The War Between the Sexes
Yesterday, Basic Books released a new book by Kay S. Hymowitz entitled Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men into Boys. A senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor to City Journal, Hymowitz is the author of an earlier book, Marriage and Caste in America: Separate and Unequal Families in a Post-Marital Age, which I touched on in a post on Sunday.
As a student of trends, Hymowitz is always worth reading, and the argument that she advances in her latest book is already causing intense discussion. The weekend before last, she published a teaser in The Wall Street Journal entitled Where Have All the Good Men Gone? The last time I checked 105,594 readers had signaled that they liked the piece, and there are indications that in some quarters it has also attracted considerable ire.
It is easy to see why. In this country today, there is no subject more apt to provide an occasion for the unleashing of fury than a frank discussion of relations between men and women. Neither sex is satisfied. Both are angry. And much of what is posted on the internet by men about women and by women about men is, frankly, vile.
The focus of Hymowitz’ article and no doubt of the book from which it was excerpted (which I have not yet seen) is what she called “pre-adulthood,” by which she means the condition of the twenty-something slacker dude. “Not so long ago,” she observes, “the average American man in his 20s had achieved most of the milestones of adulthood: a high-school diploma, financial independence, marriage and children. Today, most men in their 20s hang out in a novel sort of limbo, a hybrid state of semi-hormonal adolescence and responsible self-reliance.” This may make some sense, she acknowledges, for those who have gone to college (though she does not adequately explain why). “But it’s time to state what has become obvious to legions of frustrated women: It doesn’t bring out the best in men.”
What Hymowitz calls pre-adulthood is, as she argues, “a major demographic event,” which she compares with adolescence – a stage in life that did not exist for most Americans until the middle of the last century – when it became the norm for everyone to go to high school. The statistics are clear enough. There are colleges and universities in this country with something close to a one-to-one sex ratio (Hillsdale is one among them), but they are rare and highly selective. The overall ratio in the country is three-to-two – which helps explain why 34% of the women and only 27% of the men in the 25-to-34 age group have bachelor’s degrees. The young women who do attend college have higher GPAs than the young men alongside them, and Hymowitz is right when she says that “most professors” see them as having “more confidence and drive.” Nationwide, women outnumber men in graduate school and in law school, and they earn more than their own brothers and the men they date. They get on with life, and young men don’t.
Hymowitz explains this development in part by pointing to the “knowledge economy” – to a decline in the number of jobs that we think of as typically male and to an increase in the premium paid college graduates apt to end up sitting behind a desk. She points as well to “our increasingly labyrinthine labor market.” As she puts it, “Fields that attract ambitious young men and women often require years of moving between school and internships, between internships and jobs, laterally and horizontally between jobs, and between cities in the U.S. and abroad. The knowledge economy gives the educated young an unprecedented opportunity to think about work in personal terms. They are looking not just for jobs but for ‘careers,’ work in which they can exercise their talents and express their deepest passions. They expect their careers to give shape to their identity. For today's pre-adults, ‘what you do’ is almost synonymous with ‘who you are,’ and starting a family is seldom part of the picture.” As she puts it, “Husbands, wives, and children are a drag on the footloose life required for the early career track and identity search. It has delayed a stable sense of identity, dramatically expanded the pool of possible spouses, mystified courtship routines, and helped throw into doubt the very meaning of marriage.” One consequence is a delay of marriage. Where, in 1970, only 16% of those 25 to 29 years old have never been married, today this is true for 55%.
Hymowitz’ main point, however, is that the entry of women into the career market has given rise to “cultural uncertainty about the social role of men.”
It's been an almost universal rule of civilization that girls became women simply by reaching physical maturity, but boys had to pass a test. They needed to demonstrate courage, physical prowess or mastery of the necessary skills. The goal was to prove their competence as protectors and providers. Today, however, with women moving ahead in our advanced economy, husbands and fathers are now optional, and the qualities of character men once needed to play their roles—fortitude, stoicism, courage, fidelity—are obsolete, even a little embarrassing.
This point – and everything else that Hymowitz has to say on this subject – is well-taken. But I think that there is something that, at least in her article, she has omitted.
Some years ago, Christina Hoff Sommers published a volume entitled The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism is Harming Our Young Men, in which she explored the manner in which American schools – where women nearly always rule – denigrated manliness. This is, I suspect, one dimension of the problem. The qualities traditionally celebrated as signs of manliness -- fortitude, stoicism, courage, and fidelity, among them – are mocked, while everything is done to encourage young women to spread their wings.
There is, I suspect, yet another reason for the emergence of the slacker dude, and that is the sexual revolution. Prior to, say, 1969, coitus not interruptus was for the man unmarried – especially for those put off by the thought of going to a brothel – in short supply, and young women colluded to keep it that way. What they wanted was marriage, a family, and stability – in short, Hymowtiz’ “protector and provider.” They were not much interested in young men reluctant to step up to the plate; and they were decidedly unfriendly and, in fact, downright nasty to other young women who broke the rules. George Bernard Shaw caught the drift of things in the world of yesteryear when he observed that marriage was an institution bound to last – given that it combined the maximum of temptation with the maximum of opportunity.
In about 1969, as I well remember, everything changed, and footloose young men found that they could easily get for free from nice girls what they would hitherto have had to pay for in unsavory circumstances from girls not so nice. Young men are instinctively nomadic, and they enjoy chasing (and being chased and unchaste) – so this suited them just fine. In the circumstances, they found that it was outside marriage that they could most easily combine the maximum of temptation with the maximum of opportunity, and they succumbed to the temptation. There were women who would feed them, do their laundry, and provide for their needs in, ahem, other ways.
When Hymowitz observes, “Relatively affluent, free of family responsibilities, and entertained by an array of media devoted to his every pleasure, the single young man can live in pig heaven – and often does,” she misses something that Mark Regnerus, associate professor of sociology at the University of Texas and co-author of Premarital Sex in America catches when he observes, “When attractive women will still bed you, life for young men, even those who are floundering, just isn’t so bad.” There is, after all, at least one point on which Freud was more than half right: “Civilization is built on blocked, redirected, and channeled sexual impulse, because men will work for sex.” The real problem, as Regnerus points out, is that “today’s young men . . . seldom have to.”
In the end, however, this leaves both women and men unsatisfied. For no one really wants to be a pig, and members of both sexes possess longings that a passing roll in the hay will not do much of anything to quell. If Kay Hymowitz’ article in The Wall Street Journal adequately reflects her book, the latter will be at best a starting point for rumination on this subject – and not a sufficient source of enlightenment. But, on such a matter, it is certainly good to begin some serious thinking – for with regard to the relations between the two sexes we live in a world increasingly unhappy. Witness the fury aroused by even raising this subject.
- Comment (85)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Can't have what both ways, Scott?
Aug '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
StickerShock: "I once asked a girl at college why she dressed so modestly. Without fail, she always wore skirts that covered her entire legs. It stood out. She thanked me for referring to it as modesty, because that was not the way people normally addressed it. She felt like a freak."
...But her dress style goes far beyond modesty. Why would we want young woment to wer long skirts or dress like the Amish?
Physical attractiveness is a huge part of dating and mating. That's perfectly natural & healthy. Look at old movies and see how sexy the women were. Maybe not miniskirts, but form-fitting clothing with plenty of decoletage were the norm. Young people should be able to look their best & flirt a bit without the expectation of a roll in the hay. That's how it worked in my teen years, and I'm 52. · Mar 3 at 6:36am
"Bowling Green girls treat you right
They wear dresses cut country tight
A man in Kentucky
Sure is lucky
If he's seen the Bowling Green light" Bowling Green, Everly Brothers, circa 1967
What a lyric!
Jun '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
"Bowling Green girls treat you right"
I guess the definition of "treat you right" has changed. Girls primping, looking sexy & alluring, flirting a bit might have been the old norm. Guys getting shaved & cleaned up with a decent outfit. Get to know each other, come by and meet my mom & dad, go out to dinner. Love blossoms.
Now "treat you right" often has a much baser meaning, I'm afraid.
An example: Daughter was out dancing this weekend with girlfriends and was harassed by a man (wearing Dior) who told her she was "a perfect breeding specimen." He said he wanted her to have his children --- how obnoxious. She had security remove him. So many creeps out there today!
Aug '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Here is what the proper resolution of that situation should have been: Either some boy-friends of your daughter or you should have found out who that "man" was, tracked him down and whipped his ass for calling your daughter a "breeding specimen."
One problem with our society is that those who most desperately need a beating fail to get one...
Jun '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Ha ha! If she'd been out with midshipmen I think that might have been how the situation was resolved. Her gang of male friends studying musical theatre would not have been up to the task. Hopefully the security staff at least kicked him in the rear as they showed him the door.
It's just amazing how so many guys today use the most vulgar & inappropriate methods to meet girls. Presumably they've had some success with this approach, though. My daughter is still astounded that the exact kind of remarks made by psychotic homeless men she passes on the street are thrown out by smartly dressed men in respectable establishments. College "bro" types, too, think a girl should be flattered when without being introduced they walk up and say something idiotic about "making beautiful children together" or comment about "hotness."
It's not limited to NYC. Her friends attending colleges all over have similar tales to tell.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Matthew Lawrence
Here is what the proper resolution of that situation should have been: Either some boy-friends of your daughter or you should have found out who that "man" was, tracked him down and whipped his ass for calling your daughter a "breeding specimen."
One problem with our society is that those who most desperately need a beating fail to get one... · Mar 3 at 7:22am
Amen.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
I have noticed that women I know seem to be less happy than the men I know. This is a general statement, of course, not true for every individual. My wife is quite happy, but not a serious feminist at all. She loves being a stay at home mom with our 8 and 6 year old kids.
Still, the general pattern seems to apply. I am not sure why, but the men I know just are more satisfied and happy.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
There have always been man-babies, and there will always be man-babies. Feminism helped women understand that they don't have to put up with them. Gone are the days when girls who barely reached puberty were married off to 30 year old men. No longer is a woman judged by her marital status and her husband's opinions, and the only occupations suitable for her were nurse, teacher or mother. Women no longer must tolerate an employer who sexually harasses them. They can choose when to get pregnant. They aren't forced to remain in sexually and physically abusive marriages. They don't have to accept the double standard that a man can sow his wild oats, but any suitable wife must be pure as the driven snow.
Feminism fell short because it chose to complicate the uncomplicated: male sexuality. And women have learned to use their own sexuality, but only for a short-term advantage and allowed men to exploit them. If women used their sexuality for a long-term advantage, we'd run the world. A happy husband is one who is led to believe he's in charge. A happy wife is one who is.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Roque Nuevo
It never occurred to me that these were "whorish" or "demeaning" for anyone, let alone for the woman I love. Please explain.
I might be mistaken, but I heard or read once that in generations before WWII oral sex was associated with prostitutes. I mentioned it merely as an example of how much our culture has changed in regard to sex.
By "giving themselves completely", I meant making themselves totally bare and vulnerable to another person. As I said, women who offer their bodies for groping and oral sex before marriage but reserve the ultimate carnal act would probably not make that distinction if they were not worried about becoming pregnant.
In any case, the core change is the objectification of the human body; the notion that sex can be divorced from personal commitment and responsibility.
Let's not forget that adolescense is a modern invention. Until little more than a century ago, people worldwide were generally expected to be married in their early teens. The broadening of time between the emergence of one's sexuality and marriage is a major factor in the breakdown of sexual morality.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
I am sorry, but that seems like a sexist statement to me. If we reversed it, would women be happy with it? This quote is no different than calling a man a child.
A happy husband and wife are those that share in the marriage, each in charge of their area, but acting as a team.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
StickerShock:
...her dress style goes far beyond modesty. Why would we want young woment to wer long skirts or dress like the Amish?
Physical attractiveness is a huge part of dating and mating. That's perfectly natural & healthy. Look at old movies and see how sexy the women were. Maybe not miniskirts, but form-fitting clothing with plenty of decoletage were the norm. Young people should be able to look their best & flirt a bit without the expectation of a roll in the hay. That's how it worked in my teen years, and I'm 52.
I agree that covering one's body entirely isn't necessary for modesty.
But there's a difference between a woman dressing to be beautiful and dressing to be sexy. Modern women are trained by movies, advertising and much more to want to look sexy all the time. Dressing to be sexy is fine, but that has a proper setting. Agree?
It turned out that girl was in a local cult, by the way. Nice girl, though.
Nov '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Karen- my answer to your statement is this: The vast majority of women very much want to be wives and mothers. This entails that the vast majority of women, even who've no interest in children, desire and are attracted to men who exemplify certain qualities that signal "protector" and "provider." (Even Gloria Steinem married a man, Mort Zuckerman, who vastly out-earns her). But in order for manly assertiveness (or thumos) to be directed to a woman's honor and protection- i.e., shaping men into gentlemen- requires there be different roles for the sexes, roles informed at some level by nature. Which is to say, sex roles aren't just "cultural" or products of historical or evolving will.
At no other time have women been more unhappy than they are today. The great paradox is that women are more unhappy the more formal equality they've achieved with men. Even Maureen Dowd somehow sees this.
Edited on March 3, 2011 at 8:25pmAug '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Therein lies much of the problem.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Bryan G. Stephens
I am sorry, but that seems like a sexist statement to me. If we reversed it, would women be happy with it? This quote is no different than calling a man a child.
A happy husband and wife are those that share in the marriage, each in charge of their area, but acting as a team. · Mar 3 at 10:41am
I've never suggested men are children, but I do believe they like having their ego stroked and efforts affirmed. But if we are to label something as sexist, I'd say the suggestion that feminism is somehow responsible for men delaying adulthood is a prime example. What some describe as young men's proclivity to be "instinctively nomadic" and pleasure at being "unchaste," I call immature and irresponsible. I'm unwilling to make excuses for bad behavior. But a characteristic of childish behavior is a reluctance to take responsibility for one's actions, so if the shoe fits...
Edited on March 3, 2011 at 9:08pmMay '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Robert Lux
At no other time have women been more unhappy than they are today.
Edited on Mar 03 at 11:25 am
How can you make that statement? What does that mean to be happy, anyway? I'm not always happy, but I have joy, and it has nothing to do with "formal equality with men." Women have the leisure to reflect on their situation in life. 150 years I'd probably be on my 10th pregnancy and would be considered lucky if half of my children survived. Would I have been happy? Don't know, but my quality of life would not be as good as it is now.
Sep '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Karen
I've never suggested men are children, but I do believe they like having their ego stroked and efforts affirmed. · Mar 3 at 12:07pm
Edited on Mar 03 at 12:08 pm
?!?
So, what you mean by "man-babies" is a man that likes having his ego stroked and efforts affirmed? Then all men are man-babies.
Furthermore, babies don't even know what it means to have their egos stroked or their efforts affirmed.
May '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Dan Holmes
Karen
I've never suggested men are children, but I do believe they like having their ego stroked and efforts affirmed. · Mar 3 at 12:07pm
Edited on Mar 03 at 12:08 pm
?!?
So, what you mean by "man-babies" is a man that likes having his ego stroked and efforts affirmed? Then all men are man-babies.
Furthermore, babies don't even know what it means to have their egos stroked or their efforts affirmed. · Mar 3 at 2:04pm
Those were two different posts about two different things. Yes, there are man-babies, slackers, whatever you want to call them. Hymowitz proposes the notion. No amount of ego stroking or encouragement will make them otherwise. However, the point I was making with the other post about men (the non-slacker variety, and I think context would provide the distinction) is that they like to feel they are in charge and need the extra affirmation that they are doing a good job. All men aren't man-babies, but some are and always will be.
Feb '11
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Karen,
Your statements have the same sort of arrogance in them that I'd expect from a plantation owner speaking about his slaves circa 1850, or a mullah speaking about his multiple wives circa now: My inferiors are essentially children, and they are lucky I'm here to instruct them and show them how their lives should be.
Your day is passing. Enjoy it while you can.
Edited on March 4, 2011 at 3:19amNov '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
This has certainly been a most provocative and interesting thread!My husband recommended that I share this story because in so many ways, it neatly summarizes the yin and the yang....
My ten year-old nephew came to visit us for a week last summer. Living in Florida, there are always some "wildlife" issues with which we must reckon. That particular week, we had an invasion of geckos inside the lanai (harmless,but annoying), a garter snake (harmless, but horrifying) that insisted on sunning itself arrogantly on my driveway and a dead fish in my koi pond. Arrgghh.....
My nephew, being a typical, shoot-first-ask-questions-later-what -can-I-kill young lad, was delighted to take care of all these issues for me. (Will spare all the animal lovers the gory details). He later told his dad that he'd never had a better vacation and I responded that I'd never had a more useful guest!
Edited on March 4, 2011 at 4:00amMay '10
Re: The War Between the Sexes
Karen,
Let's reverse what you are saying:
"A happy woman is one who is led to believe she's in charge. A happy husband is one who is."
"I never suggested women are like children but they do like to have their vanity stroked and their emotions affirmed."
I put it to you, that if I went out and posted these statements, I would be branded a sexist.