Women are raised for the community, men are raised for each other
And yet so many are confused by our current reality

The harsh reality is that many men are not raised with the broader community´s well-being in mind. From birth, they are shaped in homosocial environments where loyalty to other men is paramount. Bonds between boys and men are forged in silence and complicity, prioritizing the preservation of male camaraderie over accountability or empathy. In this unspoken code, protecting each other often comes at the direct expense of women and the larger community’s best interest.
Women, on the other hand, are raised to embody the heart of the community, to nurture, defend, and uplift those around them. Even at their own personal expense. From childhood, they are taught that their worth lies in their ability to care for others, acting as guardians of the vulnerable and advocates for the collective good. Women will often fight for the safety of most children and elders, regardless of blood ties, while men are more likely to rally only when danger threatens their own kin. To women, community is not a given but a responsibility, a fragile and precious thing that requires constant tending and protection.
Yet, paradoxically, it is men, often the ones with the narrowest perspectives of community needs, the least responsibility for the collective, and the most selective loyalty, who are handed the reins of power. They are trusted to build and lead the very societies they have been conditioned to prioritize themselves over. How does that make sense?
The three monkeys, the good guys and the brotherhood
Hear no evil against other men: For many men, confronting the idea that someone they consider a "good guy" could pose a danger to women or the community is deeply uncomfortable, not unimaginable. It forces a reckoning: acknowledging that even the men they say they trust could be capable of harm means dealing with a darker truth about male behavior as a whole. Rather than face that discomfort, it’s easier to believe that women are exaggerating the risks.
Speak no evil against other men: We’ve all heard it: "Not all men are like that." While technically true, this response entirely misses the point. Women’s caution isn’t about branding every man as a threat; it’s about recognizing patterns of behavior that make vigilance necessary. The response “not all men” from some men, is less about bringing balance to the discussion and more about self-preservation, offering men the comforting illusion that the issue is less urgent because they, personally, see themselves as the "good ones."
But what qualifies them as good? Not active opposition to harmful behaviors, not challenging the attitudes that allow those behaviors to thrive, just the mere absence of committing the worst offenses themselves. The bar is set so low that simply not being a rapist, abuser, serial sex - offender or murderer is enough to earn the title of "a good man." There is no expectation to fight against parts of male culture that enable harm, no obligation to intervene, only the quiet reassurance that as long as they do not see themselves as part of the problem, they can remain uninvolved in any efforts to fix the problem.
Do no evil against other men: Male friendships often operate under a strong code of loyalty. "Bros before hoes" isn’t just a cringey phrase; it reflects a deeper cultural norm in all areas of male-centered societies. Where men cover for each other, even when the behavior crosses a line they know is wrong. Harmful actions get labelled as "boys being boys," and calling out a friend can feel like a betrayal not only to him but the brotherhood. As a result, men strategically downplay the risk posed by their peers, offering loyalty to protect the only group of people whose approval most affects their personal concept of self. Admitting that men, even those they know and admire, can be and are harmful to society means accepting a grim reality about themselves too. Even worse, might require them to accept the unwanted responsibility of holding each other accountable. And if there is one thing most men are not conditioned to do, it’s to inconvenience themselves for a cause that doesn’t directly benefit them.
Interestingly, many men can be fiercely protective of their daughters, partners, or sisters, but this protectiveness doesn’t always extend to women as a whole. They speak of newfound love and responsibility when they hold their children for the first time, as if danger only became real once they had a personal stake in the game. We might "aww" at this sentiment, but the reality it exposes is unsettling: that without a direct connection, many men rarely saw women’s or children´s safety as their concern. The threat of other men only becomes tangible when it could hit close to home, prompting action not solely out of empathy, but out of personal investment. The same men who laughed at off-color jokes, stayed silent when a friend crossed a line, or high-fived their buddies in moments of misogyny, overnight, can suddenly see the screaming red-flags when the risk of harm might affect their own blood. A part of themselves.
Follow the blind leader off the cliff
In many male-centered societies, even women internalize the ideals that men project about themselves. Many grow up believing that their lives, homes, communities, and countries are best led by men. That men are inherently more capable of making decisions for the collective good. Some women, conditioned by these narratives, become complicit in upholding and protecting the same patriarchy that oppresses them. They mistrust other women’s experiences, dismissing their frustration and desire for change as overreaction and threatening of divine order. It’s often easier for these women to direct skepticism and aggression toward fellow women than to confront the deeply ingrained and failed ideals that shape their worldview.
Yet, the home remains as a microcosm of greater society. The skills needed to manage a household, relationship building across sex and age, care, collaboration, and problem-solving, mirror those required to build and sustain thriving communities and nations. Still, these responsibilities are overwhelmingly shouldered by women, who are expected to keep the domestic sphere running smoothly. From a young age, girls are subtly trained for these roles. Doll play, helping with chores, and nurturing those around them are all rehearsals for the caregiving and emotional labor they will be expected to perform as adults. Long before they understand the weight of these expectations, they are prepared to place servitude above self-interest.
Meanwhile, boys in male-centered communities are raised with a singular focus: securing their place in male-dominated hierarchies. Rarely are they socialized for holistic community care and loyalty. Their play revolves around competition, conquest, and personal achievement. They grow up idolizing lone heroes, practicing fighting and destruction not to prepare for defending the vulnerable in the communities but as a means of asserting power. While girls are taught to imagine themselves as caregivers and keepers of relationships, boys are encouraged to pursue personal interests; cars, guns, trains, superheroes - reinforcing a sense of individualism over responsibility to others. At the end, one sex is raised to live for and sacrifice for the collective, while the other is conditioned to prioritize itself and those like it.
Despite most people witnessing these dynamics firsthand, many still cling to the belief that societies function better with men in charge, buying into the idealistic delusions we are made to believe about men in male-dominated societies. This allows us to act surprised to find ourselves in a world riddled with individualism, chaos, violence, competitiveness over collaboration, endless wars, and fragile male leaders driven by ego and grandiosity - each vying for more control, more power, more loyalty for themselves and their specific boys' club.
But how is this surprising? It’s the inevitable result of a system where ethics and morality are demanded of women while power and leadership are reserved for men. Women are tasked with fostering community, caring for others, and centering the collective good, yet they are excluded from the very positions that would benefit most from those qualities.
If we truly want a safer, more compassionate, and community-centered world, wouldn’t the best leaders be those trained from childhood to nurture and protect the collective? Shouldn’t the ideal candidate be the person who feels responsible for others, not out of personal gain or blood ties, but from a deep-rooted sense of duty to the well-being of all?
While men dream women act
Visit most impoverished, male-dominated parts of the world, and no matter the scarcity of resources, you will find women and girls bearing the daily burden of community survival. They fetch water, cook, clean, care for children, and tend to the elderly. They sell goods in markets, or even sell themselves, to ensure the vulnerable are fed, no matter the cost. In places where women have even less freedom under patriarchy, you may not see them outside at all. But they are not resting behind closed doors, indulging in leisure or self-interest. They are toiling in silence, performing the relentless, thankless labor that keeps homes and communities afloat.
Even when the worst disasters strike; famine, war, displacement, a woman’s duty does not cease. Starving women and girls cradle and share the care of weakening babies and elders, share what little they have to keep each other alive. Yet, even in these desperate conditions, they must fear not just hunger, death or disease but violence and sexual assault from the very men they struggle alongside. When the fabric of society frays, far too few men gather to figure out how to protect the vulnerable in their communities. Instead of rising to meet the crisis, many instead form tighter, more brutal gangs, preying on the vulnerable, exploiting chaos to serve their own interests. In the moments when care and responsibility are needed most, men’s loyalty often remains with each other, while women, too often, are left to defend what little remains of the community.
And yet, despite all of this, we still pray at the end of the day for the “good men” to save us from the “bad ones.” The creators of danger and its so-called protectors remain one and the same. But women are not blameless either- too many have internalized the belief that only men can rescue us, our families, our communities, and our nations.
A world created from reality instead of illusions
In a different world, boys and girls would be raised to embrace a healthy balance of community care and self-preservation. They would grow up understanding that a thriving society depends on nurturing whole, compassionate beings - that the health of a community is measured by the well-being of its most vulnerable. In this world, we would all recognize that safety, freedom and prosperity are collective responsibilities taught and practiced from a young age regardless of gender. When harm arises, we would find the courage to stand up and speak out, not because the person in danger is tied to us by blood or sex, but because the harmony and justice we want to live in demands it. Leadership would be entrusted to those who show consistent compassion, wisdom and a sense of duty rooted in sobering reality, not in ego or a hunger for power.
We would challenge the forces that stunt our communities’ growth and wellbeing even when those forces resemble us.
In an ideal world, the only loyalties we would pass down to our children regardless of sex, would be those towards justice, freedom, courage, compassion, honesty, and integrity.
But as we strive toward that future, we must confront our present reality. We must open our eyes to the true culprits behind so many of our struggles, fears, wars, and instability. We must ask ourselves how we arrived here and reckon with the roles we’ve all played in maintaining systems that make the world a playground for some and a burden for others.
The truth is, if it is the radical change we seek, reality has been screaming for generations but are we finally ready to listen, and respond radically differently? We must dare to choose courage over comfort, to abandon the delusion that those who have perpetuated the most social harm are the ones best equipped to lead us out of it.
Creating a better world is not the task of a chosen few, of a sex nor age-group, it is a full community effort and we all have a part to play.