Lisa Hickey wants to know why on earth you would take the gains of one gender and position them as the downfall of the other.
In a cover story for The New York Times magazine, Hanna Rosin looks at a handful of families in the area around Alexander City, Alabama where the men have lost jobs in manufacturing and the women in those families have taken on the role of the primary breadwinner to support the family. The men are portrayed as inflexible when it come to a changing economy, unwilling to take “non-macho” jobs” and somehow lost in the sea of changing times. The women, to help make Hannah’s point about being “the new Matriarchs”, are shown in the photos that accompany the piece, stiffly posed and standing above their seated husbands.
And the article is adapted from Hanna’s forthcoming book: “The End of Men and the Rise of Women.” Pictures of which are shown throughout the article. On the cover of the article is a photo of a man with his pants down around his ankles.
C’mon.
Gender differences exist and times are a changing, for sure, but this is such a clear-cut case of “othering” and man-bashing that I’m surprised the Times let it run. Would the Times run an article saying “Guess what, women really are the weaker sex?” I think not.
♦◊♦
The changing roles of men and women is not necessarily a bad thing, and to position it as one gender winning or losing seems to me unnecessarily harmful. And Hanna’s observations simply do not ring true with what I see. Yes, manufacturing jobs are changing, and those used to be part of men’s ability to succeed as the economic providers for a family, a role often chosen by men because of societal pressures or because they enjoyed having that be a part of their identity. But I don’t think this is the alternative:
As the usual path to the middle class disappears, what’s emerging in its place is a nascent middle-class matriarchy, in which women like Patsy pay the mortgage and the cable bills while the men try to find their place.
The family structures we’ve seen here at The Good Men Project are neither a patriarchy nor a matriarchy. They are simply two people working together to make things work. Sometimes a man or a women, sometimes two men (or two women). Children may or may not be involved, with no expectations that they need to be to be a fully realized person. If children are involved, then sometimes there is a dad that wants to stay-at-home for a while and raise the kids, and sometimes it’s the spouse. Men do adapt to the changing economy, and if that adaptation is to spend more time with their children, that is seen as a good thing. There is no “head of the household” as Hanna describes:
Like everyone of their generation I spoke to, Charles and Sarah Beth Gettys both insisted that Charles was still the “head of the household.” I often asked couples why the men got to retain the title if they weren’t fulfilling most of the attending duties. Sometimes they answered by redefining “head” as “spiritual head,” meaning biblically ordained as the leader. Often it came down to the man as the ultimate protector, the domestic superhero: if someone broke into the house, if the children were in trouble or out of control, if the roof caved in, if there was a tornado, if we needed him, he would rescue us.
Gender is not a zero-sum game. Men do not need to be de-masculinized every time a woman takes a step forward. If it is okay for a woman to be a woman, surely it is ok for a man to be a man. Let’s allow both to succeed.
If anyone has an additional response to Hanna Rosin’s piece, please email [email protected] or Noah Brand at [email protected]
Image of trousers courtesy of Shutterstock
I don’t think you really read Rosin’s article. She’s not arguing for the de-masculinization of men. She is simply taking note of the men’s personal feelings of being emasculated. She is making a point that southern society and particularly, evangelical Baptist ideology, promote unrealistic expectations for men and women. You’re way off the mark with this one.
Her tone is one of a raucous celebration of the demise of men and further implending doom; echoed by the segment of our society that still insists that the world is controlled by a “patriarchy”, a “rape culture”, and that being male still carries with it innate “privileges” (the so-called “male privilege”).
I have never found the way debate around this topic shapes up to be convincing. First, men are blamed as individuals for making poor choices (Rosin refers to boys that choose to play video games in excess in her article). When people say they’re not happy with that explanation, then we get to the second argument: it must be the culture that the men live in. If this were ANY other group, this second argument would be fundamentally unacceptable. It was not accepted when Senator Moynihan advanced it in the 1960s as an explanation for observed differences in living conditions… Read more »
Culturally, we have a set of standard explanations for any gender outcome:
Women succeed = Hurray for women’s initiative and drive!
Men succeed = Oh look, the patriarchy is giving more unearned privilege.
Women fail = Boo, the patriarchy is holding women back!
Men fail = Gee, I guess men are just inadequate and immature.
This formula can be applied to any and all situations; it’s very flexible and yet always gives the same, predictable result, as ideological filters tend to be.
“this is such a clear-cut case of “othering” and man-bashing that I’m surprised the Times let it run.”
Why would this be surprising? This message is consistent with the times socio-political world-view. The NYT is a very leaf leaning, feminist friendly magazine. They published this article with glee.
Like everyone of their generation I spoke to, Charles and Sarah Beth Gettys both insisted that Charles was still the “head of the household. So, I’ve read this a couple of times now, and I’m still mystified. What kind a question is that? Is it really supposed to be a meaningful question in the 21st century? On what planet? I can’t imagine anyone asking me that question. Or my wife. Or any of my friends. Or anyone of my generation – not to mention young couples. The concept of a “head of the household” is archaic. I belongs in a… Read more »
The problem is that very of us are indeed equal caregivers. We still expect men to be the provider, even though there are more two-income families and bread-winning wives. For proof, look at what happens to a father during a divorce — his financial support is valued more than any other type of involvement, including how much time he spends with his kids. Until that is addressed, no matter how equal we believe we are in marriage, men still aren’t equal in divorce — and that says a lot about our so-called “equal partnerships.” http://omgchronicles.vickilarson.com/2012/06/18/why-its-harder-to-be-a-good-dad-today/
In the past, very few people of either gender went to college. The current disparity in rates of college education between men & wome are not the result of fewer men (numerically) going to college. Women are going to college in greater numbers, and men haven’t kept up. Although this is not a good thing, it doesn’t mean that men are “falling behind.”. They just haven’t focused on college education to the same extent as women because historically they didn’t have to. At one time, they had access to good union jobs in construction and manufacturing which had opportunities for… Read more »
This is so true…my ex’s parents owned a laundry store and did very well for themselves in their time (ie., they owned a few houses and helped their adult children financially)….My ex said when he graduated high school, he felt like he no one to guide him….he drove a truck until he decided he should go to college and get a degree (and a better paying job)…Later, he earned a master’s and was working for years on a PhD (which at the time did not really increase his salary level to what he dreamed it should be)…In retrospect, I see… Read more »
Sarah is just recasting Rosin’s argument; According to Sarah and Hanah it is all men’s fault. I read comments like Sarah’s and, to be honest, they come across as “Boys are Stupid, Throw Rocks At Them.” I beg to disagree. i think the educational deck has been heavily stacked against boys since the early 1990s. There are lots of special programs for girls in STEM. None for boys. Reading and language skills are essential to scholastic success, even in STEM areas. Boys typically start to read later. If you aren’t a great reader by the end of the 3rd grade… Read more »
Actually I agree with ou, something needs to be done to convince boys that education is important. It’s not just the schools’ teaching methods however, it’s also parents who don’t value education, it’s society that values their boys’ success in sports over good grades, it’s society that denigrates “nerds” and idolizes athletic and military heroes. Many boys are naturally competitive and always strive to be the best at what they do, why aren’t they applying that drive to academic success? I think another issue is that man of the professional level jobs women are getting in administrative support, HR, and… Read more »
Did you see the UK study showing female teachers were marking boys lower than the girls, whilst male teachers marked both the same?
. Although this is not a good thing, it doesn’t mean that men are “falling behind.” Given that in this changing world education has become more of a vital thing I would say that in terms of getting more education in order to remain competitive yes, men/boys are falling behind. They just haven’t focused on college education to the same extent as women because historically they didn’t have to. More like they couldn’t afford to do so. Remember in accordance to the role of “the provider” men were expected to get out there and find work ASAP in order to… Read more »
I think somehow we need to change our culture so that academic success is as highly valued as sports. Graduates school in science, math and engineering aren’t filled with American women, they’re filled with foreign students! A friend of mine lives in an upscale part of Silicon Valley where the population is now more than half Asian immigrants, mostly families of high tech workers. She complained to me that her kids are athletic but there is very little going on in the way of a sports program at their school. The Asian families don’t care about sports. Their kids are… Read more »
Honestly, the reason that graduate schools in STEM are filled with foreign students is that in many fields, the job prospects are pretty bad, and have been for years. Americans aren’t going to graduate school, because, quite frankly, it literally doesn’t pay. On the other hand, working on a Ph.D in biology at an American university is a pretty good deal if you happen to live in India (or somewhere similar) and don’t want to stay there. Graduate schools are filled with non-American students for the same reason other industries use non-American labor: you don’t have to pay them as… Read more »
Not so much the end of men, more like the end of the U.S. and the birth of China and India.
More than 30% of manufacturing left the U.S. over the last ten years or so, and the U.S. is probably at the apex for those government services jobs that women rely on – so that’s not really the future, either.
But in the moment is what really counts and she can indeed make money, for her husband, peddling his demise.
Exactly. I wish people would quit talking about this as a natural progression. It’s not. A large part of this is directly related to corporations selling out North American manufacturing.
I find it so depressing that the NYT magazine finds putting a guy with his pants down on the cover somehow a sign of progress. Yes women are in the work force and going to college in record numbers. That is a *GOOD* thing, right? This idea that the lot of women and men are a zero sum game is ingrained so deeply in our culture that this “end of men” argument gets repeated over and over again. The truth, of course, is that gender roles are far more fluid than at any time in the past (again a *GOOD*… Read more »
The zero sum game thing is engrained past gender. To race, to wealth, to consumption…it’s all win lose here. It if wasn’t we’d have a much different view on health care and social programs.
I couldn’t have said it any better. The thing I find most despicable is the perpetuation of the zero sum myth–and it is most assuredly a myth–as a tactic to divide and conquer and breed the kind of resentment and irrational tribal fear that swings elections.
Rather than an end of men I would like to believe we are experience of a rebirth of men, one man at a time as reflected by the diversity of stories in our pages here at GMP. That’s it right there Tom. We are on the birth of a new era for men….. ….and frankly there are people that simply don’t like it. They don’t want us to be something different than what the old scripts tell us being a man is about. Shaming. Talk of “end of men”. Silencing. Anything to keep us in our place. The zero sum… Read more »
“….a guy with his pants down on the cover somehow a sign of progress.” ….. Uhm ? In private it can be quite a progression – but enough of my peccadillos and fantasies! P^)
I want to see a direct challenge to “The End Of Men” meme – and the “It’s Not A Zero Sum Game” counter meme is just not cutting the mustard.
I’d like to see a prize for the viral net meme which acts as an inoculation against it.
And as Hannah Rosin’s book deal illustrates, there’s good money to be made in perpetuating the zero-sum “end of men” theme… regardless of how wrong and harmful it is.
“Rather than an end of men I would like to believe we are experience of a rebirth of men….”
I would put it another way, rather than the end of men, I believe this is the end of a male stereotype. Most men should have no real gripe about Rosin’s piece because the “men” she references are caricatures; obtusely entrenched men with attitudes based on superficial beliefs of what masculinity asks of them to fullfill their role in life. They are a dying breed but they are truly in the vast minority.
This really hits home for me. ” Men do not need to be de-masculinized every time a woman takes a step forward. If it is okay for a woman to be a woman, surely it is ok for a man to be a man. Let’s allow both to succeed.” But given the deep structures of traditional values of what constitutes masculinity and femininity in the conservative south, these men DO feel de masculanized. And their women are moving (I would assume this is how they view it) into male roles thus that makes themselves less valuable. And if the roles… Read more »
Given that Rosin’s article was set in the south, I personally see this as less of an end of men/rise of women and more of an end of historically traditional roles and value systems and a rise of new ways of doing things. Genders happen to be involved. In the larger liberal cities that I’ve lived in, those roles were changing years ago and roles between men and women have been more equitable overall. More men seem at ease (in those cities) as nurses, teachers, etc or in “softer” roles that the men in the article seem ashamed to take… Read more »
HANNA ROSIN? Well she must be saying some really off target things if it has Lisa Hickey Straining at the leash from her sick bed! P^) … Big Wave! Of course, there is no issue here – except that Rosin has a nice book deal for “The End of Men: And the Rise of Women”, and this is just part of her publicity machine and marketing drive. I just wonder which Journalists and Editors have shares in certain publishing houses! The book tour beckons and every anchoroid on every morning show and afternoon show and radio show will have their… Read more »