I have been asked to write about the Baumeister Vohs paper that is receiving great attention here on teh interwebz.
But, not to sound lazy, what else needs to be said? Roissy has written a great piece, and so has Mangan, but it's simply a recap of what we already know.
The Manosphere has been writing about this for quite some, it's just until now an official academic paper has been made of it. If anything the fact the paper came to the exact same conclusions we did confirms that our non-academic methods were logical, reasonable, accurate and above all else correct. (And that's without official training in academic research!)
The paper confirms many things that have been noted in the past.
1. Men are the primary engine of economic growth as women reward economic growth (meaning riches and success) with courtship/access to sex/etc., etc.. And a logical deduction from this is that if an enemy wishes to destroy a country via its economy one of the most effective methods is to socially destroy the quality and caliber of women so men no longer wish to work hard.
2. Men, by default, are also the builders of society. Yes there is the occasional woman that does build up her own company and achieve similar institution/legacy building as men, but by far men are the founders. The majority of "advances" made by women have had to come as charity or permission within the currently existing structure. Though there is nothing stopping women from going and doing things on their own (and we even encourage them through various sorts of means such as affirmative action and an encouraging media and social environment) they simply CHOOSE not to. - ie they typically, though not always, will continue to choose easy careers, usually at the subsidy of the state instead of build something of practical economic worth.
3. We knew the relationship between men and women is best explained using an economic model where the currencies and commodities are sex, attention and security. Some elements of biology are obvious to this explanation, but only faux-academians with an evil and malicious political agenda could spend damn well near 40 years forcing the entire population to believe in a political explanation, even if it wasn't based in reality, and even if it destroyed and ruined generations of young men and women. Additionally, didn't I just write a post saying the battle between the Manosphere and feminism is the forefront of the battle between liberty and communism, and thus the cutting edge of economics?
4. We are not sexists, misogynists or bigots in any fashion. We are realists. We are merely fighting against an established and entrenched political and parasitic agenda that aims to profit off of others by criminalizing and punishing statements and observations of truth between the sexes, by claiming such statements and observations of truth result in a "victimhood" or "oppression" warranting the transfer of wealth to the political parasites.
Now, by no means is this to dismiss or lessen the importance of the work done by Dr.'s Baumeister and Vohs. It is a cap in our feathers to have an official study and data confirm our observations. My point is why do we have to wait until an official study comes out to confirm what we already know through human intuition and observation? Why does it take society 4 decades to point out facts and truth, or better yet, why is society so afraid of facts and truth? And why do such purveyors of truth get socially ostracized for pointing out the truth? Consequences or not, I'm pointing out the emperor has no clothes because I am sick and tired of tip-toeing around eggshells that communists and tyrants have laid around my feet. Life's too damn short and too damn valuable.