Of Boys and Men

Of Boys and Men Plot Summary

Introduction

Modern society faces a profound but often overlooked challenge: the widespread disengagement of boys and men from education, work, family, and civic life. While tremendous progress has been made in expanding opportunities for women and girls, a troubling pattern of male underperformance has emerged across multiple domains. Boys are falling behind in education at every level, men are withdrawing from the workforce in unprecedented numbers, fathers are increasingly disconnected from their children, and male social isolation has reached epidemic proportions. These trends transcend race and class boundaries, though they often manifest most severely among disadvantaged populations. The crisis of male disengagement represents neither a temporary fluctuation nor an inevitable consequence of female advancement. Rather, it reflects a fundamental failure to help boys and men adapt to rapid economic and social changes. Traditional male roles centered on physical strength, economic provision, and familial authority have been disrupted by technological change, economic restructuring, and evolving gender norms. Without clear pathways to develop positive masculine identities compatible with gender equality, many men have retreated into passivity, resentment, or self-destruction. Addressing this challenge requires moving beyond polarized political narratives to develop evidence-based approaches that support male development while continuing to advance gender equality.

Chapter 1: The Educational Gender Gap: How Boys Are Falling Behind

The educational landscape has undergone a profound transformation in recent decades, with girls and women surpassing boys and men at virtually every level of academic achievement. This reversal represents what some scholars call a "spectacular upsurge" in female educational attainment. The gender gap that once favored males has not merely closed but has inverted dramatically. By 2019, the gender gap in bachelor's degrees awarded was 15 percentage points - wider than it was in 1972 when Title IX was passed, but now favoring women. This educational disparity begins early. Girls are 14 percentage points more likely than boys to be "school ready" at age five. By high school, girls account for two-thirds of students in the top 10% ranked by GPA, while boys make up two-thirds of those at the bottom. These differences persist regardless of race or socioeconomic status. In Chicago, for example, the difference in the proportion of girls versus boys getting high grades in ninth grade (47% to 32%) is the same as the class gap between affluent and poor neighborhoods. The gender gap widens further in higher education. Women now earn 57% of bachelor's degrees in the U.S., and not just in stereotypically "female" subjects. They receive nearly half of undergraduate business degrees and the majority of law degrees. Women earn three out of five master's degrees and associate's degrees, and their share of professional degrees in fields like medicine, dentistry, and law has jumped from 7% in 1972 to 50% in 2019. The educational underperformance of boys appears linked to developmental differences. Boys' brains mature about two years later than girls', especially in the prefrontal cortex, which handles impulse control and planning. This developmental gap is widest during adolescence - precisely when academic performance becomes most consequential for college prospects. As neuroscientist Frances Jensen notes, "In adolescence, on average girls are more developed by about 2 to 3 years in terms of the peak of their synapses and in their connectivity processes." Despite mounting evidence of this educational gender gap, policymakers have been slow to respond. While states must report graduation rates by race, ethnicity, and economic status, they are not required to report them by sex. This policy blind spot persists even as boys fall further behind. Addressing this challenge will require rethinking educational structures to account for the different developmental trajectories of boys and girls.

Chapter 2: Economic Decline: The Disappearance of Traditional Male Jobs

The economic fortunes of many men have declined dramatically over recent decades. Labor force participation among men in the U.S. has dropped by 7 percentage points over the last half century, from 96% to 89%. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, there were 9 million prime-working-age men not in employment. One in three men with only a high school education are now out of the labor force entirely - representing 5 million potential workers. This decline is not simply a matter of individual choice or laziness. Male employment has fallen because of fundamental shifts in the economy. Men's jobs have been hit by a one-two punch of automation and free trade. Occupations most susceptible to automation are disproportionately male-dominated, including production (70% male), transportation (80% male), and construction (90% male). Meanwhile, women dominate relatively automation-safe occupations in healthcare, personal services, and education. For men who remain employed, wages have stagnated or fallen. The median real hourly wage for men peaked in the 1970s and has been declining since. While women's wages have risen across the board over the last four decades, wages for men on most rungs of the earnings ladder have stagnated. Only men at the top have seen strong earnings growth. Men who entered the workforce in 1983 will earn about 10% less across their working lives than those who started in 1967, while women's lifetime earnings have risen by 33% over the same period. The gender pay gap has narrowed, but largely because men's wages have fallen while women's have risen. The typical full-time female worker now earns about 82% as much as the typical man. However, this statistic masks considerable overlap in the wage distributions. In fact, 40% of women now earn more than the median man, up from just 13% in 1979. The remaining gap is largely explained by differences in hours worked, occupational choice, and most significantly, the impact of parenthood. Women have been crucial to economic growth for at least a generation. The U.S. economy is $2 trillion larger than it would have been had women's economic participation remained at 1970s levels. For families on modest or low incomes, women's increasing work and wages have blunted the pain of men's economic decline. As the Council of Economic Advisers concluded, "Essentially all of the income gains that middle-class American families have experienced since 1970 are due to the rise in women's earnings."

Chapter 3: Fatherhood in Crisis: The Loss of Male Family Roles

For millennia, men could describe their role in four simple words: "providing for my family." This provider role successfully connected men to familial and social life, incorporating them into what sociologist Geoff Dench calls "the interpersonal support structures, the chains of dependency, which lie at the core of any human society." However, this traditional model has been fundamentally disrupted by the economic independence achieved by women over the past half-century. Women are now the main breadwinner in 41% of U.S. households. Three in ten wives out-earn their husbands, twice as many as in 1981. Most mothers now work full time, and in almost half of families where both parents work full time, mothers earn as much or more than fathers. The welfare system has also evolved to support single mothers, allowing even those with low or no earnings to be free of dependence on a male breadwinner. Marriage and motherhood are no longer virtually synonymous. About 40% of births in the U.S. now occur outside marriage, up from just 11% in 1970. The decline in "shotgun" marriages is the biggest single cause of this rise. In 1977, 26% of pregnancies among women with low levels of education resulted in marriage before birth. By 2007, the figure was just 2%. While the role of mothers has been modernized almost beyond recognition, fatherhood remains stuck in the past. Four out of five American adults with a high school education or less still believe that "for a man to be a good husband or partner, being able to support a family financially is very important." The very men who are least able to be traditional breadwinners are the most likely to be judged by their breadwinning potential. This cultural lag has serious consequences. Men who fare poorly in the labor market also suffer in the marriage market, especially in the working class. Husbands without jobs are at much higher risk of seeing their marriages end today than in the past. Sociologist Alexandra Killewald concludes, "Expectations of wives' homemaking may have eroded, but the husband breadwinner norm persists." The result is a growing "dad deficit." Within six years of their parents separating, one in three children never see their father, and a similar proportion see him once a month or less. In 2020, one in five children (21%) were living with a mother only, almost twice as many as in 1968 (11%). This separation of men from women too often means the separation of fathers from children.

Chapter 4: Intersectionality: How Race and Class Compound Male Disadvantages

Black boys and men face unique challenges at the intersection of race and gender. The combination of racism and sexism creates what can be described as "gendered racism" - a specific form of discrimination that affects Black males differently than either Black females or white males. As scholar Tommy Curry argues, Black males in the U.S. are "oppressed racialized men." The evidence for this double disadvantage is stark. Research by economist Raj Chetty and his team shows that Black men are much less likely than white men to rise up the income ladder, while Black and white women raised by poor parents have similar rates of upward intergenerational mobility. Chetty concludes that the overall Black-white intergenerational mobility gap "is entirely driven by differences in men's, not women's, outcomes." In education, Black boys face particularly severe challenges. They lag behind both their Black female counterparts and white male peers throughout the educational pipeline. For every Black man getting a college degree at all levels, there are two Black women. Black men therefore enter the workforce with fewer educational credentials than almost any other demographic group, then face greater discrimination in the labor market and higher rates of incarceration. The criminalization of Black men has resulted in millions of workless men and millions of fatherless families. One in four Black men born since the late 1970s have been in prison by their mid-30s. Among those who dropped out of high school, it is seven out of ten. Black men are more likely to be stopped by police, more likely to be frisked, more likely to be arrested, and more likely to be convicted. Even when released, their chances of finding work are massively reduced. Class position also significantly affects male outcomes. Deaths of despair - mortality from drug overdoses, suicides, and alcohol-related illnesses - are almost three times higher among men than women. These deaths are concentrated among less-educated men, particularly in communities hit hard by deindustrialization. Opioid overdose deaths are 70% male, and suicide rates are three times higher for men than women. Childhood disadvantage hurts boys more than girls. Boys raised in families in the bottom fifth of the income distribution are less likely to escape poverty as adults than girls from similarly poor homes. Boys do especially badly if raised in neighborhoods with high levels of crime and a large share of single-parent households. The developmental gap between boys and girls starting kindergarten is much wider for children from homes with less educated mothers and less involved fathers.

Chapter 5: Political Failures: Why Left and Right Both Misunderstand Men

The political response to the challenges facing boys and men has been deeply inadequate, with both the Left and Right failing to address the issues constructively. The progressive Left has four major failings in its approach. First, it tends to pathologize naturally occurring aspects of masculine identity under the banner of "toxic masculinity." This term, which was rarely used before 2015, now refers to any male behavior that progressives disapprove of, from the tragic to the trivial. Second, progressives view male problems through an individualistic lens, blaming men for their own plight rather than recognizing structural challenges. While progressives typically look for external causes when someone is obese, commits a crime, or is unemployed, they are willing to blame men for their problems. If men are depressed, it's because they won't express their feelings; if they fail at school, it's because they lack commitment. Third, progressives deny any biological basis for sex differences. Despite strong evidence for natural differences in areas like risk-taking, aggression, and interests, many on the Left insist that all gender differences are purely social constructs. This science denial undermines effective solutions for boys and men. Fourth, progressives refuse to acknowledge that gender inequalities can run in both directions. The White House Gender Policy Council, for example, focuses exclusively on issues affecting women and girls, ignoring areas where boys and men are falling behind. Even the World Economic Forum's influential Global Gender Gap Report caps scores at parity, effectively ignoring domains where women outperform men. The political Right, meanwhile, has its own problematic approach. Many conservatives fuel male grievances for political gain, promoting the idea of a "war on men" without offering constructive solutions. They overweight the importance of biological sex differences to justify traditional gender roles, and they see the solution to men's problems as lying in the past rather than the future. Conservative thinkers like Jordan Peterson correctly identify some biological differences between the sexes but use these to justify gender disparities that are far too wide to be attributed to natural causes. They suggest that the only way to help men is to restore traditional gender roles, making women dependent again to resupply men with purpose. This political stalemate leaves the real problems of boys and men largely unaddressed. As Margaret Mead observed in 1975, "The whole process of change is taking place in an atmosphere of the greatest bad temper, and a tremendous amount of secondary hostility is being generated that in itself poses a threat to a good outcome." Nearly fifty years later, this hostility remains, despite the extraordinary successes of the women's movement.

Chapter 6: Practical Solutions: Education, Work and Family Reforms

Addressing the challenges facing boys and men requires a new framework - one that supports their development without undermining the progress made toward gender equality. Three major reforms can help create a more male-friendly education system: giving boys an extra year of pre-K before starting school, recruiting more male teachers, and investing in vocational education. The "redshirt the boys" proposal would introduce a one-year chronological age gap to reduce the developmental gap between boys and girls. Studies of redshirted boys show dramatic reductions in hyperactivity and inattention, higher levels of life satisfaction, lower chances of being held back a grade later, and higher test scores. The benefits are especially pronounced for boys from lower-income families. By starting boys later, we can reduce their risk of academic failure and grade retention. Recruiting more male teachers is equally crucial. Currently, only 24% of K-12 teachers are men, down from 33% in the early 1980s. Male teachers are especially scarce in elementary and middle schools. Research shows that male teachers boost academic outcomes for boys, especially in subjects like English. Education researcher Thomas Dee estimates that if half the English teachers from sixth to eighth grade were male, "the achievement gap in reading [between girls and boys] would fall by approximately a third by the end of middle school." The third reform involves investing in male-friendly vocational education and training. The singular focus on the traditional college route has led to a persistent undervaluing of vocational learning, which has been particularly harmful to boys and men. Studies show that career and technical education (CTE) schools boost graduation rates and wages for male students. We should aim to add at least 1,000 new technical high schools across the nation by 2030. In the labor market, we need to get more men into HEAL occupations - health, education, administration, and literacy. These sectors are where job growth is concentrated, but male representation remains stubbornly low. For every new STEM job created by 2030, there will be more than three new HEAL jobs. A national "Men Can HEAL" campaign, modeled on successful efforts to get women into STEM, could help build a pipeline of male workers, provide financial incentives, and reduce social stigma. Finally, we need to reconstruct the role of men in the family. The old model of fatherhood, narrowly based on economic provision, must be replaced with a more expansive role that includes a much bigger caring element. Fathers matter to their children whether or not they are in a relationship with their mother. Policy reforms to support this "direct dad" model include equal and independent paid parental leave, a reformed child support system, and father-friendly employment opportunities.

Chapter 7: Redefining Masculinity: Finding Purpose in a Gender-Equal World

The fundamental challenge facing men today is developing a positive masculine identity compatible with gender equality. Traditional masculinity centered on dominance, provision, and protection - qualities that made sense in historical contexts where physical strength determined survival and women lacked economic independence. As these conditions have changed, masculine identity has failed to evolve accordingly. Men need new models of masculinity that maintain positive aspects of traditional male roles while adapting to contemporary realities. Biological sex differences are real but have been misinterpreted and misapplied. Males do exhibit greater physical aggression, risk-taking, and sexual drive on average. These tendencies evolved for reproductive success in ancestral environments but require channeling and moderation in modern society. Rather than denying these differences or treating them as deterministic, we should acknowledge them while creating social structures that direct male energy toward prosocial purposes. The political left and right have both failed to offer constructive visions of modern masculinity. Progressives often pathologize traditional masculine traits while offering little positive guidance for male identity development. Conservatives nostalgically promote traditional masculinity without acknowledging its incompatibility with contemporary economic and social realities. Neither approach helps men navigate actual conditions or develop identities that combine traditional masculine virtues with adaptations necessary for a gender-equal world. Fatherhood represents the most promising foundation for positive masculine identity. While economic provision alone no longer distinguishes fathers from mothers, fathers make unique and valuable contributions to child development. Research shows that engaged fatherhood benefits children's cognitive development, emotional regulation, and social adjustment. These benefits appear particularly pronounced during adolescence, when fathers' approach to risk-taking and independence can complement maternal nurturing. Prosocial masculinity channels male traits toward community benefit rather than dominance or exploitation. Male physical strength and risk tolerance can serve protection and rescue functions, as evidenced by male overrepresentation in dangerous but essential occupations like firefighting and emergency response. Male competitive drives can motivate achievement and innovation when directed toward solving social problems rather than establishing hierarchies. Educational and cultural institutions must actively promote positive masculine development. Schools should recognize boys' developmental needs while maintaining high expectations for their behavior and achievement. Media should present diverse models of successful masculinity beyond stereotypes of either hypermasculine dominance or bumbling incompetence. Mentorship programs connecting boys with positive male role models can provide guidance through the challenging process of masculine identity formation in a rapidly changing social environment.

Summary

The challenges facing boys and men represent a profound social transformation that requires thoughtful, evidence-based responses. The educational system currently disadvantages boys due to their slower developmental trajectory; the labor market has eliminated many traditionally male jobs; and the role of fathers has been hollowed out without a clear replacement. These challenges are particularly acute for those who also face racial discrimination or economic disadvantage. Moving forward requires rejecting both progressive denial of male issues and conservative nostalgia for traditional gender roles. Instead, we need practical reforms that recognize biological realities while embracing gender equality: redshirting boys to account for developmental differences, recruiting more male teachers, investing in vocational education, encouraging men into growing HEAL occupations, and supporting direct fatherhood independent of marriage. These approaches can help boys and men flourish in a gender-equal society without reversing women's gains or reinforcing harmful stereotypes. The goal is not to restore male dominance but to ensure that both sexes can contribute fully to family, work, and society.

About Author

Loading...

Richard V. Reeves

Read more