The part at the 3:45 mark in this video put me into a mood of somber contemplation-- in part because of how tragic it is that young people are getting brainwashed into this kind of worldview, and in equal measure because of how untrue it is.
Like everything the Left promotes, this model has it exactly backwards. "What are men good for?" Almost anything. "What are women good for?" Specific subsets of things which cater to their strengths. Disclaimer: All of these things are based on averages-- Bell Curve distributions. There are individual exceptions and outliers as in any statistical model, obviously.
Men are superior to women at anything physical. They have a spectacular advantage in terms of capacity to build muscle mass; they have superior reflexes; they have superior hand-eye coordination; they have better visual-spatial judgement; they have better muscle twitch tissue; their skeletal structures and ratios are more oriented towards running and jumping versus women's.
This is why women's sports are hilariously slow compared to men's teams. For example, in soccer women's teams routinely lose to high school boys outfits. In tennis, professional female players regularly admit to losing to their high school brothers in singles. The gap is that large between the sexes. Even in something less physical like "e-sports", women's teams are always terrible: bottom of the standings in everything.
What's interesting is that men are also much better at mental competitions. For example, in chess women aren't even remotely competitive with men. In "Jeopardy", the top players are essentially all men. In terms of scientific inventions and human progress even in the arts, men rule the roost. This is because there are substantially more male geniuses than female (and also way more low-IQ men than women: women have a straight Bell Curve, whereas men have stronger distributions at either pole).
In the business world, men typically make better leaders because they are more assertive, versus women who are more focused on being agreeable and having group harmony.
In terms of civics, men are net tax payers. Women are net tax receivers. Without men and the work they do, the system would collapse immediately. In the military, women are undesirable because their comparatively fragile bodies lack strength and are more likely to succumb to all manner of illnesses, such as urinary tract infections. Countries would be invaded instantly if not for the men protecting them.
Where women have an advantage over men is in terms of empathy. Men tend to be better systematizers, whereas women are usually superior empathisers. That's why men tend to flock to the sciences-- which they are both interested in and good at-- while women tend to migrate to people-centric fields such as marketing, HR, or nursing.
I even see this with my own two children: they are only a few years apart, and were raised identically, with equal access to and promotion of the same toys and materials. My daughter is interested in consuming stories with lots of interpersonal relationship stuff; by contrast my son is obsessed with numbers and outer space. There is no "right or wrong": just intrinsic differences typical of the sexes on display. And again, they are averages: my daughter was a faster swimmer than the same-age boys in her class, for instance (she also hits a phenomenal volley with the football).
If you're betting, the man will make the better engineer. The woman will make the better social worker. It's usually true, and it shows up in the data across the board, in every possible way. Incidentally, this is also why I think it's better for women typically to stay home with the children: her increased empathy is an advantage there. In turn, the father can assert some "tough love" to keep things in balance.
So young men should take heart, and not listen to this Left-wing drivel: it's not grounded in reality. And women such as those in this video should work to curtail their vanity: it's getting out of control.