Suggesting that high testosterone being correlated with higher rates of violence implies that men are " intrinsically less suited to productive participation in a post-industrial economy" is an enormous logical leap.

Higher testosterone I would guess (this is not my area of expertise so I emphasize "guess" here) is probably also correlated with higher competitiveness, leadership, and work drive, all perfectly suited for a post-industrial economy. Men are significantly more likely to pursue entrepreneurship and be competitive within companies (in fact studies show that the wage gap is the result of women prioritizing temporal flexibility, ie. greater work/life balance).

If you're going to suggest that men aren't suited to productive participation, you need to consider more variables than simply violence rates, which in practice is only relevant to a tiny fraction of the population.

There are absolutely intrinsic differences between men and women.

I think it is a valid question if men have gender specific challenges they face in modern society, economies, and cultures.

It is important to remember that the purpose of society is to serve men and women, not the other way around. If there is a problem, we should look at society with a critical lens to see if there are areas to reform to create a better fit.

Sure, men are probably always going to commit murder at a higher rate. That said, if men are depressed due to a lack of competitive and physical outlets, that is something worth consideration.

Black people have a higher murder rate than white people worldwide. That does not mean black people are more intrinsically violent than white people or "intrinsically less suited to productive participation in a post-industrial economy".

Often these problems are cause by systems we have set up rather than by innate character qualities.

Women aren't certainly more productive in a post industrialized economy. Its only due to government mandated favoritism and hand outs that women gain economic independence. After all, if the old claim of women doing more for less were true, no one would be forced to hire them. Any venture primarily manned by women fails for all the usual unmentionable reasons, and we have to pretend this isn't true. They sometimes say women are better represented in successful companies, but as with all consequences of regulatory capture, its more that they are able to carry the burden to suppress the competition.

I don't know if there's a causal link between testosterone and violence. I'm on feminizing HRT, so my T is lower than it used to be, and I still get angry about as much as I did before.

And I don't see a lot of trans men throwing rage tantrums when they increase their T.

Maybe the correlation appears after sampling bias - If men are bigger on average, they might feel safer acting violent than a smaller person.

my suspicion would be that male violence is linked very strongly to dating/sex/mating. though that's probably true for both genders. women w/ more inward domestic violence, men more violent against competitors.

In current society I suspect a man being abused by a woman is considered "a joke" (the words "man up" come to mind)

There is no reliable evidence that testosterone increases the propensity to violence in humans.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2019.104644

I read this and interpret this with "men communicate more with the body than with words", rather than "more violent". Yes the communication can be hostile.