Really, of course it isn't as simple as that. It is the social significance attached to "accesing" that small part. For the man their can be a sense of achievement and validation through being granted access. The destructive aspect flows from the associated social implications, not from the act. Arguably the question is about why we live in a society where validation can be gained in a way that also brings such risks. The validation is not only p associated with the confirmation of physical attractiveness- so highly praised today, but also it can be linked to validation as a person. This latter - self actualization - is one of the cornerstones of all our existential goals, so clearly worth risking a lot for. So, for me, aside from the short lived pleasure, which is not really worth destruction for, it is because the act and access is so tied up with much bigger existential goals thay seem to make the "prize" worth the risk.
one argument mighy be that thats what precedent demonstrates works best, another argument might be that since it controls them and the only way to show true/complete submission to it and by adjacency her is through letting it destroy them. I have striven to understand the exact reverse of that but feel Ik have taken that course about as far as it can go.