In addition to pointing out broad flaws in early 20th-century American culture, Gilman satirizes men like Terry in particular. One example is in Chapter 5, when Terry insists that people must be incentivized to work through competition:
“No man would work unless he had to,” Terry declared.
“Oh, no man! You mean that is one of your sex distinctions?"
“No, indeed!” he said hastily. “No one, I mean, man or woman, would work without incentive. Competition is the—the motor power, you see.”
“It is not with us,” they explained gently, “so it is hard for us to understand. Do you mean, for instance, that with you no mother would work for her children without the stimulus of competition?”
The women of Herland have built a society that prizes cooperation above all else. Competition is rare there, and it is not what drives people to work. The men's teachers are confused when Terry claims that "No man would work unless he had to," assuming that he is describing one of the defining features of men. He tries to tell them that he is using "man" as a gender-neutral term, but this does not make sense to the women. If that is really the case, the mothers where Terry comes from must be callous and uncaring. By putting him in a position where he must defend the motivations of mothers, Gilman makes it clear that it is Terry specifically, and men like him, who won't work unless motivated by competition. Terry comes off looking both foolish and lazy.
It is possible to imagine this conversation as a proxy for one Gilman has been unable to have with men in her own life (at least on a public stage). Over and over, she places Terry in situations that demonstrate the limitations of his take on gender roles. In this instance, he shows himself to be severely limited in what he believes even men are capable of. Terry serves as the laughingstock of the book so that, by extension, readers are left laughing at the regressive ideology he represents. Gilman satirizes his character to insist on the possibility of a better world than he can imagine.
