I'm not sure the word "trained" is that appropriate. The last handful of generations of men have been failed by their male elders in terms of learning how to s

I'm not sure the word "trained" is that appropriate. The last handful of generations of men have been failed by their male elders in terms of learning how to successfully interact with women, or so much as how to do basic home repair. To say that men adapt to push for what they want makes more sense because either they figure it out or they don't. The need to take initiative with women is not a figment. > I can’t help but wonder if we’d be better off if we got rid of this dynamic. The vast majority men don't push, at least not in a way that is predatory. To further disarm men over the small minority of predatory (and possibly more reproductively successful) men would not be helpful even to women. > Like if we expected men and women to both initiate instead of women being taught to wait for men to pursue them. Good luck with that. This completely dismisses women as actual physical beings with their own behaviors and interests as opposed to a figment. Why exactly would women not wait for men to pursue them? Women only have so many opportunities to bear children, whereas men can theoretically impregnate 100s of women for the 9 months that a single woman is pregnant. What incentive does a woman have to give away her eggs to men who don't go out of their way to show they are willing to commit? What incentive do women have when the sexual encounters are far more available to them than the other way around on average? If a man doesn't have the courage to go up against all odds, including her initial rejection of him, then how likely will he succeed at defending her while she's pregnant and vulnerable? Not only is there no incentive for women to pursue men, but they've not had this incentive for millions of years. Some part of that dynamic is baked, as is the male propensity for violence.