The second society invited direct competition between men and women, we completely disincentivised strong men.

And I don't just mean trannies in women's sports, I mean there are men trying to be the greatest physical athlete, and women trying to be the greatest physical athlete; simply having the same goal is the problem.

Women don't like to lose, and they like the person who beat them even less. Where are the female athletes who are impressed by how badly they're outclassed by mid-tier male athletes? Are those guys getting laid? Nope, it's "not fair" and they're "oppressors".

If a man brags to a woman that he's ranked higher than other men, she's impressed. If he's ranked higher than men and women, she's jealous because, theoretically, she is a potential competitor in whatever field this is and he's not a Chad , he's an incel loser who enjoys dominating women.

This absolutely extends to the work force.

If a man is competing with a woman for promotions and raises, he's either a total loser who's getting beat by a women, or he's a threat, or even an obstacle. It's a factor of the rise in sexual harassement; no woman in the workforce is a potential sexual partner because they are in competition with you. If they make themselves sexually receptive, it's probably a trap.

So, knowing that a huge part of male competitiveness is ranking themselves for women (cause we're seen how women pick men; no thanks): what's the point of strong men if it just makes them antagonistic to women?

Sure there are other reasons for men to be strong, and there are still strong men, but they want nothing to do with women in general.