of it, shall we? :P

GenericName covered a lot but just a little thing to add about your chivalry point.

Even down to traditional etiquette, some women seem to find it offensive when men behave in a chivalrous manner towards them.

The thing is... yes, that is offensive. That's not to say being polite is bad thing, but if men are only chivalrous to women, that is offensive. If you only hold the door open to women, or you say that you only have to be polite to women, that is not equality. Either you need to be 'chivalrous' to everyone, or treat everyone without prejudice. Women aren't some other species that need to be treated differently.

Nature has made woman inferior both physically

For some tasks yes, for others no. Men are inferior at child bearing, women are inferior at hand to hand combat.

and intellectually

Unsubstantiated sexism, of course.

Of course there are exceptions, but when one considers the inventions and discoveries which contribute to the advancement and welfare of mankind one realizes that almost every one was made by the male of the species.

Of course they were, women were prevented from so much as receiving an education. Pointing to past sexism to justify present sexism is nonsensical.

In the main females are incapable of properly fulfilling jobs such as mining

Not true.

construction work

Not true.

shipbuilding

Not true.

heavy engineering

Not true.

and so forth

And so forth.

As hands on, '' on the beat'' police officers they are disastrous and retard their male colleague's ability to carry out his duties as efficiently as they could with another male officer, and in many instances represent a danger to themselves and their male comrades.

Why don't we have some fun: Can you in any way, shape, or form substantiate that claim with anything other than person conjecture?

Woman perform best when they are treated like gongs and struck at regular intervals, especially at meal times.

I am ashamed it took me this long to remember that you are a troll.

Well at least you're funny. And if you are actually taking yourself seriously, I understand, everyone likes to feel special.