Soft power is much more relevant than hard power, and women are the ones who have the most power in society under this metric, not men

People usually point to the apex fallacy when discussions about power and patriarchy come up, but I think there's a much more important discussion to be had around soft power instead.

Even if men make up 60% of senators and 90% of CEOs, they represent fewer than 20% of people who have power at home, and only 16% of people who have custody over their children.

Women on average get their way socially, legally, at home, in the marriage and dating world, and in many other areas of life.

That represents a metric of power that is much more relevant to the vast majority of people. It is a form of power over your own life, and over the lives of other people who you know personally.

For example, 80% of relationships are controlled and dominated by women. Women also display much higher levels of social aggression and are more likely to get their way in gender mixed friends groups.

If men are being bossed around in their homes and have no say over their bodily autonomy, reproductive choices, or their own labor and financial future, then it doesn't really matter if they might have a measure of power at work.

In the end, whatever power they have publicly can be used and manipulated in private by other people.

The fact that men often hold formal positions of power in society may even be because other people push them there for their own benefit.

After all, it is preferable to be the wife of a CEO than to be a CEO yourself. The vast majority of wealthy women do not work, do not cook, do not clean, and often times don't even raise their own children.

Meanwhile the average CEO works 80 hours a week under stressful conditions and ultimately does not have any power when he comes home: his wife can leave him, take his money, his children, and continue her privileged lifestyle without him.

This is a rather bleak outlook despite being a "powerful CEO", which should make you wonder how much power a regular working man has.

Any analysis that fails to look at this is going to be fundamentally flawed.