August 2011

The industrial jobs traditionally favored by men have been disappearing, and their replacements have been creative, networking, and knowledge-based jobs, at which women tend to excel. Women now predominate in higher education. At colleges and universities they outnumber men, earn better GPAs, and receive more advanced degrees. After thousands of years of dominance, men now seem like they may be a gender in decline.

But is that so? And what does it mean for public policy? How should we respond to these trends in the areas of education, employment policy, and family law? Lead essayist Kay Hymowitz is the author of the recent book Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men into Boys. She connects the dots for us and suggests an “existential explanation” — men are less likely to be married these days, and marriage is what turns an underachieving boy into an overachieving man.

Is her explanation right? Or some other one? And if so, what do we do? We’ve invited three experts to discuss Hymowitz’s ideas and their implications for public policy. They are Jessica Bennett of Newsweek, Amanda Hess of GOOD magazine, and philosopher/author Myriam Miedzian.

 

Print entire issue

Lead Essay

  • Kay Hymowitz connects several worrisome trends: Men underperform women in high school and college. Men are going to college less altogether, even at many elite schools. Men are often less likely than similarly situated women to own a home. Men earn fewer graduate degrees and are underrepresented in the new, knowledge-based economy. Hymowitz suggests three possible causes for the decline of men: the decline of the industrial economy; girls’ superiority in the context of traditional educational methods; and a third, “existential reason” — men are increasingly deprived of marriage, and thus of a key motivator to male achievement. Public policy implications may vary depending on which cause one finds most important, but they might range from pedagogical reforms to government incentives for marriage and family.

Response Essays

  • Jessica Bennett characterizes the decline of men as both “exaggerated” and sometimes “plain wrong.” Women have made great strides, but the pay gap persists across occupations, even after controlling for children and education. The recent recession has been difficult for men, but at least they’ve bounced back in the recovery; women haven’t. Elaborate concern about masculinity at best hides enduring inequality—and at worst blames women for a lengthy set of non-problems.

  • Amanda Hess argues that not much has changed for men in recent years. Juvenile behavior among adult men is nothing new; it’s part and parcel of male privilege, and it has been that way for many years. Likewise with men who underachieve in school yet go on to high-status careers, owing mostly to their networking with other men. The reason for male dominance? The Old Boys’ Club, which has never truly left us.

  • Myriam Miedzian considers the 1960s, the era that formed the parents of many of today’s underperforming men. For a generation of women, second-wave feminism opened the job market, while the 1960s “do your own thing” ethos meant educational and career success. For the same generation of men, education and career meant conformity; “do your own thing” meant having fun. Miedzian points to a wide variety of other cultural trends in a far-reaching response, but ultimately concludes that we have failed men in two ways—by placing sports and conflict ahead of study and communication, at least for them; and by culturally shutting them off from traditionally female traits, like nurture and care, and the careers associated with these traits.