The article says literally fuckall about you. Here's the funny thing: on average, men are every bit as average as women. What the article says is that men are also more likely to rule harder and suck harder than women, but the men who suck harder are rarely even noticed.

The article basically points out that women are going to be underrepresented at the top the same as they're underrepresented at the bottom but being underrepresented at the top is held forth as social injustice while being underrepresented at the bottom is held forth as a consequence of the natural superiority of women. But you're too busy looking to feel victimized to notice.

The really stupid thing is that the article isn't even saying it should be this way. The article is saying "it's probably worth investigating how it came to be this way" and putting forth hypotheses.

Know what the article says? "Average dudes don't get laid." It then explores the societal results of that maxim. Is your existence second-rate? Well, statistically you're more likely to get laid - assuming we're both single.

We're not, though. I'm married. To a woman who was married before. To a guy who dropped out of college, didn't get a job, got addicted to pot and dropped out of life. That guy? out of the gene pool. I'll bet you didn't even know he existed - the fact that I'm my wife's second husband. He's so irrelevant to our life that we haven't even looked his ass up on Facebook. That guy? Not the norm. "Extraordinary." In a way you don't want to be.

A dude who can't get laid is a loser. A woman who can't get laid is a tragedy. The article explores what that means for CEOs and jazz musicians. But frankly, at this point if you want to take it personally I really can't stop you so go right ahead.