Of Boys and Men - The Least Talked About Challenge and Opportunity

I had a meal recently with a brilliant woman who is among my go-to people to discuss feminism. She has done as much as anyone I know to help young women succeed, and herself is an extraordinary example. Every conversation is thoughtful, data-filled, balanced.

I raised with her that I had just read an extremely provocative book, Of Boys and Men: Why The Modern Male Matters, And What To Do About It . The author Richard Reeves , who is also a friend, is one of the most highly regarded thinkers on society, the middle class and more, and a leading light at Brookings. I couldn’t get through half my description and her eyes rolled: “One more book trying to explain why men actually have the short end of the stick?”

In a way I suspect Reeves would have loved this reaction because it is his very case in point. He notes, “There is a fear that helping men means hindering women, whether by design or by happenstance. But it is not true… Raising men up does not mean holding women down or “displacing” them. It means rising together.”

There are some enormously important and interesting conversations with eye-opening data on how boys are raised and where men across the country see themselves. Ignoring the latter risks significant weight and missed opportunity on our economy and society, while the ignoring the former ensures a cycle that will compound and worsen. ??And Reeves has created as important and balanced a conversation starter as has been written to date.

And yet this isn’t a start. He acknowledges a great deal of literature over some years to examine where boys and men are in the country today, but notes right off the bat that the challenges are worse than we think – they are struggling far worse in school and in average wages than ever before; that those struggling tend to be in areas of economic and social dislocation we say we want to most address today; that the issues are structural, not addressable one man or boy at a time; a surprising number of policy interventions don’t actually help boys and men who do struggle; and both political parties are stuck in ideological positions that inhibit change.

And yet… there are solutions if we are willing unpack the data and focus on what works.

Reeves, and his analysis, is as unforgiving as it is provocative. Did you know:

That: Girls have been stronger at school for decades but are now pulling even further ahead. They regularly outperform boys in grades, especially in English, and are significantly more likely to graduate high school on time. And the gender gap widens further in higher education – 57% of bachelor’s degrees are awarded to women, and in subjects across the spectrum of competitive skills for the new century.

That: Women who have achieved the greatest degree of economic independence, with high levels of education and earning potential, are the ones now most likely to get married and stay married? (Author’s emphasis).

That: Girls raised in the poorest families are 57% more likely to get a four-year college degree than boys from a similar background, compared to a difference of just 8% among those from affluent families.

That: Some well-intended early education programs that have helped girls have not boys and even been harmful. Reeves has numerous examples of summer reading programs that accelerated literacy among third grade girls but showed decline for boys; mentoring programs for teens significantly increased girls applying to college with no change in boys; scholarship programs in State universities that increased women getting degrees but had “muted” impact on boys, especially from African American and Hispanic communities.

Every page is filled with either a surprise or at least something to stop, pause and breathe and ask, “why?” Painfully, it is clear that in some cases we don’t fully know – hence this discussion and research are more important than ever. Notwithstanding, he notes: “Given the evidence that many programs simply do not work for half the population, it is irresponsible for policy makers not to question whether this money is being well spent.”

But he does also unpack many reasons and they mostly are a call to focus on simply what is structurally different about men and women. Is it surprising that increased testosterone in men, true in most species, tends toward greater aggression and risk? Is it debatable boy’s brains simply develop differently? “These sex differences are not the result of some cosmic accident,” he notes.

What I love about his analysis is he is calling for a non-partisan look at what the data says and an acknowledgement that opportunities and innovation can be created based on that common language. He puts a plague on both our political houses. ?On the left: “Many people… seem to fear that even acknowledging the problems of boys and men will somehow weaken efforts for women and girls… Anything extra for boys and men must mean less for girls and women. This is entirely false… There are real problems facing boys and men which need to be addressed.” The right equally irresponsibly often play politics fueling male grievances, oversimplify and overweight gender roles, and harken back to traditional definitions of men “rather than helping men adapt to the new world.”????????

So, what can we do for boys earlier, and how can we seriously understand where men are today without compounding the very concerns the data suggests?

He offers considerations so common sense, especially to those of us who are raising boys or, where I go two for two, being a former boy:

If boys’ brains develop more slowly, it is time for them generally to begin school a year later. “The main reason for starting boys later is not so that they will be a year older in kindergarten. It is so they will be a year older when they get to middle and high school” – the ages where the largest differences in brain development are.

If boys respond well to male teachers and data shows they do as mentors and role models among other reasons – and today fewer than 24% are male down from 33% in the 1980s – “What is required … is a massive, urgent recruitment effort.” In fact, the gap is particularly large for English teachers, and literacy and verbal skills are where boys lag furthest behind. One study shows that a single letter grade improvement in English increases the probability of college enrollment by 10%. “Having a male English teacher improved results for boys, with no negative impact for girls.”??

If boys have broad skills and interests, four-year college shouldn’t be the only goal, nor should we undervalue vocational learning. There are many paths and skills to a very successful life that include hands-on learning for jobs, internships and apprenticeship and community colleges which can offer the most relevant skills for shifts in our economy. He quotes one expert: “Refocusing education reform from an obsession with college to a respect for the other pathways that young people can follow into the labor market will be a long, slow process.” Reeves concludes, “So we had better get started.”

If helping young boys earlier seems clear, often we throw up our hands for adult men who struggle as too late. Reeves does not. He makes a strong case, as an example, for opportunity in HEAL occupations – health, education, administration, and literacy – once often thought of as more populated by women, but now some of the most valued roles in society and having the largest labor shortages in our communities. He proposes committing the resources necessary in training and placement so that both 30% of women could be in STEM jobs while 30% of men in HEAL in a decade – that, by the way, would be three million more men in the latter. For a $1 billion investment over ten years, he argues, we can push skills in high school and college; financial support and training to men in HEAL jobs later on in their careers; a full board marketing effort to show how these jobs are appealing career choices. Most studies show that men value meaningful work – why not expand and extend the base of such opportunity?

Opportunity, not feeling left out, having a hopeful look toward a future is the greatest foundation for contentment and engagement in society. As Reeves concludes: “Away from the heat and noise of tribal politics, we can come to a shared recognition that many of our boys and men are in real trouble, not of their own making, and need help.”

The data is there; the opportunity is clear; the risk is avoidable. Attacking the challenges, bluntly and boldly, would be one more, actionable way to strengthen our society and competitive position in rapidly changing global environments.

Arguably, we could be the global example.