On a daily basis, I spend precisely zero hours pondering men’s penile measurements. According to the New York Magazine’s new article, “The Big Little Penis Panic,” that may be because I do not have one, because apparently, men think about it exhaustively. 

The “panic” in question is men’s increasing insecurity regarding their size due to the manosphere trend of “looksmaxxing” and, lately, the possibility of women “catching print” of their size. My first thought upon seeing the article: How is it that men are instantly comforted by a reputable media outlet for their insecurity, while women’s problems take decades to receive the tiniest bit of attention? 

Currently, approximately 5% of health research and development focuses on women’s health. In previous decades, it was even less; treatments for non-gender-specific diseases and conditions were only tested on male subjects, disregarding side effects exclusive to women. To this day, in autism research, less than 10% of research participants are women, despite the industry being worth around $9 billion. 

Furthermore, endometriosis, a painful chronic condition, affects 190 million women of reproductive age worldwide; yet, it’s only valued at $1.97 billion. The funding increases exponentially for erectile dysfunction, male infertility and prostate cancer industries, despite these conditions affecting a similar percentage of men as endometriosis affects women. 

It appears highly unlikely that this systematic disparity between men’s and women’s issues is merely coincidental, especially considering women’s problems are not only ignored but also exploited and monetized. 

The beauty industry is worth $532 billion in total. Globally, the retinol anti-aging skincare industry is worth $1.02 billion, with women accounting for 68% of the market. Furthermore, women make up 85.7% of the global plastic surgery industry, which is worth $61 billion as of 2026. The trend appears to be that, for each insecurity a woman possesses, there are countless overpriced ways to treat and take advantage of it. 

The stark difference between the funding allocated to the beauty industry and the female healthcare industry invites us to question why. Unlike female healthcare, which solely serves women, the beauty industry was originally built around the notion of appearing more pleasing to the heterosexual male perspective that often reduces women to passive sexual objects for male viewing pleasure rather than beings of actual humanity or agency.

There is, therefore, an evident prioritization of women’s care that benefits the patriarchy over care that benefits women alone; we are seen as less important than our ability to please men.

It is important to note that these industries are not the root problem but rather the ripple effects of the fundamental issue: Women are an afterthought. Mundane systems that comprise the foundation of our society are designed primarily, if not entirely, with men in mind. There are so many examples of this phenomenon that it has even been given a name: the gender data gap. 

The gender data gap highlights disparities in the design of seat belts, CPR mannequins, spacesuits, military equipment, smartphones, sports attire, science gear, office spaces, and much more. 

To demonstrate in extent, before vehicles are authorized to hit the streets, they’re tested with crash test dummies: full-scale, instrumented models of the human body that assess a vehicle’s safety. However, only 5% of these dummies mimic the female body; as such, women are 17% more likely to die in car accidents due to insufficient safety testing. 

Moreover, to corroborate an earlier point, these new female dummies were introduced only recently, developed in 2022, 7 decades after the invention of the male dummy. One might ask, what provoked the change? Rather than a small realization, it came after years of pressure from researchers, advocates and campaigners who eventually forced institutions to consider women in a system that affected us all along. 

To clarify, the issue is not, and has never been, the attention given to men’s health or male-specific issues; everyone, regardless of their identity, deserves compassion and concern. The issue is that a man’s anxiety about the size of his penis automatically generates widespread cultural discussion while millions of women struggle and fight to have their chronic pain, medical conditions and safety concerns taken seriously. 

Society is way too comfortable with postponing female inclusion. The solution is not in adapting and accepting a world that disregards us or in waiting for slow, gradual change; it’s in pushing for it. Although it’s unfortunate that we still have to fight for what should be our inherent human rights in 2026, we must continue to do so so that one day our lives can be as valuable as men’s penises.