Decades ago, policies corrected the 60-40 male-to-female college enrollment gap. Now that the ratio has reversed to favor women, the idea of affirmative action for men is politically unpalatable, revealing a societal double standard.

Related Insights

Women and people of color often believe they need another certification to be qualified, while men confidently pursue roles with fewer prerequisites. This highlights a systemic confidence and perception gap, not a competence gap, where women over-prepare to compensate for perceived shortcomings.

With three-quarters of mental health providers being women, the field may have a significant blind spot regarding male issues. This gender imbalance can make it difficult for men to feel seen and heard, creating a structural barrier to effective treatment that goes beyond social stigma and pushes them towards toxic online communities.

Despite women earning nearly 60% of college degrees—the primary qualification for members of Congress—they hold only 26% of seats. This statistical disparity suggests that American voters still subconsciously conflate stereotypically male traits like height and a deep voice with leadership, creating a systemic bias against female candidates.

The successful fight for women's equality has inadvertently created a blind spot for the growing problems facing men, such as higher suicide rates and lower college enrollment. This 'elite neglect' from the left has alienated male voters, who feel their problems are ignored or that they are seen as the problem.

Research highlights a significant bias in promotion decisions. Men are often judged on their perceived capabilities two years in the future, allowing for deficits. In contrast, women are typically evaluated strictly against their current skill set, penalizing them for not already possessing every requirement of the role.

Societal applause for women excelling in male domains like CEO leadership, while downplaying nurturing roles, subtly implies that masculine pursuits are inherently more valuable. This reveals a form of patronizing sexism from within progressive circles.

When addressing challenges faced by men, there's often societal pressure to first acknowledge the historical and ongoing struggles of women. This framing can irritate, exhaust, and dilute the focus on men's specific problems.

Public discourse comfortably accepts generalizations that women are better doctors, but similar statements about men being better entrepreneurs due to risk-aggression are met with discomfort. This reveals a bias in how gender-based attributes are perceived and discussed.

There is a significant hypocrisy in elite university admissions. While affirmative action for historically disadvantaged groups is highly controversial, these same institutions give equal or larger admissions breaks to athletes in niche, wealthy sports like fencing and rowing, a practice that receives far less public scrutiny.

The struggles and pathologies seen in young men are not just an isolated gender issue. They are a leading indicator that the broader societal belief in upward mobility—'we can all do well'—is eroding. This group is the first to react when reliable paths to success seem blocked.