There is much work being done about the nature of masculinities; in fact, the research is starting to shape not a mere trickle of a stream, but the full flow of a substantial river.
Here are some notes from one of the essays in a new book entitled, Brothers Keepers, New Perspectives on Jewish Masculinities. The writers of the essay, Michael C. Reichert and Sharon M. Ravitch are conducting a review of the literature.
Methods and perspectives developed within men's studies--what Connell and Messerschmidt (2005) characterize as "ethnographic realism"--offered helpful tools and perspectives with which to explore boys' actual experience of boyhood. To grasp the actual nature of boys' lives and the day-to-day nature of their opportunities and pressures, researchers now understood that the masculine dimension of their experiences had to be discerned:the peer pressure and incitements, institutional norms, rewards and recognitional systems, family and school tacit man-making curricula, and structured world of opportunity as it is typically offered to boys. For too long, gendered developmental paths for boys had been imperceptible.
These tools and perspectives encouraged "voice centered" methodologies in work with boys, which have helped researchers to hear boys' stories about the costs of the masculine identity process. In particular, a worrisome picture of the restrictive force of the dominant form of masculinity has emerged: "It is exclusive, anxiety-provoking, internal and hierarchically differentiated, brutal and violent." (Donaldson, 1985, p.646) Our own and a great deal of other research on boys' lives has established that boys' encounters with this dominant form of masculinity are unavoidable and often painful (Connell, n1989; Martino, 1999,2008; Reichert, 2001; Reichert and Kuriloff, 2003: Reichert, Stoudy & Kuriloff, 2006, Stoudt, 2006).This dominant form of masculinity and its ideals are promoted through valorization and institutionalized endorsement--accompanied by potent reward and recognitional systems--and are enforced by violence, bullying, and even ongoing threat. For a boy not to make some accommodation or show at least public complicity with the privileged identity invites substantial reaction, usually in the form of admonishment, exclusion and peer policing. Ultimately, most boys and men square themselves with society's central ideas about manhood as much to realize their benefits, especially in terms of recognition and reward--the patriarchal dividend--as to avoid the punishments meted out to dissenters (Connell, 1995, p.79)
In many key developmental areas boys' accommodation to this masculine ideal reveals its distorting effect. For example, in terms of basic health outcomes, Waldron (1976),the U.S. Preventive Services Task Froce (1996), and Courtnay (2003) all found that boys' choices and lifestyle practices imperil them at far greater rates than those of females. Broks and Silverstein (1995), Pleck, Sonenstein, and Ku (1994) and Pleck (1995) determined that the greater the boy's conformity to narrow ideas about masculinity, the more likely he is to take risks related to alcohol use, drunk driving, and drug abuse. Similarly, in relation to mental health outcomes, O'Neil, Good and Holmes (1995) compiled stunning testimony over many years to the detrimental effects--in terms of self-esteem, depression, anxiety violence, and relationship success--of restrictive masculine norms. These damaging contrainsts take effect quite early in boys' lives, according to the work of Chu (2000), who studied elementary-age boys and found them to be sensitive to the cultural demands of masculinity, making deliberate compromises in personal authenticity to avoid going against the grain of masculine norms. The author felt that compromises were forced on her research subjects by the tacit and ever-present masculine pressures of school and community life, resulting in a loss of both voice and opportunity. Finally, and perhaps most problematic for societies, a strong relationship exists between these same male norms and uncivil behavior. Boys far more commonly than girls engage in behaviors that increase the risk of disease, injury, and death to themselves and others; they carry weapons more often, engage in pohysiucal fights more often, wear their seat belts less often, drive drunk more frequently, have more sexual partners as we as more unprotected sex, and use alcohol or drugs more often before sex (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006).(p.19-20)
Programs in schools and religious institutions that attempt to teach and inculcate healthy and positive traits in males, whether based on values or on skills come up against the acculturation of these young men.
Schools have struggled with their historic, embedded, "hidden" masculinity curricula, discovering that boys are learning from their experience of near-Darwinian school cultures much more effectively than they learn from any didactic programs (Berkowitz, 2002; Conell, 1996; Reichert, 2001; Reichert & Hawley, 2006; Swain, 2005). Poor school achievement, disciplinary problems, overdiagnosis and over -referral to special educational services, athletic over-injury, bullying, peer harassment, and school violence are some of the issues that raise concerns about the effectiveness of schooling for boys. Religions and cultures across society struggle with boys. Put simply, male adolescents in every religion included in a recent large study showed up less often and dropped out more dramatically (Smith & Denton, 2005)
Friday, January 25, 2013
Tuesday, January 15, 2013
US20 something's make dating obsolete...tragically
The End of Courtship
By Alex Williams, New York Times, January 11, 2013
Instead of dinner-and-a-movie, which seems as obsolete as a rotary phone, they rendezvous over phone texts, Facebook posts, instant messages and other “non-dates” that are leaving a generation confused about how to land a boyfriend or girlfriend.
“The new date is ‘hanging out,’ ” said Denise Hewett, 24, an associate television producer in Manhattan, who is currently developing a show about this frustrating new romantic landscape. As one male friend recently told her: “I don’t like to take girls out. I like to have them join in on what I’m doing — going to an event, a concert.” ...
Blame the much-documented rise of the “hookup culture” among young people, characterized by spontaneous, commitment-free (and often, alcohol-fueled) romantic flings. Many students today have never been on a traditional date, said Donna Freitas, who has taught religion and gender studies at Boston University and Hofstra and is the author of the forthcoming book, “The End of Sex: How Hookup Culture is Leaving a Generation Unhappy, Sexually Unfulfilled, and Confused About Intimacy.”
Hookups may be fine for college students, but what about after, when they start to build an adult life? The problem is that “young people today don’t know how to get out of hookup culture,” Ms. Freitas said. In interviews with students, many graduating seniors did not know the first thing about the basic mechanics of a traditional date. “They’re wondering, ‘If you like someone, how would you walk up to them? What would you say? What words would you use?’ ” Ms. Freitas said....
Relationship experts point to technology as another factor in the upending of dating culture.
Traditional courtship — picking up the telephone and asking someone on a date — required courage, strategic planning and a considerable investment of ego (by telephone, rejection stings). Not so with texting, e-mail, Twitter or other forms of “asynchronous communication,” as techies call it. In the context of dating, it removes much of the need for charm; it’s more like dropping a line in the water and hoping for a nibble.
“I’ve seen men put more effort into finding a movie to watch on Netflix Instant than composing a coherent message to ask a woman out,” said Anna Goldfarb, 34, an author and blogger in Moorestown, N.J. A typical, annoying query is the last-minute: “Is anything fun going on tonight?” More annoying still are the men who simply ping, “Hey” or “ ’sup.”
“What does he think I’m doing?” she said. “I’m going to my friend’s house to drink cheap white wine and watch episodes of ‘Dance Moms’ on demand.”
Online dating services, which have gained mainstream acceptance, reinforce the hyper-casual approach by greatly expanding the number of potential dates. Faced with a never-ending stream of singles to choose from, many feel a sense of “FOMO” (fear of missing out), so they opt for a speed-dating approach — cycle through lots of suitors quickly.
That also means that suitors need to keep dates cheap and casual. A fancy dinner? You’re lucky to get a drink.
“It’s like online job applications, you can target many people simultaneously — it’s like darts on a dart board, eventually one will stick,” said Joshua Sky, 26, a branding coordinator in Manhattan, describing the attitudes of many singles in their 20s. The mass-mailer approach necessitates “cost-cutting, going to bars, meeting for coffee the first time,” he added, “because you only want to invest in a mate you’re going to get more out of.”
If we needed more evidence that we live in a transactional culture, here is a truckload.
"Asynchronous communications" remove most of the risk, both of the person wishing to invite another out, and of the recipient of such an invite. Neither has to "commit" even so much as a couple of hours of conversation face-to-face over a table in a restaurant, for example. As one young woman quoted later in the Williams piece puts it to this effect, I will not accept an invitation, unless he is prepared to make a formal request, a formal commitment and a formal expression of interest in spending time with me.
Economic insecurity, job security, hook-up's in college, and of course, the ubiquitous twitter, facebook etc....rationalizes a refusal to "relate"....and if this is a twenty-something phenomenon, one hopes that, if and when this generation finally decides to "commit" to a life partner, they will find either the appropriate dating service, or a mutual friend who takes the stop of making the introductions.
Trawling for a nibble on a fishing line, when one hopes to land another human being to spend quality time with is about as realistic as planting a quarter in the backyard and expecting a tree of gold leaves that can be converted to gold bars to blossom on that spot. It's never going to happen.
And the men who are participating in this charade are insulting their own confidence and capacity to relate, and the women whose company they seek. To be sure, there will be awkward moments, awkward expressions, and even awkward and inexplicable emotions and that is an important part of the getting-to-know both the self and the other that is essential preparation for a life with a partner.
Refusing to risk those awkward moments is to refuse to risk making mistakes, mistakes that could and would serve as a kind of informal learning curve for these young men.
And women, too, will not escape similar awkward moments should they dip their "toes" into the water of one-to-one conversation, as a integral component in their maturing.
And where are the parents?
Have they left the playing field exclusively to these young men and women whose canvas is still uncluttered with the colours of embarrassment, vulnerability, intimacy and rejection in a private and potentially life-giving and/or crushing experience.
By Alex Williams, New York Times, January 11, 2013
Instead of dinner-and-a-movie, which seems as obsolete as a rotary phone, they rendezvous over phone texts, Facebook posts, instant messages and other “non-dates” that are leaving a generation confused about how to land a boyfriend or girlfriend.
“The new date is ‘hanging out,’ ” said Denise Hewett, 24, an associate television producer in Manhattan, who is currently developing a show about this frustrating new romantic landscape. As one male friend recently told her: “I don’t like to take girls out. I like to have them join in on what I’m doing — going to an event, a concert.” ...
Blame the much-documented rise of the “hookup culture” among young people, characterized by spontaneous, commitment-free (and often, alcohol-fueled) romantic flings. Many students today have never been on a traditional date, said Donna Freitas, who has taught religion and gender studies at Boston University and Hofstra and is the author of the forthcoming book, “The End of Sex: How Hookup Culture is Leaving a Generation Unhappy, Sexually Unfulfilled, and Confused About Intimacy.”
Hookups may be fine for college students, but what about after, when they start to build an adult life? The problem is that “young people today don’t know how to get out of hookup culture,” Ms. Freitas said. In interviews with students, many graduating seniors did not know the first thing about the basic mechanics of a traditional date. “They’re wondering, ‘If you like someone, how would you walk up to them? What would you say? What words would you use?’ ” Ms. Freitas said....
Relationship experts point to technology as another factor in the upending of dating culture.
Traditional courtship — picking up the telephone and asking someone on a date — required courage, strategic planning and a considerable investment of ego (by telephone, rejection stings). Not so with texting, e-mail, Twitter or other forms of “asynchronous communication,” as techies call it. In the context of dating, it removes much of the need for charm; it’s more like dropping a line in the water and hoping for a nibble.
“I’ve seen men put more effort into finding a movie to watch on Netflix Instant than composing a coherent message to ask a woman out,” said Anna Goldfarb, 34, an author and blogger in Moorestown, N.J. A typical, annoying query is the last-minute: “Is anything fun going on tonight?” More annoying still are the men who simply ping, “Hey” or “ ’sup.”
“What does he think I’m doing?” she said. “I’m going to my friend’s house to drink cheap white wine and watch episodes of ‘Dance Moms’ on demand.”
Online dating services, which have gained mainstream acceptance, reinforce the hyper-casual approach by greatly expanding the number of potential dates. Faced with a never-ending stream of singles to choose from, many feel a sense of “FOMO” (fear of missing out), so they opt for a speed-dating approach — cycle through lots of suitors quickly.
That also means that suitors need to keep dates cheap and casual. A fancy dinner? You’re lucky to get a drink.
“It’s like online job applications, you can target many people simultaneously — it’s like darts on a dart board, eventually one will stick,” said Joshua Sky, 26, a branding coordinator in Manhattan, describing the attitudes of many singles in their 20s. The mass-mailer approach necessitates “cost-cutting, going to bars, meeting for coffee the first time,” he added, “because you only want to invest in a mate you’re going to get more out of.”
If we needed more evidence that we live in a transactional culture, here is a truckload.
"Asynchronous communications" remove most of the risk, both of the person wishing to invite another out, and of the recipient of such an invite. Neither has to "commit" even so much as a couple of hours of conversation face-to-face over a table in a restaurant, for example. As one young woman quoted later in the Williams piece puts it to this effect, I will not accept an invitation, unless he is prepared to make a formal request, a formal commitment and a formal expression of interest in spending time with me.
Economic insecurity, job security, hook-up's in college, and of course, the ubiquitous twitter, facebook etc....rationalizes a refusal to "relate"....and if this is a twenty-something phenomenon, one hopes that, if and when this generation finally decides to "commit" to a life partner, they will find either the appropriate dating service, or a mutual friend who takes the stop of making the introductions.
Trawling for a nibble on a fishing line, when one hopes to land another human being to spend quality time with is about as realistic as planting a quarter in the backyard and expecting a tree of gold leaves that can be converted to gold bars to blossom on that spot. It's never going to happen.
And the men who are participating in this charade are insulting their own confidence and capacity to relate, and the women whose company they seek. To be sure, there will be awkward moments, awkward expressions, and even awkward and inexplicable emotions and that is an important part of the getting-to-know both the self and the other that is essential preparation for a life with a partner.
Refusing to risk those awkward moments is to refuse to risk making mistakes, mistakes that could and would serve as a kind of informal learning curve for these young men.
And women, too, will not escape similar awkward moments should they dip their "toes" into the water of one-to-one conversation, as a integral component in their maturing.
And where are the parents?
Have they left the playing field exclusively to these young men and women whose canvas is still uncluttered with the colours of embarrassment, vulnerability, intimacy and rejection in a private and potentially life-giving and/or crushing experience.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
Unlikely New Year's Wishes
Seems some pipe-dream wishes might be in order on this, the last day of 2012, for the upcoming 2013!
So here goes:
I wish that Gary Bettman would find a nursing home, plant himself deeply and permanently in one of its suites and leave the administration of the NHL to someone who really knows the purpose, meaning and promise of the game of hockey...and it is not "just about the money"!!
I wish that David Brooks, columnist for the New York Times, would receive an invitation from Barack Obama, to conduct a three-day seminar, with weekly follow-ups for one full year, with the president, the four leaders of Congress and all of their spouses, on the long-term health of the United States, including the need to build trust between and among all political leaders, as a model of leadership for the rest of Congress, the states and even for the rest of the world.
I wish that Ban Ki Moon would host a visioning conference, for leaders from the 190 countries who are members of the United Nations, on how to re-structure the UN to better meet the complex and overlapping issues of the world's poverty, disease, terrorism, religious extremes, the environment, and the world's impending food shortages...with a view to specific actions being promised and committed by all participants, in the model of the Clinton Global Initiative, with a firm date for public reporting in one, five, ten and twenty years, so the world can once again have confidence that leaders are interested in more than their careers.
I wish that every newspaper in Canada, the United States and Great Britain, France, Germany, South Africa, Egypt, Israel, India, Pakistan, China would send fully trained reporters to all world capitals, and begin reporting every day from their perspectives, in digital format that would be accessible to all intenet subscribers...so that we could easily and readily begin to comprehend the facts and the multiple perspectives in a world increasingly complex and inter-dependent.
I wish that Mayor Bloomberg would host an assault weapons amnesty/buy-back in New York city, and encourage all mayors across the United States to do a similar event, with full public disclosure on the recovery of these weapons, their melt-down and the significance of the move.
I wish that all elementary and secondary teachers would be required, prior to certification, to spend a minimum of two semesters in courses designed to discover the history, motivations, learning needs and potential of all male students whom they will face in their classrooms. This initiative would also require the public advertisement from all faculties of education, in all media outlets, as a way to encourage the recruitment of an army of committed male educators to enter the schools, classrooms, principals offices, and administration offices.
I wish that all universities in North America and in Europe would develop and institute courses in male studies, as a complement and a supplement to the multiple female studies courses and departments that have already been established.
I wish that all national and city editors of all daily newspapers would pay more attention to the arts communities in their coverage areas, with a view to reviewing the events offered not merely the dates and times, so that we begin to develop a balance between the deadening parade of economic information with the important creative and prophetic voices in every community.
I wish that all countries and their leaders would learn that an open internet accessible to all, freely, is in the best interests of a global community, through sponsorsed on-line learning opportunities, and that censorship be exercised only on those sites promoting violence, hatred, abuse and political unrest.
I wish that all christian church leaders would re-think all of their institutional claims to be the "only" or the "best" or the "first" or the "primary" faith, in an overt initiative to remove much of the marketing/evangelizing from their self-promotion efforts and begin to lead creative projects that help to integrate all human vulnerabilities into their perspectives...in the manner of a Jedd Apatow in movies.
I wish that all television commercials would declare a war on dumb men and women, in an effort to talk "up" to an educated and enlightened audience, and eliminate all references to comedic insults to their competitors, and to individual human beings.
I wish that Aaron Sorkin would write a docu-drama series about the complexities of religious organizations, the abuse of power by those organizations, and the potential of those organizations to open the eyes, hearts, minds and spirits of people, without infantilizing those people.
I wish that Stephen Harper would call a meeting of all Canadian political leaders, with all First Nations chiefs and leaders, and re-think and re-work the relationship between First Nations people and the rest of the country, using the perspectives, recommendations and urgings of the aboriginal communities.
Happy New Year!
So here goes:
I wish that Gary Bettman would find a nursing home, plant himself deeply and permanently in one of its suites and leave the administration of the NHL to someone who really knows the purpose, meaning and promise of the game of hockey...and it is not "just about the money"!!
I wish that David Brooks, columnist for the New York Times, would receive an invitation from Barack Obama, to conduct a three-day seminar, with weekly follow-ups for one full year, with the president, the four leaders of Congress and all of their spouses, on the long-term health of the United States, including the need to build trust between and among all political leaders, as a model of leadership for the rest of Congress, the states and even for the rest of the world.
I wish that Ban Ki Moon would host a visioning conference, for leaders from the 190 countries who are members of the United Nations, on how to re-structure the UN to better meet the complex and overlapping issues of the world's poverty, disease, terrorism, religious extremes, the environment, and the world's impending food shortages...with a view to specific actions being promised and committed by all participants, in the model of the Clinton Global Initiative, with a firm date for public reporting in one, five, ten and twenty years, so the world can once again have confidence that leaders are interested in more than their careers.
I wish that every newspaper in Canada, the United States and Great Britain, France, Germany, South Africa, Egypt, Israel, India, Pakistan, China would send fully trained reporters to all world capitals, and begin reporting every day from their perspectives, in digital format that would be accessible to all intenet subscribers...so that we could easily and readily begin to comprehend the facts and the multiple perspectives in a world increasingly complex and inter-dependent.
I wish that Mayor Bloomberg would host an assault weapons amnesty/buy-back in New York city, and encourage all mayors across the United States to do a similar event, with full public disclosure on the recovery of these weapons, their melt-down and the significance of the move.
I wish that all elementary and secondary teachers would be required, prior to certification, to spend a minimum of two semesters in courses designed to discover the history, motivations, learning needs and potential of all male students whom they will face in their classrooms. This initiative would also require the public advertisement from all faculties of education, in all media outlets, as a way to encourage the recruitment of an army of committed male educators to enter the schools, classrooms, principals offices, and administration offices.
I wish that all universities in North America and in Europe would develop and institute courses in male studies, as a complement and a supplement to the multiple female studies courses and departments that have already been established.
I wish that all national and city editors of all daily newspapers would pay more attention to the arts communities in their coverage areas, with a view to reviewing the events offered not merely the dates and times, so that we begin to develop a balance between the deadening parade of economic information with the important creative and prophetic voices in every community.
I wish that all countries and their leaders would learn that an open internet accessible to all, freely, is in the best interests of a global community, through sponsorsed on-line learning opportunities, and that censorship be exercised only on those sites promoting violence, hatred, abuse and political unrest.
I wish that all christian church leaders would re-think all of their institutional claims to be the "only" or the "best" or the "first" or the "primary" faith, in an overt initiative to remove much of the marketing/evangelizing from their self-promotion efforts and begin to lead creative projects that help to integrate all human vulnerabilities into their perspectives...in the manner of a Jedd Apatow in movies.
I wish that all television commercials would declare a war on dumb men and women, in an effort to talk "up" to an educated and enlightened audience, and eliminate all references to comedic insults to their competitors, and to individual human beings.
I wish that Aaron Sorkin would write a docu-drama series about the complexities of religious organizations, the abuse of power by those organizations, and the potential of those organizations to open the eyes, hearts, minds and spirits of people, without infantilizing those people.
I wish that Stephen Harper would call a meeting of all Canadian political leaders, with all First Nations chiefs and leaders, and re-think and re-work the relationship between First Nations people and the rest of the country, using the perspectives, recommendations and urgings of the aboriginal communities.
Happy New Year!
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Fantasy slut league in San Francisco high school
High school’s athletes formed ‘Fantasy Slut League,’ awarding points for sex
By The Associated Press, in Toronto Star, October 23, 2012
PIEDMONT, CALIF.—Male teenage athletes at a San Francisco-area school formed what they called a “Fantasy Slut League,” awarding points for sex with female students.
Piedmont High School principal Rich Kitchens says the so-called league, which had existed for up to six years, has been disbanded.
School officials learned of what the athletes were doing after a date-rape awareness assembly this month. The number of students involved is being withheld.
The San Francisco Chronicle says Kitchen sent a letter to parents Friday saying officials learned that athletes earned “points for documented engagement in sexual activities” with girls who often weren’t aware of the game.
The school is not planning to discipline the students involved.
After reading this, I am extremely grateful I am neither a teacher nor a parent of secondary school children, especially girls. There are so many troubling questions:
1) Why did the school not know about this "league"?
2) Why have the girls not complained before now?
3) Why have the parents not known about this activity, both the parents of the boys and the girls?
4) Why is the school not planning to discipline the students involved?
5) Why is there not a public meeting of parents demanding that the school principal be put on administrative leave, pending a formal investigation of the issue?
6) Why are the boys being permitted to remain in this school, pending a full investigation?
7) What follow up activities, including counselling for both the boys and the girls, not being initiated by the school board and its administration?
8) In how many other secondary schools is a similar "league" operating, and for how long has that been going on, in other cities, states, provinces (of Canada)?
9) Where is the research money that would be needed to conduct a research project, even an oral history, for the purpose of a longitutinal study, covering the past six or seven years, through interviews of the male and female students who are and have attended Piedmont's School for Scandal?
Call me a prude, yet if I were the parent of an adolescent girl who attended this school, and caught even a whiff of this "league" and the pressure that such activity puts on young women "to perform," I would certainly want to know what the school was going to do to assure me, and other parents, that not only is the activity "disbanded," but that there will be both instructional programs and monitoring of in-school activity, as well as after-school programs, to nip additional activity before it starts.
This story casts a cloud over both the young men and the young women, many of whom were undoubtedly unaware of the "league" in which they were participating, and are now both embarrassed and angry at their own betrayal.
By The Associated Press, in Toronto Star, October 23, 2012
PIEDMONT, CALIF.—Male teenage athletes at a San Francisco-area school formed what they called a “Fantasy Slut League,” awarding points for sex with female students.
Piedmont High School principal Rich Kitchens says the so-called league, which had existed for up to six years, has been disbanded.
School officials learned of what the athletes were doing after a date-rape awareness assembly this month. The number of students involved is being withheld.
The San Francisco Chronicle says Kitchen sent a letter to parents Friday saying officials learned that athletes earned “points for documented engagement in sexual activities” with girls who often weren’t aware of the game.
The school is not planning to discipline the students involved.
After reading this, I am extremely grateful I am neither a teacher nor a parent of secondary school children, especially girls. There are so many troubling questions:
1) Why did the school not know about this "league"?
2) Why have the girls not complained before now?
3) Why have the parents not known about this activity, both the parents of the boys and the girls?
4) Why is the school not planning to discipline the students involved?
5) Why is there not a public meeting of parents demanding that the school principal be put on administrative leave, pending a formal investigation of the issue?
6) Why are the boys being permitted to remain in this school, pending a full investigation?
7) What follow up activities, including counselling for both the boys and the girls, not being initiated by the school board and its administration?
8) In how many other secondary schools is a similar "league" operating, and for how long has that been going on, in other cities, states, provinces (of Canada)?
9) Where is the research money that would be needed to conduct a research project, even an oral history, for the purpose of a longitutinal study, covering the past six or seven years, through interviews of the male and female students who are and have attended Piedmont's School for Scandal?
Call me a prude, yet if I were the parent of an adolescent girl who attended this school, and caught even a whiff of this "league" and the pressure that such activity puts on young women "to perform," I would certainly want to know what the school was going to do to assure me, and other parents, that not only is the activity "disbanded," but that there will be both instructional programs and monitoring of in-school activity, as well as after-school programs, to nip additional activity before it starts.
This story casts a cloud over both the young men and the young women, many of whom were undoubtedly unaware of the "league" in which they were participating, and are now both embarrassed and angry at their own betrayal.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Study: Peers influence men in sexual abuse of women
Journal of Family Violence, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1995
Sexual Abuse in Canadian University and College
Dating Relationships: The Contribution of Male
Peer Support
Walter S. DeKeseredy I and Katharine Kelly 1
DeKeseredy (1988a,b, 1989a, 1990a) shows that having abusive male friends and peers who verbally encourage and legitimate female victimization increases the likelihood of both physical and psychological variants of woman abuse in university dating relationships. He also developed a theoretical model which explains how malepeer support contributes to these two behaviors as well as sexual abuse(DeKeseredy, 1988c).
His male peer support model is informed primarily by social support
theory which is a perspective generally used to explain how social integration
and the various resources provided by interpersonal relationships influence
people's ability to cope with stressful life events (Wills, 1985).
Although social support theory deals mainly with health issues and not specifically with the relationship between male peer group dynamics and sexual
assault, it is relevant to this problem.
For example, many men experience stress when their dating partners
refuse to have sexual relations with them (DeKeseredy and Schwartz, 1993).
Some men attempt to alleviate this stress themselves. Others, however, turn
to their male peers for advice on how to deal with sexual rejection. Informational support provided by male friends may influence men to sexually
abuse their partners; especially if they are defined as "teasers," "economic
exploiters," "bar pick-ups," and "loose women" who do not want to engage
in sexual intercourse (Kanin, 1985). Additionally, male homosocial cohorts
often provide sexually aggressive members with a "vocabulary of adjustment"
so that their actions do not alter their conceptions of themselves as
normal, respectable men (Kanin, 1967a).
DeKeseredy (1988c) also contends that male peer support can influence
the probability of woman abuse regardless of any type of dating-related
stress. In fact, most of the male peer support studies conducted so
far do not identify stress as a prerequisite for men interacting with male
friends or receiving pro-abuse support (DeKeseredy, 1990b). There are
many situations in which factors other than stress characteristic of malefemale
courting dynamics, such as leisure activities and work, integrate men
with other males who encourage sexual abuse. These are considered
" . . .violence-supporting social relations that may occur at any time and
any place" (Bowker, 1983, p. 136).
Behaving as part of the herd or gang of men, especially if that group supports the retaliation by men against women who refuse to "comply" with their sexual request/demands will naturally breed both contempt for those "unco-operative females, and enhanced desire for revenge and even more power, through abuse.
Men have names for women who refuse to "obey" and those names are not complimentary.
First, relationships that circle around the exercise of power over another human being are spiralling downwards. Men who are not taught this basic information are being short-changed, and so will their female partners be upon discovering that gap in their male partner's learning.
Next, group-think, in the form of gang-assumption of power offended or resisted, is another of the archetypes into which males, when threatened and vulnerable, escape at their peril.
Third, men need to be formally taught about the merits of mutual, respectful and integrated relationships different from those with other males. And the differences are substantial.
With males, competition, including all forms of satire, ridicule, dissing, and even embarrassment are the norm. This kind of irony, acting as an enemy or opponent and as competitor, is taken by the male conventional perceptions to be both normal and expected. In fact, men come to know they have been "accepted" when they are being ridiculed by their peers, inside the male circle.
However, relating with women, on the other hand, is precisely the opposite.
When a man resists an idea, a suggestion or a recommendation, another man is likely to ramp up the muscle behind the proposal.
However, when a woman resists a suggestion, request or proposal from a male, especially with respect to sexual relations, the man's only option is to respect the resistance, and in so doing, respect the female partner. What happens to a woman's body, as what happens to any person's body, is the exclusive business of that woman. That boundary is neither negotiable nor evil. It is there for very legitimate and supportable reasons. And to disrespect that boundary is to show disrespect both for the woman and for the male involved.
Elementary school curricula about "sex education" will not likely include this kind of topic, given the highly cultural component of its tradition and ethics.
Respect for the boundaries of "the other" is also, not incidentally, one of the basic learnings of any full education in any culture and ethnicity, or ought to be.
Sexual Abuse in Canadian University and College
Dating Relationships: The Contribution of Male
Peer Support
Walter S. DeKeseredy I and Katharine Kelly 1
DeKeseredy (1988a,b, 1989a, 1990a) shows that having abusive male friends and peers who verbally encourage and legitimate female victimization increases the likelihood of both physical and psychological variants of woman abuse in university dating relationships. He also developed a theoretical model which explains how malepeer support contributes to these two behaviors as well as sexual abuse(DeKeseredy, 1988c).
His male peer support model is informed primarily by social support
theory which is a perspective generally used to explain how social integration
and the various resources provided by interpersonal relationships influence
people's ability to cope with stressful life events (Wills, 1985).
Although social support theory deals mainly with health issues and not specifically with the relationship between male peer group dynamics and sexual
assault, it is relevant to this problem.
For example, many men experience stress when their dating partners
refuse to have sexual relations with them (DeKeseredy and Schwartz, 1993).
Some men attempt to alleviate this stress themselves. Others, however, turn
to their male peers for advice on how to deal with sexual rejection. Informational support provided by male friends may influence men to sexually
abuse their partners; especially if they are defined as "teasers," "economic
exploiters," "bar pick-ups," and "loose women" who do not want to engage
in sexual intercourse (Kanin, 1985). Additionally, male homosocial cohorts
often provide sexually aggressive members with a "vocabulary of adjustment"
so that their actions do not alter their conceptions of themselves as
normal, respectable men (Kanin, 1967a).
DeKeseredy (1988c) also contends that male peer support can influence
the probability of woman abuse regardless of any type of dating-related
stress. In fact, most of the male peer support studies conducted so
far do not identify stress as a prerequisite for men interacting with male
friends or receiving pro-abuse support (DeKeseredy, 1990b). There are
many situations in which factors other than stress characteristic of malefemale
courting dynamics, such as leisure activities and work, integrate men
with other males who encourage sexual abuse. These are considered
" . . .violence-supporting social relations that may occur at any time and
any place" (Bowker, 1983, p. 136).
Behaving as part of the herd or gang of men, especially if that group supports the retaliation by men against women who refuse to "comply" with their sexual request/demands will naturally breed both contempt for those "unco-operative females, and enhanced desire for revenge and even more power, through abuse.
Men have names for women who refuse to "obey" and those names are not complimentary.
First, relationships that circle around the exercise of power over another human being are spiralling downwards. Men who are not taught this basic information are being short-changed, and so will their female partners be upon discovering that gap in their male partner's learning.
Next, group-think, in the form of gang-assumption of power offended or resisted, is another of the archetypes into which males, when threatened and vulnerable, escape at their peril.
Third, men need to be formally taught about the merits of mutual, respectful and integrated relationships different from those with other males. And the differences are substantial.
With males, competition, including all forms of satire, ridicule, dissing, and even embarrassment are the norm. This kind of irony, acting as an enemy or opponent and as competitor, is taken by the male conventional perceptions to be both normal and expected. In fact, men come to know they have been "accepted" when they are being ridiculed by their peers, inside the male circle.
However, relating with women, on the other hand, is precisely the opposite.
When a man resists an idea, a suggestion or a recommendation, another man is likely to ramp up the muscle behind the proposal.
However, when a woman resists a suggestion, request or proposal from a male, especially with respect to sexual relations, the man's only option is to respect the resistance, and in so doing, respect the female partner. What happens to a woman's body, as what happens to any person's body, is the exclusive business of that woman. That boundary is neither negotiable nor evil. It is there for very legitimate and supportable reasons. And to disrespect that boundary is to show disrespect both for the woman and for the male involved.
Elementary school curricula about "sex education" will not likely include this kind of topic, given the highly cultural component of its tradition and ethics.
Respect for the boundaries of "the other" is also, not incidentally, one of the basic learnings of any full education in any culture and ethnicity, or ought to be.
Am. Academy of Pediatrics Study: Boys reaching puberty earlier
Boys hitting puberty earlier, U.S. Study shows
By Patty Wensa, Toronto Star, October 20, 2012
For years, pediatric experts have warned that girls were reaching puberty earlier, but now males are maturing faster as well.
A new U.S. study shows their bodies are beginning to change on average at 9 for African-American boys and at 10 for Hispanic and white boys.
The research, by the American Academy of Pediatrics, means boys are going into puberty six months to two years earlier than previously documented.
Scientists say they don’t know why it’s happening.
“There needs to be more research,” says Richard Wasserman, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Vermont and one of study’s authors. “Any reasoning we do with respect to cause and effect is pure speculation.”
But doctors say it has important implications for treatment.
“As clinicians it helps us pick out kids who are truly hitting puberty in advance of normal, which means I need to be worried about those kids,” says Margo Lane, a pediatrician and adolescent medicine specialist in Winnipeg, who was not involved in the study. Early puberty in either sex can be a sign of disease.
The new research is also important because it sets benchmarks by race. “That allows us to have an understanding of the variability of different races in terms of what’s normal,” says Lane.
A study done by the same research group in 1997 found that 7 per cent of white girls and 27 per cent of African-American girls were reaching puberty as early as 7. The reason for the difference between races isn’t known.
Experts have speculated the early onset is being brought on by weight or by hormones in the environment. Lane says one of the strongest predictors of puberty is genetic.
In this study, researchers recruited pediatricians and nurse practitioners across the U.S., as well as in Quebec, who measured the genital and pubic hair growth of more than 4,000 boys from 2005 to 2010. Parents were asked for consent.
The study updates 20-year-old information, which is hard to get because of the invasiveness of the procedure.
“The most common first sign of a boy going into puberty is the enlargement of the testicles,” says Lane. “The boys are obviously self-conscious about it and we don’t want to embarrass the boys.”
But Wasserman says all doctors are trained in the procedure and it should be done to determine if a child is progressing normally.
“There is a squeamishness that is emerging about examining the genitals of children that is probably related to the fear of child sexual abuse,” says Wasserman. “But these are examinations done with a parent in the room.”
He also thinks the research means sex education should be taught earlier.
“A more common sense reason to want this all to be assessed is so you can help your child through puberty,” says Wasserman. “There should be a parent who can matter-of-factly say, you know that boys and men look very different,” he says. “It shouldn’t be a mystery.”
That information isn’t taught in Ontario schools until Grade 5, but a group of experts recently advocated that it be part of the curriculum in Grade 4.
Lane says parents shouldn’t worry that the early onset of puberty means kids are deciding to have sex.
“By no means is it strictly hormonal,” says Lane. “There are so many other social and cultural factors that influence when a young person is going to start having sex.”
By Patty Wensa, Toronto Star, October 20, 2012
For years, pediatric experts have warned that girls were reaching puberty earlier, but now males are maturing faster as well.
A new U.S. study shows their bodies are beginning to change on average at 9 for African-American boys and at 10 for Hispanic and white boys.
The research, by the American Academy of Pediatrics, means boys are going into puberty six months to two years earlier than previously documented.
Scientists say they don’t know why it’s happening.
“There needs to be more research,” says Richard Wasserman, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Vermont and one of study’s authors. “Any reasoning we do with respect to cause and effect is pure speculation.”
But doctors say it has important implications for treatment.
“As clinicians it helps us pick out kids who are truly hitting puberty in advance of normal, which means I need to be worried about those kids,” says Margo Lane, a pediatrician and adolescent medicine specialist in Winnipeg, who was not involved in the study. Early puberty in either sex can be a sign of disease.
The new research is also important because it sets benchmarks by race. “That allows us to have an understanding of the variability of different races in terms of what’s normal,” says Lane.
A study done by the same research group in 1997 found that 7 per cent of white girls and 27 per cent of African-American girls were reaching puberty as early as 7. The reason for the difference between races isn’t known.
Experts have speculated the early onset is being brought on by weight or by hormones in the environment. Lane says one of the strongest predictors of puberty is genetic.
In this study, researchers recruited pediatricians and nurse practitioners across the U.S., as well as in Quebec, who measured the genital and pubic hair growth of more than 4,000 boys from 2005 to 2010. Parents were asked for consent.
The study updates 20-year-old information, which is hard to get because of the invasiveness of the procedure.
“The most common first sign of a boy going into puberty is the enlargement of the testicles,” says Lane. “The boys are obviously self-conscious about it and we don’t want to embarrass the boys.”
But Wasserman says all doctors are trained in the procedure and it should be done to determine if a child is progressing normally.
“There is a squeamishness that is emerging about examining the genitals of children that is probably related to the fear of child sexual abuse,” says Wasserman. “But these are examinations done with a parent in the room.”
He also thinks the research means sex education should be taught earlier.
“A more common sense reason to want this all to be assessed is so you can help your child through puberty,” says Wasserman. “There should be a parent who can matter-of-factly say, you know that boys and men look very different,” he says. “It shouldn’t be a mystery.”
That information isn’t taught in Ontario schools until Grade 5, but a group of experts recently advocated that it be part of the curriculum in Grade 4.
Lane says parents shouldn’t worry that the early onset of puberty means kids are deciding to have sex.
“By no means is it strictly hormonal,” says Lane. “There are so many other social and cultural factors that influence when a young person is going to start having sex.”
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Brooks on the End of Men, as depicted in Rosin's book of the same title
But, in her fascinating new book, “The End of Men,” Hanna Rosin posits a different theory. It has to do with adaptability. Women, Rosin argues, are like immigrants who have moved to a new country. They see a new social context, and they flexibly adapt to new circumstances. Men are like immigrants who have physically moved to a new country but who have kept their minds in the old one. They speak the old language. They follow the old mores. Men are more likely to be rigid; women are more fluid. (From a column by David Brooks, New York Times, September 10, 2012, below)
There is both empirical evidence to support Rosin's theory, and a different perspective to push back against it. Rosin cites the former; I would like to posit the latter.
Men, for all our warts and pain, are much less likely than women to be "flexible," to use Rosin's interpretation and much more likely to be resistant, because we often see flexibility as co-dependence, or as pandering to the conventional norms or even as becoming subservient to an overwheening and perhaps abusive authority.We are less likely to be compliant with whatever we find in our experience, and much more likely to challenge that "evidence" as sceptics, and for that, the world might consider being more grateful and less judgemental. Our emotional life, while mostly hidden and repressed until it cannot be hidden any longer, is deeper, more profound and also less likely to be amended, shaped or even impacted by circumstances than others, including women, might realize. We do not like, and refuse to perform, in situations where we are reduced to "trained seals" unless and until we choose that curriculum and that culture and that life. And that includes families where the performance "standard" is imposed as "perfection" when we already know we cannot measure up. And it also includes schools where perfect compliance with the rules would and always does make for a very boring day, for us, and for the system that we believe "the system"needs to make more adjustments to accommodate our truth and reality.
And to measure us by women, is to be more insulting than anything we could imagine. We are NOT women, never have been, and never will be. And women do not possess, or incarnate, or express what must be considered the "perfect" role models for us. They are women, and for that we both love and respect them. But we are not women, and never will be, no matter how long or how hard is the push/pull to put our reality into their "container" for that reality.
Tell us women are doing better than we are and we will respond, "So?" "What does that mean?"
For us, it means only that we have left the playing field, because such comparisons are anathema to our existence. And then to hold us accountable for such failure is like saying women have all the right answers for everything, and while we already know that they do most of the time, we cannot subscribe to the world of "somebodies" (women) and "nobodies"(men).
Men will never enter a playing field where we are compelled to match wits with women, for the simple reason that it is not a competition and must not become a competition. If women wish to see it that way, and apparently if we believe books like Rosin's they do, that is their perogative. But don't ascribe to us the same measuring stick(s) that are applied to women.
We cannot and will not give birth.
We cannot and will not play with dolls.
We cannot and will not become more like Odysseus and less like Achilles, simply because that way spells something the world calls "success".
We cannot and will not succumb to the judgement that "we are imposing our wills on the world" just because we refuse to be as complicitous, as easily managed and as "flexible" as our female counterparts.
There is a legitimate place for men, if and when they are seen for what and who we are.
There is no legitimate place for anyone who is the pawn of a system gone awry, as our's certainly has.
The fact that men, far more than women, are responsible for the violence in relationships, and for the wanton destruction of both Wall Street and Baghdad, cannot be pinned on all men, but on a stripe of men whose worth is demeaning to the rest of us. We are not Dubya or Cheney, and more men should have stood up against those bullies.
However, we are not micro-managers either, for the most part, and we find the minutiae of many worlds so confining that we ought not to enter those worlds. And that, while it is somewhat limiting, is also part of who we are.
We need our female partners, in so many ways, not excluding our need for intimacy, and we are very bad at expressing that need.
We need to be understood and held and supported and we are even worse at expressing both our need and our appreciation when it is met.
We need to make a living, and we will work our "butts off" when we are genuinely appreciated, and never when we are treated as trash...and we see our "trashing" as part of a system that sees us as part of the raw material for the production process, and not as integral to the whole system.
Like Mark Twain, many years ago, " The reports of my (our) death are greatly exaggerated!"
And to write that we will have to be more like Odysseus and less like Achilles, is like saying we are not "OK" as we are...and there's the rub!
We are who we are!
We are not going to become something else!
We are not going to apologize for who we are and for not being something else!
And the sooner the world can see and accept and deal with that reality, the better off we will all be!
I have written elsewhere that a female supervisor once commented to me, "John you are far too intense for me!"
To which I responded without taking or missing a breath, "I am also too bald, deal with it!"
Why Men Fail
By David Brooks, New York Times, September 10, 2012
You’re probably aware of the basic trends. The financial rewards to education have increased over the past few decades, but men failed to get the memo.
In elementary and high school, male academic performance is lagging. Boys earn three-quarters of the D’s and F’s. By college, men are clearly behind. Only 40 percent of bachelor’s degrees go to men, along with 40 percent of master’s degrees.
Thanks to their lower skills, men are dropping out of the labor force. In 1954, 96 percent of the American men between the ages of 25 and 54 worked. Today, that number is down to 80 percent. In Friday’s jobs report, male labor force participation reached an all-time low.
Millions of men are collecting disability. Even many of those who do have a job are doing poorly. According to Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project, annual earnings for median prime-age males have dropped by 28 percent over the past 40 years.
Men still dominate the tippy-top of the corporate ladder because many women take time off to raise children, but women lead or are gaining nearly everywhere else. Women in their 20s outearn men in their 20s. Twelve out of the 15 fastest-growing professions are dominated by women.
Over the years, many of us have embraced a certain theory to explain men’s economic decline. It is that the information-age economy rewards traits that, for neurological and cultural reasons, women are more likely to possess.
To succeed today, you have to be able to sit still and focus attention in school at an early age. You have to be emotionally sensitive and aware of context. You have to communicate smoothly. For genetic and cultural reasons, many men stink at these tasks.
But, in her fascinating new book, “The End of Men,” Hanna Rosin posits a different theory. It has to do with adaptability. Women, Rosin argues, are like immigrants who have moved to a new country. They see a new social context, and they flexibly adapt to new circumstances. Men are like immigrants who have physically moved to a new country but who have kept their minds in the old one. They speak the old language. They follow the old mores. Men are more likely to be rigid; women are more fluid.
This theory has less to do with innate traits and more to do with social position. When there’s big social change, the people who were on the top of the old order are bound to cling to the old ways. The people who were on the bottom are bound to experience a burst of energy. They’re going to explore their new surroundings more enthusiastically.
Rosin reports from working-class Alabama. The women she meets are flooding into new jobs and new opportunities — going back to college, pursuing new careers. The men are waiting around for the jobs that left and are never coming back. They are strangely immune to new options. In the Auburn-Opelika region, the median female income is 140 percent of the median male income.
Rosin also reports from college campuses where women are pioneering new social arrangements. The usual story is that men are exploiting the new campus hookup culture in order to get plenty of sex without romantic commitments. Rosin argues that, in fact, women support the hookup culture. It allows them to have sex and fun without any time-consuming distractions from their careers. Like new immigrants, women are desperate to rise, and they embrace social and sexual rules that give them the freedom to focus on their professional lives.
Rosin is not saying that women are winners in a global gender war or that they are doing super simply because men are doing worse. She’s just saying women are adapting to today’s economy more flexibly and resiliently than men. There’s a lot of evidence to support her case.
A study by the National Federation of Independent Business found that small businesses owned by women outperformed male-owned small businesses during the last recession. In finance, women who switch firms are more likely to see their performance improve, whereas men are more likely to see theirs decline. There’s even evidence that women are better able to adjust to divorce. Today, more women than men see their incomes rise by 25 percent after a marital breakup.
Forty years ago, men and women adhered to certain ideologies, what it meant to be a man or a woman. Young women today, Rosin argues, are more like clean slates, having abandoned both feminist and prefeminist preconceptions. Men still adhere to the masculinity rules, which limits their vision and their movement.
If she’s right, then men will have to be less like Achilles, imposing their will on the world, and more like Odysseus, the crafty, many-sided sojourner. They’ll have to acknowledge that they are strangers in a strange land.
There is both empirical evidence to support Rosin's theory, and a different perspective to push back against it. Rosin cites the former; I would like to posit the latter.
Men, for all our warts and pain, are much less likely than women to be "flexible," to use Rosin's interpretation and much more likely to be resistant, because we often see flexibility as co-dependence, or as pandering to the conventional norms or even as becoming subservient to an overwheening and perhaps abusive authority.We are less likely to be compliant with whatever we find in our experience, and much more likely to challenge that "evidence" as sceptics, and for that, the world might consider being more grateful and less judgemental. Our emotional life, while mostly hidden and repressed until it cannot be hidden any longer, is deeper, more profound and also less likely to be amended, shaped or even impacted by circumstances than others, including women, might realize. We do not like, and refuse to perform, in situations where we are reduced to "trained seals" unless and until we choose that curriculum and that culture and that life. And that includes families where the performance "standard" is imposed as "perfection" when we already know we cannot measure up. And it also includes schools where perfect compliance with the rules would and always does make for a very boring day, for us, and for the system that we believe "the system"needs to make more adjustments to accommodate our truth and reality.
And to measure us by women, is to be more insulting than anything we could imagine. We are NOT women, never have been, and never will be. And women do not possess, or incarnate, or express what must be considered the "perfect" role models for us. They are women, and for that we both love and respect them. But we are not women, and never will be, no matter how long or how hard is the push/pull to put our reality into their "container" for that reality.
Tell us women are doing better than we are and we will respond, "So?" "What does that mean?"
For us, it means only that we have left the playing field, because such comparisons are anathema to our existence. And then to hold us accountable for such failure is like saying women have all the right answers for everything, and while we already know that they do most of the time, we cannot subscribe to the world of "somebodies" (women) and "nobodies"(men).
Men will never enter a playing field where we are compelled to match wits with women, for the simple reason that it is not a competition and must not become a competition. If women wish to see it that way, and apparently if we believe books like Rosin's they do, that is their perogative. But don't ascribe to us the same measuring stick(s) that are applied to women.
We cannot and will not give birth.
We cannot and will not play with dolls.
We cannot and will not become more like Odysseus and less like Achilles, simply because that way spells something the world calls "success".
We cannot and will not succumb to the judgement that "we are imposing our wills on the world" just because we refuse to be as complicitous, as easily managed and as "flexible" as our female counterparts.
There is a legitimate place for men, if and when they are seen for what and who we are.
There is no legitimate place for anyone who is the pawn of a system gone awry, as our's certainly has.
The fact that men, far more than women, are responsible for the violence in relationships, and for the wanton destruction of both Wall Street and Baghdad, cannot be pinned on all men, but on a stripe of men whose worth is demeaning to the rest of us. We are not Dubya or Cheney, and more men should have stood up against those bullies.
However, we are not micro-managers either, for the most part, and we find the minutiae of many worlds so confining that we ought not to enter those worlds. And that, while it is somewhat limiting, is also part of who we are.
We need our female partners, in so many ways, not excluding our need for intimacy, and we are very bad at expressing that need.
We need to be understood and held and supported and we are even worse at expressing both our need and our appreciation when it is met.
We need to make a living, and we will work our "butts off" when we are genuinely appreciated, and never when we are treated as trash...and we see our "trashing" as part of a system that sees us as part of the raw material for the production process, and not as integral to the whole system.
Like Mark Twain, many years ago, " The reports of my (our) death are greatly exaggerated!"
And to write that we will have to be more like Odysseus and less like Achilles, is like saying we are not "OK" as we are...and there's the rub!
We are who we are!
We are not going to become something else!
We are not going to apologize for who we are and for not being something else!
And the sooner the world can see and accept and deal with that reality, the better off we will all be!
I have written elsewhere that a female supervisor once commented to me, "John you are far too intense for me!"
To which I responded without taking or missing a breath, "I am also too bald, deal with it!"
Why Men Fail
By David Brooks, New York Times, September 10, 2012
You’re probably aware of the basic trends. The financial rewards to education have increased over the past few decades, but men failed to get the memo.
In elementary and high school, male academic performance is lagging. Boys earn three-quarters of the D’s and F’s. By college, men are clearly behind. Only 40 percent of bachelor’s degrees go to men, along with 40 percent of master’s degrees.
Thanks to their lower skills, men are dropping out of the labor force. In 1954, 96 percent of the American men between the ages of 25 and 54 worked. Today, that number is down to 80 percent. In Friday’s jobs report, male labor force participation reached an all-time low.
Millions of men are collecting disability. Even many of those who do have a job are doing poorly. According to Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project, annual earnings for median prime-age males have dropped by 28 percent over the past 40 years.
Men still dominate the tippy-top of the corporate ladder because many women take time off to raise children, but women lead or are gaining nearly everywhere else. Women in their 20s outearn men in their 20s. Twelve out of the 15 fastest-growing professions are dominated by women.
Over the years, many of us have embraced a certain theory to explain men’s economic decline. It is that the information-age economy rewards traits that, for neurological and cultural reasons, women are more likely to possess.
To succeed today, you have to be able to sit still and focus attention in school at an early age. You have to be emotionally sensitive and aware of context. You have to communicate smoothly. For genetic and cultural reasons, many men stink at these tasks.
But, in her fascinating new book, “The End of Men,” Hanna Rosin posits a different theory. It has to do with adaptability. Women, Rosin argues, are like immigrants who have moved to a new country. They see a new social context, and they flexibly adapt to new circumstances. Men are like immigrants who have physically moved to a new country but who have kept their minds in the old one. They speak the old language. They follow the old mores. Men are more likely to be rigid; women are more fluid.
This theory has less to do with innate traits and more to do with social position. When there’s big social change, the people who were on the top of the old order are bound to cling to the old ways. The people who were on the bottom are bound to experience a burst of energy. They’re going to explore their new surroundings more enthusiastically.
Rosin reports from working-class Alabama. The women she meets are flooding into new jobs and new opportunities — going back to college, pursuing new careers. The men are waiting around for the jobs that left and are never coming back. They are strangely immune to new options. In the Auburn-Opelika region, the median female income is 140 percent of the median male income.
Rosin also reports from college campuses where women are pioneering new social arrangements. The usual story is that men are exploiting the new campus hookup culture in order to get plenty of sex without romantic commitments. Rosin argues that, in fact, women support the hookup culture. It allows them to have sex and fun without any time-consuming distractions from their careers. Like new immigrants, women are desperate to rise, and they embrace social and sexual rules that give them the freedom to focus on their professional lives.
Rosin is not saying that women are winners in a global gender war or that they are doing super simply because men are doing worse. She’s just saying women are adapting to today’s economy more flexibly and resiliently than men. There’s a lot of evidence to support her case.
A study by the National Federation of Independent Business found that small businesses owned by women outperformed male-owned small businesses during the last recession. In finance, women who switch firms are more likely to see their performance improve, whereas men are more likely to see theirs decline. There’s even evidence that women are better able to adjust to divorce. Today, more women than men see their incomes rise by 25 percent after a marital breakup.
Forty years ago, men and women adhered to certain ideologies, what it meant to be a man or a woman. Young women today, Rosin argues, are more like clean slates, having abandoned both feminist and prefeminist preconceptions. Men still adhere to the masculinity rules, which limits their vision and their movement.
If she’s right, then men will have to be less like Achilles, imposing their will on the world, and more like Odysseus, the crafty, many-sided sojourner. They’ll have to acknowledge that they are strangers in a strange land.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)