Fact: Men and Women have different inherent strengths and in modern gynocentric society, it is almost a crime to acknowledge such differences

Men and Women have different competitive advantages and disadvantages and in modern society, acknowledgement of such differences is frowned upon and almost considered a crime.

Greater male variability compared to women and tail-distribution effects mean men are overly represented at the extremes (top and bottom) ends of the normal distribution in almost every field compared to women.

The distribution effects are more pronounced at both ends for men - there are more likely to be male handicapped morons than women just as there are also more male geniuses than compared to women.

This is where the Feminist Apex Fallacy comes in because they look exclusively at the top-end of the distribution while ignoring the bottom-end of the distribution.

It is a fact that at the top-end of the distribution, men dominate overwhelmingly: educators, athletes, scientists, chefs, doctors, engineers, etc, in the top of almost every field, men almost exclusively excel overwhelmingly, compared to women.

The only fields in which women overwhelmingly excel and which men fail miserably at is biological reproduction (childbirth) and those which are inherently biological (women fashion models, etc).

This is why men always need the co-operation of women in order to raise a family. For a man, raising a family requires a trade, an exchange of his competitive advantage with a woman - eg. a man may be a top chef which earns him a lot of resources - he has to trade his resources with a woman in order to have a family.

However, women do not need such co-operation. Raising a family is always her competitive advantage - if she is sufficiently well-off or successful in her career, she can choose to do so. Additionally, and moreso with modern gynocentric society, daddy government welfare programs are sufficient enough such that she can choose to raise a family by herself.

In modern gynocentric society, the government can forcibly compel men to transfer his resources to her, all in order that she can raise a family by herself.

Without modern big daddy gynocentric government, one would expect most women would exchange their competitive advantage (reproduction) in exchange for resources - this is what we find in the era of small government and native/tribal societies.

A woman who willingly choses to ignore her competitive advantage, instead opting for a career competing against the top-end distribution of men has to be in the extremely talented tail-end of the distribution to be successful, which is, by definition uncommon.

The average women would not be able to compete and would be better off making the choice of utilising their greatest competitive advantage (childbirth) in exchange for resources, rather than competing and failing to succeed.

These are the facts which modern gynocentric society attempts to criminalise.

Professors have had their careers cut short for pointing out the fact that men dominate at the top and contribute more to scientific progress than women (Alessandro Strumia).

Engineers have been fired for pointing out that gender differences in tech are due to inherent biological differences (James Damore).

Only equality of outcome quotas and a misandrist government policy can forcibly keep women represented in the top fields, by artificially promoting women and actively discriminating against men.

If we are to successfully advocate for men's rights, we have to be intellectually honest with ourselves and acknowledge the inherent biological differences and competitive advantages between men and women.

We have to point out the misandrist government policies which forcibly transfer resources from men to women.

We have to fight government 'equality' policies which are equality of outcome policies designed to discriminate against men by actively promoting women to top jobs.

We can and should focus on the tail-end of the distributions where men are over-represented compared to women, and thus point out that men at the bottom-end requires a lot more support and resources, moreso because of their greater representation compared to women.

Now cue the shills and the downvotes from sensitive people who cannot handle the truth.