> You're making an argument to make better men, but your method is victimize weak boys instead.
Unfortunately, even weak males are a physical threat to females. The difference in upper body strength is that stark. So if you're trying to split society along some line to reduce the problem of physical aggression, gender is not a bad place to do it.
(Add more lines, and you'd end up with a system more akin to boxing weight classes, which would be more than a bit ridiculous. It's way better to invest in enforcement of very rigid norms against physical abuse.)
Unfortunately, even weak males are a physical threat to females. The difference in upper body strength is that stark. So if you're trying to split society along some line to reduce the problem of physical aggression, gender is not a bad place to do it.
(Add more lines, and you'd end up with a system more akin to boxing weight classes, which would be more than a bit ridiculous. It's way better to invest in enforcement of very rigid norms against physical abuse.)