Author blames feminism for the lack of marriagable men
This is the reason why only 29% of men say that a successful marriage is one of the most important things in their lives, according to Fox columnist and author Suzanne Venker. Responding to the Pew Research Center findings, Ms. Venker, who is promoting her latest book, “How to Choose a Husband (And Make Peace with Marriage)” (spoiler alert—it’s not fiction!), cited an unspecified “subculture of men” in her “hundreds, if not thousands” of conversations she’s had in research for her three books on American family.
If you’re familiar with the media slant of Fox News, then you might easily dismiss the opinion piece by its title: The war on men. But Ms. Venker’s outlandish claims go on to say that, since the sexual revolution, “men haven’t changed much—they had no revolution that demanded it—but women have changed dramatically.”
I can only infer that she means men haven’t changed much biologically, because the quantifiable data I’ve read and the perception I experience couldn’t be more contrary to her assertion. I need not look too far beyond my father’s generation, when the husband worked and the wife took care of the domestic duties. It’s obvious how much those lines have been blurred, in one generation. But opinions are like…well, you know. So here’s some facts. In the 2008 National Study of the Changing Workforce (last revised in 2011), 80% of married (or partnered) employees lived in dual-income families, up 14% from 1977.
The percentage of all employees of all ages who agree (strongly or somewhat) that it’s better for all involved if “the man earns the money and the woman takes care of the home and children” has dropped significantly and substantially over the past three decades—from 64% in 1977 to 39% in 2008, a decline of 25 percentage points. Nevertheless, it is important to note that two in five employees still endorse traditional gender roles.
Don’t like ads? Become a supporter and enjoy The Good Men Project ad freeThis change has been more dramatic among men than women.
For the first time in 2008, men’s and women’s views about appropriate work and family roles have converged to a point where they are virtually identical and not significantly different:
• among men, the percentage who agreed with that statement fell from 74% in 1977 to 40% in 2008; and
• among women, the percentage dropped from 52% in 1977 to 37% in 2008.
Thus, while the attitudes of men and women were significantly and substantially different in 1977, the gender difference was inconsequential and not significantly different in 2008—a striking and seminal change in attitudes over the past three decades.
Seems like men have changed. Ms. Venker’s subjective sampling must have been wholly from the “2 out of 5” pool, which, according to my math, would be in the minority. It’s one thing to be contrarian to illuminate an overlooked trend, one that adds a new element to the discourse, and it’s a wholly different and specious thing to be contrarian to sell books, especially behind a wizard’s curtain of authority or journalistic impartiality.
The NSCW report goes on to state that “Fathers are spending more time with their children than three decades ago.” Few of us need factual support to prove what is obvious, but its nice in the case when someone states the opposite as true. The report goes on to state that the Millennial generation, both fathers and mothers, spend more time with their children than in the four decades prior. That seems like a significant—and salubrious—change.
For the record, it also found through large-sampling phone-interview research that “Men are taking more responsibility for other family work as well, according to their wives/partners.”
Ms Venker goes on to suggest that feminism and the battle of the sexes has created a dynamic where women are good/men are bad, and the “so-called dearth of good men (read: marriageable men)” might be “hold on to your seats—women’s fault?”
Wow. You just blew the cap off of what The Daily Show host Jon Stewart calls “Bullshit mountain.” First off, to blame a gender, or even a subset of a gender, for a cultural gap, is erroneous and narrow-sighted. In Fox terms, it’s stupid. To then say that “the so-called rise of women has…pissed [men] off,” needs some kind of proof, especially if you’re going to go on and say that “Feminism serves men well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever.”
Hello, Fox News?
The Families and Work Institute calls its report “the only on-going study of its kind or scale to provide such extensive information about workers’ lives on and off the job is widely used by policy makers, employers and the media.” Ms Venker might want to have a look.
Read more about the changing roles of Dads and Families here.
—Photo by esPos.de/Flickr
the way that women have changed today, how could they be.
@Alice:I am many things and being wrong frequently is one of those things. However, being pompous–having excessive self esteem and exaggerated diginity isn’t among them. At the same time misunderstandings online aren’t unheard of either. I meant you no harm. I am confused by exaclty what your points are because you seem to be making points that criticize men for choosing “foreign women” over persumably American women. I am always circumspect and suspicious of what I may see as xenophobia,again could be wrong. But if I am wrong, then why make the distinction? Why does it matter that the choice… Read more »
Men aren’t going to be as interested in marriage because they get everything they want outside of marriage.
I think ‘shacking up’ is the new marriage for men. Guys want someone to move in, have sex with them, cook and clean for them, who can be thrown up pretty easily.
In all fairness, is there not a group of men who complain that American women are too masculine (and thats why they marry foreign women)?
@Alice: I agree with you that men have figured out that they can get what they need without getting maried, but probably for different reasons than yours. The belief that men only want a woman that will clean for him, cook for him, etc, is a bit 1950’s . I think that especially on this site men have very clearly articulated, with respect and deference to the feelings of women, some significant problems that need t be addressed along side issues that womwen have about men. The mistake in reducing this problem to one of sexaulity, or the desire for… Read more »
Ogwriter: “The belief that men only want a woman that will clean for him, cook for him, etc, is a bit 1950′s” It may be 1950s, but sometimes it’s true. There are guys out there who assume that anyone female can cook. I’ve dealt with guys I didnt really know, but invited me to live with them. Dude can’t cook so expects me to cook and be there to service his other ‘needs.’ When a guy who barely knows me asks me to move in, I really dont know what else to think. Not every guy who has asked me… Read more »
I don’t know many women who would allow a man to move in only to become a servant to the man. They have men who cook, clean, and take care of themselves.
Yes and women want men to pay for them, protect them, do all the nasty work so women can sit in ivory towers being precious little snowflakes right? Cut the sexist dribble please. The guys whinging about local women being shit do it more because the local women they meet ARE bitches, they ARE shitty dates, they’re entitled, hypocritical, etc. Doesn’t mean all are but they for some reason end up meeting quite a few who suck. For a while I met local women like this and the nice women I knew were all from overseas. There are some that… Read more »
@Alice: Which men are marrying “foreign’ women and why does it matter?
yes why does that matter if men marry foreign girls? and so what? lot of women marry foreign men, and it seems not to be any problem there. Why should that matter if somebody try find love overseas?
@Suo pertypo: I thnik what you are seeing in these comments about foriegn girls and such is something that few women ever talk about openly, feelings of jealously and bias when American men —who women like Alice seem to consider their property—date outrside of their “race” or country. I hear this frequebtly in the African American community in the hysteria over African American men marrying “white” women. The numbers on interracial marrieges between white women and blackmen as a percentage of all marrieges involving African American men Caucasion women is miniscule—well less than one percent. What’s interesting is that seldom… Read more »
What? Thats a really pompous assumption? Most of the time I stay away from men, how on earth could I think they are my property? I was making the point that some men really do think American women are too I masculine or “not really women” so they go elsewhere. I was going to say sometimes black men say it about white women. Sometimes white men say it about white women. I dont care what they do, I was just making a point. I must wonder why you’d say that, its not like Im here singing the praises of men… Read more »
isnt that a bit passé Alice 😉
No, men aren’t eschewing marriage because “they get everything they want” outside of it.
It’s more like they opt out of it because there’s not much in it for them.
@Alice… Maybe men are not interested in marriage anymore because it is viewed as less than fulfilling. Women go off and sow their wild oats. Then they wake up one day and say it is time to find a “decent” guy to marry and have babies…..Sex goes to hell in the marriage. Husband is miserable…. Then the kids are off to college and out of the house. Suddenly she then says, SHE is no “unfulfilled” and files for divorce. Meanwhile the guy has wasted decades of his life. So, this whole marriage thingy is all about the woman and what… Read more »
Agreed. It’s basic marketing: if you want more men to marry, you have to make marriage appealing to men. What’s the draw, where’s the upside of marriage?
I agree copy, right now I cant see the big thing in bein married, beside lot of work and expences. She get alot, but whats in for me? what do I get out of this?
@Copyleft: It is somewhat odd that the point you make about making marriage more appealing to men and men would want to get married is absolutely missed. If you think about what many men are actually asking for from women—it’s not political— is a matter of want to. And if marriage is so all fired damn important to women why aren’t they more amenable to providing men with what they feel they need , within reason? It makes little sense to me that if having a lifetime partner is important, than the perspective becomes, ‘ What sacrifices am I wiling… Read more »
2Duffer: I meant to write that women are not ready to look in the mirror.
@Duffer: Why is it perceived when men decide they don’t want marriage as a bad thing? Isn’t marriage a new thing anyway? Hasn’t the world moved along just fine without marriage for most it’s existence? Why can’t men simply choose to define themselves differently and be supported in that choice? Or is it only ok for women to eschew marriage for the finer things in life? If marriage was as good for men and bad for women as women have been saying for generations shouldn’t women be glad men are eschewing marriage? Now women are free to be independent without… Read more »
@OG, while I’m sure some men are fed up, I think the trend of marrying later, or alternatives to traditional marriage, are more to do with men’s self-awareness. Marriage is no longer a social, cultural, or economic duty. It’s a good thing, I hope, that people–both men and women–are being more discerning in their life choices, that waiting til your ready is better. People who are deciding to get married are doing it later and, speaking for myself, I’m much more aware of who I am in my 30s than I was in my 20s. There’s a durability to that.
@ Duffer: I read the commen,t about finding your femnine side the opposite of you. I read it as meaning that the feminine side as superior to the masculine.However, the more I consider the points, I think both definitions—masculine and feminine— are a crock. and the belief that one has to even have a constant definition to live by is divisive,retrograde and ultimately aspoils relationships by forcing people to choose sides.
@Archy:Dit-the fuck-to.
I confess I’m totally confused by the whole “end of men” debate. When I put it all together, I hear really mixed messages: Men haven’t changed enough, but they also need to keep in touch with older ideals. Men are being left behind, and the best way to fight this is to be more like they used to be. Men need to modernize more and at the same time be more like they were before. Change forwards and change backwards. Gender ideals are really unrealistic, exploitative mindgames, and we need to question every single one of them, except when it… Read more »
@wellokaythen I think about this a lot. There are some interesting dynamics but for me it mostly boils down to, do you prefer the ideas you have of what a man is supposed to be or an actual, emotionally and intellectually complex, living, breathing man. Because you can’t have both (and the same goes for men when it comes to women, or men to men, women to women, etc…) I had an ex who got terribly upset when I explained that I didn’t worship the ground she walked on and it was a good thing. Needless to say it didn’t… Read more »
“Where have all the good men gone?” I heard women in Sydney asking this, but potential men for them REQUIRED to earn $100k+ per year and be college educated, already they’ve taken away most of the market. Theoretically if there are more n more women who want college educated men but women make up 60% of the college admissions, eventually there will be a supply issue. If they’re earning in the top 5% of the income of their country and want someone similar whilst men do not require the same need to date within the 5%, then they’re making it… Read more »
Interesting POV from a feminist. Even includes the requisite “FOX! EWWW!” thingy, but goes on from there in a rational way.
http://www.yourtango.com/2012166222/war-on-men-feminist-unlikely-stance
Also, telling us that husbands do more or different stuff today does not tell us about the guys who aren’t and may never be husbands and fathers, the point of the Venker piece.
Sucks to be them? Not to go all Herbert Spencer on you but if men can’t adapt to the new society, do they deserve to be a husband and father?
I would have to agree with that position, lucrezaborgia, across all evolutionary lines, including gender.
Or it might be great to be them? If men are not marrying it doesn’t necessarily follow that those men are misfits or unmarriable. It seems to be that the institution no longer holds an allure for millions of men the way it did for their fathers. Who is to say that their life is wrong, or that they haven’t adapted to the new society? Being a father (or mother) isn’t necessarily the gold standard of human behavior. Maybe not marrying is the adaptation. http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com/2012/03/transcript-of-men-not-marrying-how-deep.html Here is Girl Writes What’s post on the trend which I have to say (whether… Read more »
“If you’re familiar with the media slant of Fox News, then you might easily dismiss the opinion piece by its title: The war on men.” So if Huffington Post or Jezebel were to title a piece The War on Women, we might easily dismiss it as opinion. I constantly seen stats like only 2 – 3% of reported rapes are false when no actual studies have been cited and the only study I’m familiar with is Kanin’s, which found 41% of accusations to be false or when they assert that the majority of DV victims are women, when then CDC’s… Read more »
Agreed, John. Hyperbole in headline is as old as newsprint.
While this article reads like something from ‘People’ magazine, it does touch upon something that I feel is relevant. My 21 year old son and just about all his friends, ranging in age from 21-30 or so. None of them show any desire to get married. Some live with girlfriends sure, but their attitude is “If she breaks my balls too much, I’ll just get another one”. A couple of times I thought my son was serious about someone(spending ‘quality’ time togeather), but it seems it was just a case of ‘Friends with benefits’. Meanwhile , my 30 year old… Read more »
Great point, Bobbt, and I’d say your data is as qualified as Ms Venker’s because it’s, well, qualified. There’s something to the Pew Center study (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1920/millennials-value-parenthood-over-marriage), and an undeniable trend that people are getting married later, or less tolerant of marriage, or even less tolerant of the prospect of divorce. This report is definitely relevant, as is the observation on your kids. Why this is happening is interesting, and worthy of analysis, but I’m far more interested in what it portends.
Nothing in soceity exists in a vacuum. When something changes, such as womens position in the workforce, it creats a ‘Butterfly’ or ‘Ripple’ effect on the rest of soceity. How things will change,you might as well go to the gypsy fortune teller because no one can say, but if soceity is good and the change is fundementally good, thereshouldn’t be any catastrophy. Soceity will adapt as it as throughout history. I try to tell my Daughter,”You’re not going to find a 1970’s man in 2012″ By that I mean a oung man who’s gotten the partying ou of his system… Read more »
I suspect people will have fewer children but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Also, I’m old enough to have learned that no relationship is often better than z bad relationship.
There is one thing I forgot to mention. I have 2 of 3 daughters who are happily married to really great guys. They both are 10 years OLDER than my daughters! My one daughter (the one mentioned above) actually has said there’s no way she would marry the person her husband was over 10 years ago!
What interests me is that this is commonly–at least, in panic-mongering media articles–viewed as a problem, rather than simply a shift. “Oh noes! Men aren’t getting married as much! Society is doomed, DOOOOOMED!”
Sorry, not seeing the problem here. If marriage isn’t appealing to men, they opt out. Shrug.
Sounds like your daughter is just lamenting based on her own ideals. I presume her friends are looking for good (willing to marry) men, but for your son and his friends, clearly they are OK with another ideal (as are the partners they are taking up with).
I myself am a single male (tentatively seeing someone at the moment), but I don’t see the institution of marriage as an ideal for me. I’m not opposed to spending my life with someone, but I have next-to no interest in marriage as it has been traditionally defined.
Isn’t she related to Phyllis “Do As I Say, Ladies, Not As I Do” Schafly?
Yes, niece. Big surprise.
I am having a hard time believing this isn’t some sort of pay-for-play-type situation between Fox and this woman’s publisher.
Maybe it’s the optimist in me.
@TK, I might understand it if it were some kind of publisher payola. I still can’t find the Pew Center study she’s referencing–I saw one on 18-34 year old, or Millennials, attitudes toward marriage and parenting, but no exact cite.
Just as empty as the end of men craze. By all mean’s feminism isn’t the sunshine and rainbow fest meany of its members try to convince us it is, but it’s the root of the problem.
She’s one card short of a full deck, pretty much like everybody else at FOX. What a crock!
I meant “there’s so much wrong with THIS” as in her piece
Whatever the basis is for Suzanne Venker’s claims, it certainly isn’t data. Also, she implies that men who don’t want to get married aren’t good (which is not true, as evidenced by many intelligent conversations here on GMP) and her column reeks of the “good girls have to get married” complex. I know plenty of smart, passionate, amazing people who don’t fit her paradigm.
Also maybe this is just me but it sure sounds like she’s telling women to shut up and sit down. Which should outrage anyone with a pulse.
Yeah, Joe, “To embrace their feminine side”, as if the feminine side is a subordinate trait. There’s so much that’s wrong with us, and it stems from a proven lack of fact. Just call it an opinion; don’t cloak it in unsubstantiated claims
@Duffer: If funny but I read that comment about embracing the feminine side the opposite of how you did:which is to say, the feminine sid eis superior to the masculine. However, the more I think about it,there is no such thing as a feminine or a masculine.The idea that either concept–and that’s all they are is concepts, that live and breath on a whim– ever exists as a pure manifestation of the ideal is simply not true. And the more we find out about humanity–all of it, not just some version of it that will only exist for a short… Read more »
That’s how I interpret it too! It seems like patriarchy has a strong hold on her.