They're not a homogenous group of people, so I can't hate all of them, but here's a gist of what we don't like.
Most Helpful Guy
It would sure be easier to have asexual reproduction - less stress.
And have an "IT" gender and that's it.
But genetical diversity would plummet.
Any change in environment would drive us extinct.
The downside to this is the sexual competition. Problem is we now have removed all checks and balances and are spiralling downwards towards animalistic instincts.
There are two sexual selection methods:
- full monogamy where there is a pair and while not happy 100% the couple has stability, hence the name NUCLEAR family ( the nucleus is stable )
- what we have today where we got the tournament style sexual competition.
The best men can breed with hundreds of women and the unappealing ones do not.
Of course the downside to this is that said men see no incentive to invest their energy in someone else' off-spring AND/OR invest in society.
So we see them drop out;
school, jobs, etc
The desire of women for total liberation has - ironically - liberated men of all constraints to care for said women.
And society cannot function without one gender sadly, no matter how many books we see about "the end of men".
Of course if we create thinking machines then i suppose most men can be killed off and only the 10% that are desired can be kept as breeding stock.