Chapter 5: Disposable Men: The Utility Trap
Chapter 5: Disposable Men: The Utility Trap
The Truth is She Hates You: How Society Shamed Men into Slavery
In today’s society, men are seen not as individuals with their own intrinsic worth but as tools to be used for their utility. The value of a man is measured by what he can provide: his labor, his protection, his resources. And when he is no longer useful, he is discarded without a second thought. This is the essence of the utility trap—an insidious system in which men are conditioned from a young age to believe that their worth is tied entirely to what they can do for others, not who they are as people.
The notion that men are disposable is deeply embedded in Western culture. From the workplace to relationships, from the family unit to the military, men are expected to sacrifice themselves for the greater good. Whether it’s working themselves to death in physically demanding jobs or risking their lives in wars that they didn’t start, men are taught that their duty is to serve, and once they can no longer fulfill that duty, they are cast aside.
This chapter will explore how men are trapped by their utility, how society manipulates them into believing their only value is in service to others, and how this mentality is leading to widespread disillusionment, burnout, and even despair among modern men. We will also examine how this concept of disposability is driving more and more men to opt out of traditional roles in search of a life where they are valued for more than just their ability to provide.
The Conditioning Begins Early
The conditioning of men to view themselves as disposable starts in childhood. From a young age, boys are taught that their primary role in life is to be providers and protectors. Whether it’s through family expectations, societal norms, or media portrayals, boys grow up internalizing the idea that their value lies in their ability to serve others.
In school, boys are encouraged to be tough, to compete, and to prove their worth through achievement. Emotional vulnerability is discouraged, and boys quickly learn that showing weakness is not acceptable. While girls are often nurtured and given space to express their feelings, boys are taught to bottle up their emotions, focusing instead on performing, achieving, and preparing themselves to one day "take on the world."
This early conditioning is reinforced by the stories boys consume through popular culture. In movies, TV shows, and video games, the male hero is almost always a figure of strength, self-sacrifice, and stoicism. He is expected to face danger, endure pain, and save the day—often at great personal cost. The male protagonist is rarely allowed to show vulnerability, and his success is measured by how much he can endure for others, not by his personal happiness or well-being.
This sets the stage for a lifetime of conditioning. As boys grow into men, they internalize the belief that their worth is tied to their utility. They become providers, protectors, and workers, sacrificing their own needs and desires for the good of their families, their employers, and society at large. And, like the heroes they grew up idolizing, they often do so without expecting or receiving any recognition for their sacrifices.
The Burden of Being a Provider
One of the clearest manifestations of the utility trap is the expectation that men will serve as the primary providers for their families. Even in the modern era, where women have more opportunities than ever before to pursue careers and achieve financial independence, the burden of providing still falls disproportionately on men.
This expectation is deeply ingrained in cultural norms and social expectations. Men who are unable or unwilling to fulfill the role of provider are often stigmatized as failures. Society views a man’s success through the lens of his ability to provide material wealth, stability, and security for his family. A man who cannot provide is seen as less of a man, regardless of the circumstances that led to his situation.
The pressure to provide takes a heavy toll on men. Many men feel trapped in jobs they hate, working long hours in stressful environments just to make ends meet. They sacrifice their health, their personal time, and often their relationships in the pursuit of financial stability. The stress of being the sole or primary breadwinner leads to higher rates of burnout, mental health issues, and even suicide among men.
This burden is compounded by the fact that, in many cases, men are expected to provide without having a say in how their resources are used. In traditional family structures, men are often the financial providers, but women are the ones who make many of the decisions about how the family’s money is spent. Men are expected to hand over their earnings without question, even if they have little to no control over the family’s financial priorities.
This dynamic is particularly evident in divorce cases, where men are frequently required to continue providing for their ex-wives and children through alimony and child support, even after the relationship has ended. The family court system overwhelmingly favors women in these cases, treating men as nothing more than financial providers whose primary role is to continue supporting their families from a distance.
The Military: Sacrifice Without Recognition
The idea of men as disposable is perhaps most starkly illustrated in the way society treats men in the military. For centuries, men have been expected to fight and die in wars, often for causes that they had no hand in shaping. The military has long been a place where men are expected to sacrifice everything—their time, their health, and even their lives—for the sake of their country.
The glorification of male sacrifice in the military is deeply ingrained in Western culture. From a young age, boys are taught to idolize soldiers, viewing them as the ultimate embodiment of masculine strength and duty. The message is clear: a real man is willing to lay down his life for the greater good, and doing so is the highest form of honor.
But what happens to these men when their service is no longer needed? For many veterans, the answer is bleak. Once they return from the battlefield, they often find themselves discarded by the very society they fought to protect. Mental health issues like PTSD are rampant among veterans, yet many struggle to access the care and support they need. Homelessness among veterans is a well-documented issue, and countless men who once served their country are now left to fend for themselves, forgotten and ignored.
The military’s treatment of men as disposable extends beyond those who serve in active combat. Men are expected to be the first to sign up for the draft, the first to be deployed in times of crisis, and the first to risk their lives on the front lines. Women, on the other hand, are given a choice—they can serve if they want to, but they are not required to. This disparity reflects the broader societal view that men’s lives are inherently less valuable than women’s, and that men’s primary role is to sacrifice themselves for the greater good.
The Workplace: Risk and Reward
The disposable nature of men is also evident in the workplace, where men are overwhelmingly represented in dangerous and physically demanding jobs. From construction and mining to law enforcement and firefighting, men are the ones who take on the most hazardous roles, often risking their lives to keep society functioning.
These jobs are not glamorous, nor are they particularly well-compensated. Men who work in these industries are often exposed to dangerous conditions, long hours, and high levels of physical and mental stress. Yet, despite the risks they take, they are rarely recognized for their contributions. Instead, they are expected to quietly do their jobs and accept the dangers that come with them, all while society turns a blind eye to the sacrifices they make.
This dynamic is exacerbated by the fact that men are often passed over for safer, more lucrative jobs in favor of women, thanks to diversity initiatives and gender quotas. While men are expected to take on the riskiest jobs, women are fast-tracked into leadership positions and office roles that offer more security and higher pay. This creates a situation where men are stuck in dangerous jobs with little opportunity for advancement, while women benefit from preferential treatment in safer, more desirable fields.
The workplace is just another area where men are valued for their utility but not for their humanity. As long as they can continue performing their roles, they are tolerated. But the moment they can no longer meet the demands of the job—whether due to injury, burnout, or age—they are discarded and replaced by the next man willing to take on the risk.
Emotional Labor: The Invisible Burden
The utility trap is not limited to physical labor. Men are also expected to perform emotional labor, often without recognition or support. In relationships, men are frequently expected to be the emotional rock, providing stability and reassurance to their partners, even when they themselves are struggling.
The concept of emotional labor refers to the work involved in managing emotions and maintaining relationships. In many modern relationships, men are expected to provide emotional support to their partners, helping them navigate their feelings and offering solutions to their problems. However, men are rarely given the same level of support in return. Society expects men to be emotionally self-sufficient, to handle their problems on their own, and to remain stoic in the face of adversity.
This dynamic is particularly evident in marriages and long-term relationships, where men are often expected to be the primary source of emotional support for their wives or girlfriends. Men are conditioned to believe that their role is to provide, protect, and fix problems, while their partners are encouraged to express their feelings and seek emotional validation. This creates an unbalanced relationship where men are constantly giving emotional energy without receiving much in return.
The toll of this emotional labor is significant. Many men feel emotionally isolated, unable to share their struggles or express vulnerability for fear of being seen as weak. The expectation that men must always be strong and in control leads to higher rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide among men. Yet, despite the emotional burden they carry, men are rarely recognized for the emotional labor they perform. Instead, they are expected to bear it silently, just as they do with their physical labor.
The Rejection of Male Vulnerability
One of the most damaging aspects of the utility trap is society’s rejection of male vulnerability. Men are conditioned to believe that they must always be strong, that admitting weakness or asking for help is a sign of failure. This mentality is reinforced by cultural norms, media portrayals, and even the way men are treated by those closest to them.
When men do express vulnerability, they are often met with ridicule or indifference. Society tells men to "man up" and deal with their problems on their own. This rejection of male vulnerability creates a toxic environment where men feel unable to seek help or express their emotions, leading to a sense of isolation and despair.
This dynamic is particularly harmful in relationships, where men are expected to be the emotional rock for their partners but are not given the same level of support in return. When men do open up about their feelings, they are often dismissed or told to "get over it." This creates a situation where men are trapped in a cycle of emotional repression, unable to express their true selves for fear of being judged or rejected.
The rejection of male vulnerability is not just a personal issue—it is a societal one. By conditioning men to believe that they must always be strong and self-sufficient, society reinforces the idea that men are disposable, valued only for their utility and not for their humanity. This mentality leads to a culture where men are expected to sacrifice themselves for others, without ever being given the opportunity to express their own needs or desires.
The Passport Bros: Escaping the Utility Trap
Faced with the overwhelming pressures of the utility trap, more and more men are choosing to opt out of the system altogether. The rise of the Passport Bros movement—men who leave Western countries in search of a life where they are valued for more than just their ability to provide—is a direct response to the disposability of men in modern society.
These men are seeking out countries where traditional gender roles are still respected, where men are valued for their contributions, and where they are not treated as disposable tools. In these cultures, men are often seen as partners and leaders, not just providers and protectors. The Passport Bros movement represents a rejection of the Western model of male disposability and a search for a life where men can find fulfillment, respect, and a sense of purpose.
The Passport Bros are not running away from responsibility—they are running toward a life where they are valued for who they are, not just what they can do. They are rejecting the idea that their worth is tied to their utility and embracing a new model of masculinity, one that values emotional connection, personal fulfillment, and mutual respect.
Conclusion: Breaking Free from the Utility Trap
The utility trap is one of the most insidious forces shaping modern men’s lives. From a young age, men are conditioned to believe that their worth is tied to their ability to provide, protect, and sacrifice. They are taught that their value lies in their utility, and once that utility is no longer needed, they are discarded.
But men are not tools. They are not disposable. They are human beings with their own needs, desires, and emotions. Breaking free from the utility trap requires men to reject the societal expectations that have been placed upon them and to seek out a life where they are valued for who they are, not just what they can do.
This journey is not easy, but it is essential. Men must begin to recognize their own worth, to demand respect and recognition for their contributions, and to seek out relationships and environments where they are valued for more than just their utility. Only by breaking free from the utility trap can men begin to live lives of fulfillment, purpose, and true freedom.
Are You a Free Subscriber?
Want More? Unlock Exclusive Content Today! You’re just scratching the surface. Paid members get:
2+ Weekly Articles
Full Archive Access
Exclusive Guides & Podcasts Upgrade now and dive deeper into the content that matters most!
Upgrade now and dive deeper into the content that matters most!
Great post. I became "MGTOW" in the last millennium, about 30 years ago, mid-90's, long before the acronym even existed. When I first heard of MGTOW I began to follow its social media pioneers, and they were telling me everything I already knew, but some of which I had not put in words to myself. There were very few of us; just thousands in the entire world. Today we may indirectly be 63% according to one statistic I heard recently regarding the proportion of men NOT interested in a relationship at all.
But there are problems within MGTOW, however, which I intend to write about in my Philosophical Emergency book soon. The biggest one is religious, political and ideological polarization that don't belong in the movement. I, for one, I'm neither religious, nor conservative, nor a huge believer in "nuclear family", nor even a believer in monogamy; but the tendency in MGTOW today is people trying to align it to their other prejudices, whatever they may be.
For me, the essence worth preserving is the insult and the injury done to men, the toxic "empowerment" of women, and our walking away. Nothing else, whether religious, political or ideological needs to be mixed into it.
And the analysis of the origin of this social disease needs to be looked at with philosophical depth and scientific breadth. One very common mistake people make, for example, is to draw a sharp distinction between first and second- or third-wave feminism, and point fingers one way but not the other. When I was a toddler in Buenos Aires, in the early 1960's, my mother, who was a first wave secret reader, used to whisper venom in my ear about my gentle, knowledgeable and hard-working father. Occasionally she whispered in my ear that some day women will rule the world, and will keep only a small male population in cages just for reproduction purposes. It NEVER was about equality. NEVER. And among the details on its origin, late David Rockefeller's confession to a reporter, that he had commissioned the books, so as to have women work and pay taxes, should be looked at. I don't think George Soros is an accident; I think there's a whole secret history of organized chaos involved. So, women were duped into this ideology of fighting an imaginary "Patriarchy" precisely by the only real patriarchy.