FamilyGuy women's caution about men is not angst, it's a low-level sub-conscious caution, just as you would doubtless feel if you walked around Welling (where the BNP is based because that's where it is welcome).
For women, many of their interactions with men are their Welling. We just have to be cautious. That's not angst, it's an acceptance of reality - we can't take it for granted that we're safe. When we don't employ this caution and men attack us, we are blamed for not having employed caution "what did she think would happen" "why did she think he was inviting her in" etc. So at the back of our minds nearly always with men we don't know very well, is that consciousness of needing caution. That's all it is - a consciousness. Not angst. And mostly we don't even feel the caution until a man does something to alert us to the fact that we may need it after all.
Re the washing up, women who continue to voice their discontent are called nags. So if they voice their discontent, they are nags, if they do the washing up in silent resignation/ contempt, they are victims and martyrs and it's their own fault for not voicing it and if they decide on divorce as the only other course of action, they are lambasted for splitting up a family for such frivolous reasons as him not doing the washing up. Just sayin'.
Re the physicality comment, I don't think you quite got what I was saying. I can't speak for Somerset, but I still maintain that women don't fear men as a group because of their physicality but because of their behaviour. Men as a group inflict terrible violence on women and women don't know beforehand, which members of the group might do that to us, hence the caution when we encounter groups of men - we don't know whether they are going to be violent to us or not.
As for the male violence stat - I said it is a rare woman who has not experienced the threat of it. Men threaten women with violence all the time. They don't have to spell it out - for example, I was recently in a carpet warehouse where I was the only customer there and there was one bloke who was on duty there. I was looking at one of those rails of carpets which are hung up like posters and he came and stood behind me and put one arm on one side of me and one on the other so that I was trapped between him and the carpets. I was suddenly conscious of a threat of danger. He didn't spell it out, he didn't threaten me, he didn't voice any threat, but the threat was undeniably there, just in the fact that he'd trapped me in a space with no-one else around. When men cat-call women in the street, they are reminding us that they can rape us and frequently do; they don't have to say "hey women, guess what, we're bigger and stronger than you and we can rape you and we've set up a legal system which means you'll be blamed for that, so knuckle under". The threat is there implicitly, so implicit and so sub-conscious that although everyone's aware of it, there is complete deniability. "I didn't threaten her" "i didn't say anything" "it was just a joke" etc. The gaslighting possibilities in the area of sexual threat are immense. If I told anyone in RL about that story with the carpets, they'd prob just tell me I was paranoid or intolerant or sth. Because women are supposed to tolerate sexual threats and not over-react or get angry about them or try and analyse the nature of them - if they do, they're told they've got chips on their shoulders and should be concentrating their attention on something more important.