Is There Anything Good About Men?

1. Culture's Hidden Hand: Exploiting Men for Progress

I shall suggest that cultures routinely exploit men in certain ways, which is to say cultures find men more useful than women for certain tasks.

A new perspective. This book challenges conventional wisdom by proposing that cultures, as abstract systems, exploit men for their own survival and advancement. This exploitation isn't a conspiracy by men against women, but a pragmatic strategy for cultural success, often involving competition between groups of men. While women are also exploited, the nature and purpose of male exploitation are distinct and often overlooked.

Culture's goals. Cultures, driven by the need to survive and outcompete rivals, "want" several things:

• Wealth creation: To provide for material needs and increase prosperity.
• Military strength: To defend against enemies and expand influence.
• Stability and progress: To maintain internal order and foster innovation.
• Population increase: To ensure future generations and numerical advantage.
  These goals are achieved through "system gain," where the collective effort of a group, organized by culture, far exceeds the sum of individual contributions.

Men as tools. Men are often the primary agents for achieving these cultural objectives. Their inherent drives, shaped by evolutionary history, align with the demands of large-scale cultural endeavors. By channeling male ambition, risk-taking, and competitive spirit, cultures generate the surplus wealth, military power, and innovations necessary to flourish, even if it comes at a significant cost to individual men.

2. Gender Differences: A Story of Tradeoffs, Not Superiority

If one gender is better at something, the superior ability will probably be linked to being worse at something else.

Beyond "better or worse." The author argues against the prevailing notion that one gender is inherently superior. Instead, he posits that fundamental differences between men and women are rooted in evolutionary tradeoffs. Nature preserves differences when a trait is beneficial for one purpose but detrimental for another, leading to complementary strengths rather than universal superiority.

Challenging stereotypes. Historical shifts in societal views—from male superiority to "no difference" to female superiority—are seen as politically driven rather than scientifically robust. The "Women Are Wonderful" (WAW) effect, where both genders perceive women more favorably, is acknowledged but questioned as a complete picture of reality.

The "different but equal" paradigm. This radical theory of gender equality suggests that men and women possess distinct capabilities and inclinations that, when combined, create a more robust and adaptable human society. These differences are not flaws but specialized adaptations, each valuable in its own context, ensuring that both genders contribute uniquely to the collective good.

3. Male Extremity: Nature's Gamble for Progress

Super-genius and severely retarded are both mostly boys’ clubs, though a few exceptional girls do show up too.

The bell curve's tails. A crucial, often overlooked, fact is the "male extremity pattern." While men and women may have similar average intelligence, height, or personality traits, men are disproportionately represented at both the highest and lowest extremes of these distributions. Women, conversely, tend to cluster more in the middle.

Statistical illusions. This pattern can create misleading statistics:

• Grades: Grade inflation (low ceiling) can make women appear to have better average grades, as the male genius surplus is capped, while the male low-achiever surplus pulls down the average.
• Salaries: The absence of a salary ceiling (and a minimum wage floor) can make men appear to earn more, as the male genius surplus can earn unlimited amounts, while the male low-achiever surplus is capped at the minimum.
  These disparities may reflect statistical artifacts of male extremity rather than inherent differences in average ability or systemic oppression.

Nature's experiment. The author speculates that male extremity is nature's way of "experimenting." Males are more "expendable" in reproductive terms (as discussed later), making them ideal for genetic trials. Failed experiments (e.g., low intelligence) are quickly weeded out of the gene pool through reproductive failure, while successful experiments (e.g., genius) can spread rapidly due to the potential for high male reproductive output.

4. The Engine of Difference: Motivation Outweighs Ability

The most likely explanation is that some strong influence of Mother Nature produces both extremes. Something in the biology of maleness produces more cases at both extremes.

Can vs. Want. The author posits that the most significant and impactful differences between men and women lie not in their abilities (what they can do), but in their motivations (what they want to do). While ability differences are often small, motivational differences are substantial and drive divergent life choices and societal roles.

Science and careers. For instance, the underrepresentation of women in top science and math fields is attributed primarily to a lack of interest, not ability. Studies show:

• Women often get better grades in high school math/science but choose non-science fields.
• Women with high math ability are often also good at other things, leading them to pursue diverse interests.
• Men are more likely to be "workaholics" and prioritize money and career advancement, leading to longer work hours and higher salaries.
  These choices reflect differing preferences and priorities, not a deficit in female competence.

Marketplace reflections. The entertainment and consumer industries capitalize on these motivational differences, offering gender-specific products and media. From magazines to video games, men's preferences often involve competition, numbers, and systems, while women's lean towards relationships and personal well-being. This commercial success underscores the reality and economic significance of these motivational gaps.

5. Two Social Worlds: Intimacy for Women, Systems for Men

Women are designed for the small, intimate sphere of close relationships in which people connect one to one. Men are better designed for the large sphere in which there are more connections to more people.

Different social blueprints. Men and women are both social, but they specialize in different types of social relationships. Women excel in "dyadic" or one-to-one intimate relationships, prioritizing emotional connection and mutual support. Men, conversely, are more oriented towards larger groups and complex "systems," even if these involve shallower, more numerous ties.

Behavioral manifestations: This fundamental difference manifests in various ways:

• Aggression & Helping: Women are more aggressive/helpful in intimate relationships; men are more aggressive/helpful towards strangers or in larger group contexts.
• Group Dynamics: Girls tend to pair-bond; boys engage in larger, more fluid group play.
• Communication: Women use gentle, indirect speech (suited for intimacy); men use clear, forceful language (suited for large groups).
• Fairness: Women favor equality (treating everyone the same); men favor equity (rewarding based on contribution), which is more effective in large, productive groups.
• Hierarchy: Women prefer egalitarian structures; men are more comfortable with and driven by status hierarchies in large groups.

Agency vs. Communion. This distinction aligns with the psychological concepts of "agency" (initiative, autonomy, action, typical of men) and "communion" (merging, caring, connection, typical of women). While both are vital, agentic traits are more conducive to navigating and building large, competitive systems, whereas communal traits foster strong, supportive intimate bonds.

6. Ancestral Imbalance: The Root of Male Expendability

Of all humans ever born, most women became mothers, but most men did not become fathers.

The "underappreciated fact." DNA studies reveal that today's human population is descended from approximately twice as many women as men. This means that throughout history, most women who reached adulthood reproduced, while most men did not. This profound reproductive asymmetry is a cornerstone for understanding gender differences.

Evolutionary pressures. This imbalance shaped male and female psychology differently:

• Women: Faced favorable odds of reproduction. Their evolutionary path favored playing it safe, being lovable, and ensuring the survival and quality of their few offspring.
• Men: Faced overwhelming odds of reproductive failure. Their path favored risk-taking, striving for dominance, and outcompeting other men to secure mating opportunities.
  The drive to "strive for greatness" in men is thus deeply rooted in this ancestral competition for reproductive success.

Polygamy and monogamy. Historically, polygamy (one man, multiple wives) was common, exacerbating the male reproductive imbalance. While seemingly disadvantaging women, it actually created a surplus of available men, giving women more choice. Monogamy, a relatively recent cultural invention, primarily benefits men by ensuring that more men have access to wives, thus reducing the number of reproductively "expendable" males.

7. Manhood Earned: A Relentless Quest for Respect

Every adult female human being is a woman, but not every adult male is a man.

A fundamental asymmetry. Womanhood is largely an ascribed status, a biological given. Manhood, however, is an achieved status; it must be earned through effort, achievement, and public validation. This creates immense pressure on men to constantly prove themselves worthy of respect.

The male "double standard." While women are often judged by their appearance, men are judged by their achievements, status, and ability to provide. This "precarious manhood" means that a man's identity is never secure and can be lost through perceived failure, leading to anxiety and a need for constant vigilance and defense of his honor.

Defining manhood. Sociologist Steven L. Nock's definition of manhood as "producing more than you consume" encapsulates this drive. This includes:

• Self-sufficiency: Providing for one's own needs.
• Surplus creation: Generating extra resources to support a family or contribute to society.
  This cultural expectation harnesses male effort, driving them to work hard, take risks, and create wealth, which ultimately benefits the entire cultural system.

8. The Sexual Lever: How Culture Harnesses Male Desire

The male sex drive can be used to motivate men. It is probably an almost universal truth that plenty of men will do whatever is necessary to get sex.

The insatiable beast. Men possess a significantly stronger and more pervasive sex drive than women, a fact often misunderstood or denied. This difference is evident in:

• Frequency of desire and fantasy: Men think about sex more often and have more varied fantasies.
• Masturbation rates: Men masturbate far more frequently.
• Risk-taking for sex: Men are more willing to take risks and incur costs for sexual opportunities.
• Initiation: Men are almost always the initiators of sexual encounters.
  This relentless drive, fueled by testosterone, is not merely for reproduction but also for motivating broader male behaviors.

Sex as an incentive. Cultures exploit this powerful male desire by linking sexual access to achievements and status. Since women are often attracted to successful and resourceful men, cultures can establish rules where men must:

• Create wealth: To attract partners and provide for families.
• Achieve status: To gain desirability and access to women.
• Make commitments: Such as marriage, which ensures long-term provision for women and children.
  This system channels male sexual energy into productive cultural contributions.

Marriage as an economic transfer. Marriage, in many cultures, functions as a mechanism to transfer wealth from men to women and children. The "impossible promise" of lifelong fidelity, particularly challenging for men with their stronger sex drive, is often made during the peak of passionate love. This romantic illusion encourages men to commit financially, ensuring the support of future generations, even if their sexual desires for their spouse wane over time.

9. Disposable Lives: Men as Culture's Sacrificial Symbols

A man who believes the official story is headed for disappointment and surprise if it is put to the test.

The lesser value of male life. Cultures, in their pragmatic pursuit of survival and progress, consistently value men's lives less than women's. Phrases like "even women and children" highlight this implicit hierarchy. Historical events, such as the Titanic sinking where rich men had lower survival rates than poor women, starkly illustrate this societal expectation.

Sacrifice for the system. Men are disproportionately assigned to dangerous roles:

• Warfare: Overwhelmingly male casualties, often sent into hopeless situations.
• Dangerous jobs: Men account for over 90% of occupational deaths.
• Risky ventures: Men are encouraged to take chances in science, business, and exploration, knowing many will fail or die, but the culture benefits from the few who succeed.
  This "expendability" allows cultures to pursue high-stakes endeavors, using men as disposable agents for collective gain.

Symbolic sacrifice. Beyond physical sacrifice, men are frequently used as symbolic scapegoats or heroes. Their public failures are often magnified to serve as moral lessons or warnings, while their successes are celebrated to inspire others. This symbolic utility, often absent for women, reinforces cultural values and motivates future male striving, even if it means ruining individual men's lives for a broader message.

10. The Future of Men: A Paradox of Progress and Peril

Will he play along? The future of the culture depends on his answer.

A changing landscape. The modern American man faces a complex and contradictory future. While enjoying unprecedented opportunities for a comfortable life and sexual freedom (more partners, less risk of pregnancy), he also confronts subtle disadvantages in institutions increasingly geared towards women.

Undermining male drives. Policies designed to promote female self-esteem and equality in schools, for example, may inadvertently undermine male motivation for greatness. Grade inflation and a focus on collective achievement rather than individual excellence can disengage boys who are naturally driven by competition and the desire to stand out. This risks sidetracking male talent into less productive avenues like video gaming.

The cultural dilemma. Society expects men to continue shouldering traditional responsibilities—solving problems, providing, protecting, and driving progress—even as it:

• Devalues their contributions and treats them as expendable.
• Blames them for societal inequalities.
• Undermines their traditional sources of respect and motivation.
• Promotes policies that favor women and minorities.
  The long-term viability of a culture that increasingly alienates its male population, while still relying on their unique contributions, remains an open and critical question.

Last updated: October 18, 2025