Yes. I finally admit it: our generation of men has been scammed.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m not one of those guys who tries to compensate for his lack of manliness through misogyny, or by berating and belittling women. On the contrary, I am an ardent supporter of radical equality between men and women in all fields of life—at least legally and morally. We all know life is unfair and that kind of absolute equality is impossible to find in reality. Yet, as an idealist, I want to cherish and promote my ideals for a better world.
That being said, the issue of equality has become a circus show over the past two decades. What do I mean?
To start with, the definition of “being a man” or “manliness” isn’t clear-cut, yet we’ve been speaking about men as a uniform—and uniformly bad—species that has been suppressing women for centuries, seemingly for fun. There’s no denying this planet is still a man’s world, but that comes with a price for men, too.
Not all men are into suppression or inequality, but we are born into social institutions, cultures, and traditions that predate us.
“Okay,” you might say, “then change it.” But when you try—as a man—you quickly realize that resistance comes from both men and women. Why?
Because many women cannot stand the idea of an “unmanly” man, including many—if not most—self-proclaimed feminists. Actually, if you track the future marriages of feminist activists from your university days, a pattern is likely to emerge: they predominantly prefer men from “non-feminine” departments—typically masculine, successful, and preferably good-looking men with an aura of male authority. (Not machos or misogynists, but still traditionally “manly.”)
You might say, “Well, there are also a lot of women who aren’t into that kind of man.” Fair enough. But again, if you look closely, many of those women prefer men who are not exactly considered equals. They want subservient men who will support the woman’s career and accept a subordinate position in the family hierarchy. That’s not equality—it’s a reversed patriarchal model.
In my opinion, the worst type of expectation is the one where men are supposed to be masculine, good earners, dominant—but also understanding, soft, and emotionally expressive. No wonder we see increasing mental health issues among young men in relation to relationships.
I should note: I’m aware of the Red Pill movement, incels, and the like—but that’s not our topic here. I’m talking about the average man and woman on the street.
So, why are we scammed?
Some of us—perhaps seeing our fathers mistreat our mothers, or our brothers-in-law belittle our sisters, or simply out of empathy—decided that the patriarchal, aggressive, competitive model of manliness needed to be changed. That women should have better opportunities, and should share equal responsibilities with men. Ideally.
But what actually happened?
Let’s take a workplace example. Imagine a company where hiring and promotion were traditionally based on sex — men keeping top positions for other men — and the institutional culture was condescending and disempowering to women. Over time, a new generation joins the ranks, aiming to improve this culture. There are DEI hires, sensitivity training, positive discrimination policies—a real change in policy and attitude. After all, women make up 50% of the population and should contribute equally.
Some of you already know where I’m going, because you’ve seen how this ends.
In the end, what we have is not equality.
I won’t say the company hires undeserving people — profit-driven firms rarely do that. But within a few years, two groups emerge as winners: (1) the hard-working women, and (2) believe it or not, the same old boys’ networks that these policies aimed to dismantle.
What happened?
Women — like men — are competitive in work environments. So when women are hired, and some men step back to create space for equality, women naturally fill the vacuum. And like anyone would, they form their own networks. I’ve seen time and again how these networks replicate what was taken from men and become women-only circles, leading to promotions and advantages. Of course, they clash with the men who don’t step back — but by then, both groups are well-established and competing for top spots. Meanwhile, the pro-equality men are eliminated.
For men, this often means difficulty finding a partner, maintaining a relationship, or having children—issues well-documented in post-industrial societies.
So the only group that gets punished is the men who supported equality. Because despite all the changes, women’s expectations from men haven’t changed much. And many of the women who once criticized the “evil ways of men” now eagerly adopt those same behaviors when they become advantageous — stripping men of privileges that once helped them find a partner or raise a family.
Despite being masculinized, these new generations of women still expect men to court them.
And when we talk about workplace equality, let’s be honest: most women think about equality in high-paying office jobs. But most manual labor—construction, garbage collection, truck driving, military service — is still done by men. Men still live shorter lives than women. We’re yet to see equality in these fields.
I’ve also noticed that self-proclaimed careerist, competitive feminists often go for the low-hanging fruit. Just like in the workplace, where pro-equality men are sidelined by both women and old-boy networks, these women can also be unnecessarily aggressive toward pro-equality men.
I remember seeing a guy on social media — someone who embodies equality in his personal and professional life — share a nostalgic post about missing a dish his mother used to cook when he was a child. It’s worth mentioning: the guy is an excellent cook himself. Immediately, one of his female friends responded with: “You know, you can cook it for yourself. You don’t need other people to cook for you.”
This is a man who has been cooking for himself for the last 15 years. My theory? Two things triggered her:
- She knew he was gentle and wouldn’t fight back like a misogynist might. So she thought, “Let’s make him the scapegoat for my frustrations.”
- More subtly — and more disturbingly — he showed emotional vulnerability. He missed something from his childhood, associated with his mother. (If his father had cooked that dish, he’d probably miss it too—it’s not about sex.) But for a man to display such emotion is still taboo. She likely saw him as a “soft,” “unmanly” man, and subconsciously felt triggered. It was her way of saying: “Man up.”
And here we are.
Men who believe in equality, living our values — losing promotions, relationships, and dignity — while being pushed aside by both women and men.
This is the scam.
No one can convince me otherwise. I’ve lost too many opportunities—not only to unethical old-boy networks, but also to exclusive women’s networks. I no longer feel morally obliged to play the role of Jesus Christ, turning the other cheek, while everyone else agrees that “second place is the first loser” and stepping on the “weak” is fair game.
I’ll never give up my ideals of equality for all human beings. But we are at a crossroads.
I’m asked to give up my privileges as a man for the sake of gender equality — yet the moment I let go, those same privileges are picked up by women. If being a competitive, aggressive male is so bad, why do a lot of women treat it as a positive privilege when they have access to it?
If we have the same mentality, but different sexes, then I want to play by the same rules. If women feel entitled to masculinity, I think in order to survive in this jungle I’m entitled to embrace mine too.
We’ve been trying to survive this boxing match with one hand tied behind our backs, getting punched by both men and women.
Well, I’m untying my hand. And from what I can see, many disappointed men are considering the same.
Sorry, ladies—but this time, it wasn’t our fault. You were supposed to destroy the Ring of Power in Mount Doom. Instead, you put it on.