Why men are hard to help

[Roadrunner]

https://nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/why-men-are-hard-to-help
 

As a parent to boys, I found this very interesting. This also rings very true in my friend circle where daughters have thrived and boys have really lagged behind. I thought some of you might find it equally interesting. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Roadrunner

[Eos]

Interesting. This also rings true for my community but here men and boys have excellent prospects in industries that remain traditionally male like fishing. 

They don't give numbers for victims (and perpetrators) of violence and addiction which I would suspect would also hold true for skewing male.

The idea that men and boys are sort of in shock after "thousands of years" of cultural and economic dominance seems simplistic but I appreciate that they emphasize that the researchers have not come up with any better answers.  I notice that of all the authors on the front page of the magazine that 13 are men, one is female, 2 are ambiguous to me, so males are lagging except in mainstream conservative media?  

Edited May 14, 2023 by Eos

[Roadrunner]

1 hour ago, Eos said:

Interesting. This also rings true for my community but here men and boys have excellent prospects in industries that remain traditionally male like fishing. 

They don't give numbers for victims (and perpetrators) of violence and addiction which I would suspect would also hold true for skewing male.

The idea that men and boys are sort of in shock after "thousands of years" of cultural and economic dominance seems simplistic but I appreciate that they emphasize that the researchers have not come up with any better answers.  I notice that of all the authors on the front page of the magazine that 13 are men, one is female, 2 are ambiguous to me, so males are lagging except in mainstream conservative media?  

“

This point cannot be overstated: The boys and men struggling the most are those at the sharp end of other inequalities. The ones we need to be worried about are not those of the upper middle class, who are flourishing in almost every respect, but the ones on the bottom half of the economic and social ladders.

Most men are not part of the elite, and even fewer boys are destined to take their place. As The Economist puts it, "the fact that the highest rungs have male feet all over them is scant comfort for the men at the bottom." Men at the top are still flourishing, of course, but men in general are not. And many of the attempts to help them are falling short.”

[HomeAgain]

One thing I have found is that compulsory education is increasingly skewed toward language-heavy behavior.  We know that girls have a larger vocabulary (receptive and expressive) at significant milestone points in their lives.  It carries heavily into school now, with kids being penalized in traditionally language-scant subjects.  A child who can work out math problems is now disadvantaged by questions focused on the language development: Explain how you got your answer.  Pick all solutions that apply. 

It moves a child into different paths, and yet those paths become blocked as well as more college degrees are needed for careers that traditionally have been learned on the job or with certification.  That's more time in a language-heavy environment that negates innate skills in different types of kids.

We also have the compensation issue.  Girls and boys present ADHD symptoms differently.  Girls are more likely to be undiagnosed and learn compensation skills that propel them forward, while boys are more likely to be medicated and show that they are not thriving in an environment meant for higher than average learners.  My kid gets a 20 minute lunch, p.e. for one semester, and 3 minutes between classes that rotate through a 'drop one' schedule each day. This is not a place I could have thrived when I was his age.  I was very glad to have a 45+ minute lunch, a 10-15 minute break in the morning, p.e. every day, and 5 minutes between static classes. I needed that.  I needed the downtime and the mental break. I have a strong feeling that this push for more "learning time" is destroying children and adults.

[Roadrunner]

Boys falling behind hurt girls as well, because we need partners not to mention nothing good happens in societies where a lot of males wonder without jobs or purpose.
I was surprised to see the aggregate numbers on the gap even though I wasn’t really surprised by the trend. I see it around me in middle class, not even on the “sharp edge of inequality.” 
 

I have seen stats that boys tend to do still much better in math. Why not encourage them at their strength? The author also suggested to move compulsory age for boys a year behind girls since there is enough clear evidence that boys don’t mature at the same rate as girls. 

[Wheres Toto]

2 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

We also have the compensation issue.  Girls and boys present ADHD symptoms differently.  Girls are more likely to be undiagnosed and learn compensation skills that propel them forward, while boys are more likely to be medicated and show that they are not thriving in an environment meant for higher than average learners.  My kid gets a 20 minute lunch, p.e. for one semester, and 3 minutes between classes that rotate through a 'drop one' schedule each day. This is not a place I could have thrived when I was his age.  I was very glad to have a 45+ minute lunch, a 10-15 minute break in the morning, p.e. every day, and 5 minutes between static classes. I needed that.  I needed the downtime and the mental break. I have a strong feeling that this push for more "learning time" is destroying children and adults.

Some schools around here have constantly changing schedules that I would have found a nightmare when I was in school (and to an extent still would, I like predictability).     From week to week different classes have different time slots or don't meet at all, a different order.  It's an executive functioning nightmare just figuring out where to be, what homework is due, what tests to worry about.  

Redshirting of boys with Spring/Summer birthdays is very common around here but sometimes that still isn't enough.  

[Roadrunner]

Also really surprised that interventions mostly work for girls. That’s discouraging. 

[Arcadia]

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

I see it around me in middle class, not even on the “sharp edge of inequality.” 
 

I have seen stats that boys tend to do still much better in math. Why not encourage them at their strength? 

Middle class by government’s definition where I am would have the bulk of income going into housing. That leave less money (and time) for after schooling and I think there are still parents locally who assumes the school would handle everything.

(San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley 

Low-end middle class: $77,000
High-end middle class: $232,000)

My boys were “held back” by their English writing skills. They do very well in state testing for English because it does not include essays. The writing standardized test is separate. They use CAVA which could cater to asynchronous levels since it is an online public charter. My friends’ kids in my district school would just be encouraged to improve their English since the teachers’ focus is not on subjects you could pass and probably score an A in. CAVA allowed my kids to take German from kindergarten even though my kids could not write well. My local public schools does not give that choice. Our “weaker” public schools in my area focus is in improving performance on state testing, on getting kids to graduate. My kids public school teachers are accommodating but they still have to focus on paragraph writing while leaving us to deal with math and sciences. Schools are rather demoralizing at times for boys not as good in English because they see their female classmates and/or siblings having higher class ranks and GPAs. It is a double whammy if their female classmates and/or siblings are better at marketing themselves at interviews and college applications essays as well. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Arcadia
typos

[Arcadia]

7 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Also really surprised that interventions mostly work for girls. That’s discouraging. 

I am not at all surprised by the article. Our elementary school teachers are majority great in English and not so great in math. They are going to unintentionally favor those good in English in their classes. Boys already get the message early that they aren’t as strong academically. It took DS18 getting back his AP Eng Lit exam score and his dual enrollment English scores to realize he is not as behind as he thought he was compared to brick and mortar age peers. He qualified for remedial English writing tutoring in elementary school and his teachers were very nice to him partially because his California state testing scores are high so they only need to worry about the California state writing test. 

[Arcadia]

Middle income is also the donut hole that makes males either have no priority for support programs that cater to low income or first gen or URMs, or ineligible. Some stem programs are for females only though priority is still for low income or first generation. My DS18 managed to get a one week internship coordinated by his community college only because it is unpaid and students generally aim for the summer internships because they pay well and look good for college applications. Summer internships give priority to URMs and there are plenty of first gen students applying for limited internships.

News media are telling males that they are behind academically and in the job market. Millennials and Gen Z are into social media and what they see isn’t encouraging. 
 

DS18 has met a few guidance counselors at his community college throughout his four years there. Most are neutral in opinions. One counselor told him that his transcript would not get him into any UCs or CSUs for computer science with a 3.88 GPA 🤦‍♀️ It was very discouraging.    After that counselor, he never bothered to see a counselor again for suggestions. DS17 would meet a guidance counselor strictly to get paperwork done but has learned to ignore any opinions.

ETA:

@SeaConquest. For DS18’s scenario, the discouraging one is a guy and the encouraging one is a lady. The neutral ones are guys. 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Arcadia

[SeaConquest]

"Sullivan's research team does note that the case managers assigned to work with students were all women. When a program relies heavily on a close one-to-one relationship, matching the gender of the provider and recipient may be an important factor."

 

As they say, representation matters.

[73349]

I think our (US) culture suggests to young boys that it's nerdy (and maybe girly) to like and do well in school and to read a lot of books. It's cool to do things like mountain biking and four-wheeling and drinking beer.

Nobody wants to pay you to go out four-wheeling, bro.

At the same time, we're rightly telling girls to get on out there and do their thing, and not worry about looking to get married right out of high school or anything. Secure your own future! And many are taking that to heart. I saw what happened in may parents' generation (lots of divorce!), and I wasn't going to walk down the aisle without a bachelor's degree already in my pocket and a career ready to go. Now a lot of people don't get married in the first place, so yeah, the girls plan accordingly.

Edited May 15, 2023 by 73349
typo

[EKS]

Young men and boys are in crisis in our society.  I think we are just now noticing the impact of years of neglect of boys and, frankly, outright hostility towards them.  Boys are constantly told that just being who they are is toxic whereas girls and young women are cheered at every turn (girl power!).  It's ridiculous, and, frankly, anyone who thinks that females are at a disadvantage in our society now is just deluding themselves.

[Farrar]

I think this is rough because young males are getting it from both ends. There are a lot of societal expectations that they be tough, treat girls and women poorly, never do anything "feminine," never show their inner emotions... that stuff IS toxic and bad for them and bad for everyone else. But then there's also a lot of demonization of things that aren't at all toxic, like playing hard, being physically active, etc. along with the fact that boys sometimes do mature a little differently with different skills that aren't as valued in school, as the article is saying. Basically, I see BOTH toxic masculinity and healthy masculinity demonized -- sometimes by the same people, sometimes by different ones, but the impact is double. No wonder boys are confused and disaffected.

I think there's a good point here that just because some men have historically had it better, that doesn't help the people who are having a rough time now. Just like how you can look at other groups as say, okay, just because this woman can become a CEO or that Black man can become president doesn't mean that misogyny and racism are over. Just because men have certain societal advantages doesn't mean every male can take advantage of them.

[chiguirre]

This article is a short version of Reeves' book, Of Boys and Men. I read it a couple of weeks ago and it was brutal. I had no idea that boys underperformed girls so drastically that the gap is similar to the gap between rich and poor students. It's pretty universal too because the author cites Finland and Iceland too. 

It's not true that there is no help for boys. One of the chapters covers the silent affirmative action male applicants receive so that schools don't tip "too female". 

I'd highly recommend reading the entire book, it's very interesting.

[Garga]

On 5/14/2023 at 3:41 PM, 73349 said:

I think our (US) culture suggests to young boys that it's nerdy (and maybe girly) to like and do well in school and to read a lot of books. It's cool to do things like mountain biking and four-wheeling and drinking beer.

Nobody wants to pay you to go out four-wheeling, bro.

At the same time, we're rightly telling girls to get on our there and do their thing, and not worry about looking to get married right out of high school or anything. Secure your own future! And many are taking that to heart. I saw what happened in may parents' generation (lots of divorce!), and I wasn't going to walk down the aisle without a bachelor's degree already in my pocket and a career ready to go. Now a lot of people don't get married in the first place, so yeah, the girls plan accordingly.

Cynical me was thinking that it’s a toxic masculinity causing men to reject bettering themselves, “If the women (sneer) are out there getting degrees, well I don’t want to be like a woman (sneer), so I won’t get a degree.” The more women succeed at something, the more it because a “girly-woman” thing to do and toxic masculinity can’t allow for men to do “girly” things.

23 hours ago, Farrar said:

I think this is rough because young males are getting it from both ends. There are a lot of societal expectations that they be tough, treat girls and women poorly, never do anything "feminine," never show their inner emotions... that stuff IS toxic and bad for them and bad for everyone else. But then there's also a lot of demonization of things that aren't at all toxic, like playing hard, being physically active, etc. along with the fact that boys sometimes do mature a little differently with different skills that aren't as valued in school, as the article is saying. Basically, I see BOTH toxic masculinity and healthy masculinity demonized -- sometimes by the same people, sometimes by different ones, but the impact is double. No wonder boys are confused and disaffected.

I think there's a good point here that just because some men have historically had it better, that doesn't help the people who are having a rough time now. Just like how you can look at other groups as say, okay, just because this woman can become a CEO or that Black man can become president doesn't mean that misogyny and racism are over. Just because men have certain societal advantages doesn't mean every male can take advantage of them.

So, I’m glad you wrote this Farrar, because I don’t like believing that there’s still so much misogyny that men would walk away from bettering themselves if they feared it would make them seem too girly. It could be that the young men aren’t awful people but do feel like they can’t do anything right, even healthy masculinity, so they’ve given up.

Between my two sons they have 12 male friends they’ve known since babyhood. Out of those 12, only 1 is going to college. My kids are frustrated by their friends who seem content to be working jobs at Walmart and local grocery stores instead of learning skills or gaining an education. My sons feel pretty alone in their educational pursuits. And it’s not like my sons are super academic, but I did make it a “thing” in our household that they must either learn a trade or get a degree. Now, they’re adults and could refuse and say, “Nope. Sorry old lady, but I’m not going to college and I’m not going to learn a trade, and I’m going to work at Walmart instead,” but so far they’ve complied with my request.

Out of these 12 boys, 6 of them have college-educated parents (at least an AA and either mom or dad has the degree, and sometimes both). Six of them don’t have college-educated parents. I’d have thought that with the 50/50 percentage of parents being college-educated that more than 1 son would be going to college. It’s a mystery to me.

My oldest did struggle at first with going to college and not having any money, because even though they’re only working at Walmart, his friends are bringing in more money than my son who spends all his time studying and not working. But he’s realizing that he’s upping the odds for him to have a chance at more jobs in a field he is interested in and chose. And as I told him, “Walmart will always be there. If you don’t get a job in your degree, you haven’t lost anything. You can always get a job at Walmart.” Note: I got a job and my entire salary goes toward paying for their education, so they won’t have debt when they’re done.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Garga

[Arcadia]

21 minutes ago, Garga said:

Between my two sons they have 12 friends they’ve known since babyhood. Out of those 12, only 1 is going to college. My kids are frustrated by their friends who seem content to be working jobs at Walmart and local grocery stores instead of learning skills or gaining an education. My sons feel pretty alone in their educational pursuits. And it’s not like my sons are super academic, but I did make it a “thing” in our household that they must either learn a trade or get a degree. Now, they’re adults and could refuse and say, “Nope. Sorry old lady, but I’m not going to college and I’m not going to learn a trade, and I’m going to work at Walmart instead,” but so far they’ve complied with my request.

Out of these 12 boys, 6 of them have college-educated parents (at least an AA and either mom or dad has the degree, and sometimes both). Six of them don’t have college-educated parents. I’d have thought that with the 50/50 percentage of parents being college-educated that more than 1 son would be going to college. It’s a mystery to me.

Are the 6 with college educated parents getting help from parents in paying for college? Are all 12 working full time and none taking classes at community college? 
Besides my kids, I know quite a few their age from middle income families who are going to community college either because they have zero acceptance where they don’t mind going (or paying) and/or to save on costs. I told my kids that we will help pay for four years of state university for each kid. So they aren’t stressed about cost of college since they don’t really spend much on wants. My kids read about student debt on the media very often and I won’t be surprised that students no longer see college as a risk free investment. 

[Garga]

31 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

Are the 6 with college educated parents getting help from parents in paying for college? Are all 12 working full time and none taking classes at community college? 
Besides my kids, I know quite a few their age from middle income families who are going to community college either because they have zero acceptance where they don’t mind going (or paying) and/or to save on costs. I told my kids that we will help pay for four years of state university for each kid. So they aren’t stressed about cost of college since they don’t really spend much on wants. My kids read about student debt on the media very often and I won’t be surprised that students no longer see college as a risk free investment. 

Some of the 12 are working full time, but not all. I don’t know about how much the parents have said they will/won’t help. None are taking any classes at CC. From what my sons say, their friends have zero plans for college or a trade. My older son’s friends are 21, the younger one friends are high school seniors or graduated last year. 

My own sons are starting at CC and moving on to the 4-year. 

I agree that lots of people aren’t seeing college as a risk-free investment. But no one is learning to be a mechanic or a welder or an exterminator or a plumber, or anything. It’s just baffling to us all. It’s literally just Walmart and busboys at Hoss and working at Giant. 

My guys aren’t close friends with girls, but I’m thinking of the sisters of their friends and 3 went to/are going to college, 4 are the same as the boys with nothing jobs—and 2 went to beauty school. One of the girls who went to beauty school is getting herself through college, which is hard for her because she has learning disabilities. She’s married now and in her mid-twenties, but decided to go to college. (So, now I guess I could say that 4 went to/are going to college).

 

ETA: changed the numbers of which girls are doing what, because I’d forgotten a couple of the girls. 

Edited May 15, 2023 by Garga

[Arcadia]

3 minutes ago, Garga said:

None are taking any classes at CC. From what my sons say, their friends have zero plans for college or a trade.

 

I agree that lots of people aren’t seeing college as a risk-free investment. But no one is learning to be a mechanic or a welder or an exterminator or a plumber, or anything. It’s just baffling to us all. 

How much does a typical class course for either academic or votech at the CC? 
 

Does your area typically treat high school graduates as adults that should pay rent to continue living at home?  Just wondering if the kids feel lost as in cannot afford community college without loans and/or working and not sure what they want to do in life.

Does your area have apprenticeship programs where someone can be trained on the job for mechanic or a welder or an exterminator or a plumber?

There are late bloomers in my family and they are all males. They all went into trades before going to college. However my grandparents and many of my cousins run family businesses so the late bloomers could just work for their parents or relatives while they figure out what to do after high school graduation. 

[chiguirre]

4 minutes ago, Garga said:

I agree that lots of people aren’t seeing college as a risk-free investment. But no one is learning to be a mechanic or a welder or an exterminator or a plumber, or anything. It’s just baffling to us all. 

The same thing is happening with military recruitment. It's tanking even though we're not actively fighting any wars and the benefits are very attractive. The GI Bill is a four year full ride to any public university and many private ones and if you've already got some credits, you can use the extra time for a masters. The VA Loan program makes buying a house a realistic goal. You can start building a retirement account with 5% matching before you can legally buy a drink. But there are still massive shortfalls. 

Part of the sudden drop off is the introduction of Genesis, a program that pulls all of your medical records. It makes it harder to enlist because every broken arm or mental health diagnosis (even for situations that are temporary and expected, like divorce or death of a parent) will need a waiver. But there's another part that is young people settling for living with their parents and working low wage jobs. I don't know if it's the effect of the pandemic that just stunted the maturation of a half of a generation of kids (very likely) or social media influence (somewhat likely) or its just "kids these days" (popular among boomers but not very likely.)

 

[Arcadia]

1 hour ago, Garga said:

Cynical me was thinking that it’s a toxic masculinity causing men to reject bettering themselves, “If the women (sneer) are out there getting degrees, well I don’t want to be like a woman (sneer), so I won’t get a degree.” The more women succeed at something, the more it because a “girly-woman” thing to do and toxic masculinity can’t allow for men to do “girly” things.

That’s weird to me because traditional patriarchal cultures in asia do expect the males to be the main financial provider. They also expect females to marry up so a female with a bachelors would be expected to marry someone with a bachelors or higher. When we married, my husband has just started on his PhD so his aunts teased him to hurry up and get his PhD completed else he would be academically “lower” than me.

[Garga]

27 minutes ago, Arcadia said:

How much does a typical class course for either academic or votech at the CC? 
 

Does your area typically treat high school graduates as adults that should pay rent to continue living at home?  Just wondering if the kids feel lost as in cannot afford community college without loans and/or working and not sure what they want to do in life.

Does your area have apprenticeship programs where someone can be trained on the job for mechanic or a welder or an exterminator or a plumber?

There are late bloomers in my family and they are all males. They all went into trades before going to college. However my grandparents and many of my cousins run family businesses so the late bloomers could just work for their parents or relatives while they figure out what to do after high school graduation. 

I don’t know the answers to the questions other than I don’t believe any of the young men are paying rent to their families. I either know they’re not paying rent or am unsure if they are. I don’t know of any that 100% are paying rent to their families. 

I have no idea about apprenticeship programs since we never researched them. I live 50 minutes from Baltimore city in one direction and 50 minutes from the PA capital in the other, so I’m sure there’s something within an hour’s drive from here. 

I do hope that they do come up with something to do in the future and 9 years from now when my oldest son’s friends are all 30, they aren’t still working at Giant. Out of the 12 of them, it’s a bit surprising to me that only 1 is going to college. 

After knowing these young men for 17-21 years (depending on their ages) I’d have expected 3 of them to go to college, 4 of them to learn a trade in some way or other, and 5 of them to do what they’re doing. For it to be 1 out of 12 is surprising, knowing their family histories and incomes and lifestyles.  

Edited May 15, 2023 by Garga

[Arcadia]

9 minutes ago, Garga said:

I have no idea about apprenticeship programs since we never researched them. I live 50 minutes from Baltimore city in one direction and 50 minutes from the PA capital in the other, so I’m sure there’s something within an hour’s drive from here.

I did a quick search for apprenticeship programs with tie in to the community college my kids are attending. The hourly rates are decent for residential wireman apprenticeships for example 

 

12 minutes ago, Garga said:

After knowing these young men for 17-21 years (depending on their ages) I’d have expected 3 of them to go to college, 4 of them to learn a trade in some way or other, and 5 of them to do what they’re doing. For it to be 1 out of 12 is surprising, knowing their family histories and incomes and lifestyles.  

If we include community college, I do think it is surprising given that you have known them for so long. I don’t know any kid in that age range who isn’t in community college or college even if they work many hours. I met a young adult at my volunteer work who is studying part time while working almost full time because he isn’t sure what he wants to major in. So he is taking general education requirements classes as well as a business class now to see if he would like to major in business. An adult volunteer did tell me while we were chatting about gap year that he was sick of studying after high school so his mom sent him to a small private college and his grades were not great there but he did graduate. 

[Frances]

13 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

One thing I have found is that compulsory education is increasingly skewed toward language-heavy behavior.  We know that girls have a larger vocabulary (receptive and expressive) at significant milestone points in their lives.  It carries heavily into school now, with kids being penalized in traditionally language-scant subjects.  A child who can work out math problems is now disadvantaged by questions focused on the language development: Explain how you got your answer.  Pick all solutions that apply. 

It moves a child into different paths, and yet those paths become blocked as well as more college degrees are needed for careers that traditionally have been learned on the job or with certification.  That's more time in a language-heavy environment that negates innate skills in different types of kids.

We also have the compensation issue.  Girls and boys present ADHD symptoms differently.  Girls are more likely to be undiagnosed and learn compensation skills that propel them forward, while boys are more likely to be medicated and show that they are not thriving in an environment meant for higher than average learners.  My kid gets a 20 minute lunch, p.e. for one semester, and 3 minutes between classes that rotate through a 'drop one' schedule each day. This is not a place I could have thrived when I was his age.  I was very glad to have a 45+ minute lunch, a 10-15 minute break in the morning, p.e. every day, and 5 minutes between static classes. I needed that.  I needed the downtime and the mental break. I have a strong feeling that this push for more "learning time" is destroying children and adults.

So much this. My elementary had morning, noon, and afternoon recess plus weekly PE. And we were required to do PE all four years of high school, even if we did sports.It continues to astound me that the majority of our public schools are structured to do the opposite of research proven best practices in so many ways from start times to recess to how reading and math are taught, etc. All of our children are paying a price, but those at the lower end economically are paying the biggest price. I also think the push to move more formal academics and seat time to lower grades in general hurts boys more than girls, especially when so many schools aren’t even using phonics to teach reading. So we push academics early, but don’t even do it in a way that enables success for the majority of students.

[Frances]

5 hours ago, EKS said:

Young men and boys are in crisis in our society.  I think we are just now noticing the impact of years of neglect of boys and, frankly, outright hostility towards them.  Boys are constantly told that just being who they are is toxic whereas girls and young women are cheered at every turn (girl power!).  It's ridiculous, and, frankly, anyone who thinks that females are at a disadvantage in our society now is just deluding themselves.

Not sure it’s so rosy out there for girls either. Mental health issues among teen girls are skyrocketing and are significantly higher than for teen boys.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2023/p0213-yrbs.html

[Frances]

4 hours ago, chiguirre said:

This article is a short version of Reeves' book, Of Boys and Men. I read it a couple of weeks ago and it was brutal. I had no idea that boys underperformed girls so drastically that the gap is similar to the gap between rich and poor students. It's pretty universal too because the author cites Finland and Iceland too. 

It's not true that there is no help for boys. One of the chapters covers the silent affirmative action male applicants receive so that schools don't tip "too female". 

I'd highly recommend reading the entire book, it's very interesting.

My son was an excellent student with top test scores, but definitely knows that being male was a hook at some of the elite LACs he applied to and received significant merit money from.

[EKS]

41 minutes ago, Frances said:

Not sure it’s so rosy out there for girls either. Mental health issues among teen girls are skyrocketing and are significantly higher than for teen boys.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2023/p0213-yrbs.html

Probably because society continues to insist that being a woman is the worst thing in the world.

[Roadrunner]

5 hours ago, chiguirre said:

This article is a short version of Reeves' book, Of Boys and Men. I read it a couple of weeks ago and it was brutal. I had no idea that boys underperformed girls so drastically that the gap is similar to the gap between rich and poor students. It's pretty universal too because the author cites Finland and Iceland too. 

It's not true that there is no help for boys. One of the chapters covers the silent affirmative action male applicants receive so that schools don't tip "too female". 

I'd highly recommend reading the entire book, it's very interesting.

Unless it’s STEM (which they are interested in) they want. Then girls are encouraged because they are fewer in those fields. Being male doesn’t help if you want STEM.

 

But what is fascinating to me more in this article is we don’t really fully understand why males are falling behind. Him speculating on potential answers that have to do with their place in society is something else. 
i think I am going to buy his book and read it. 

[Arcadia]

https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1155&context=brookings_lectures_events
 

 

 

[Clarita]

15 hours ago, HomeAgain said:

One thing I have found is that compulsory education is increasingly skewed toward language-heavy behavior.  We know that girls have a larger vocabulary (receptive and expressive) at significant milestone points in their lives.  It carries heavily into school now, with kids being penalized in traditionally language-scant subjects.  A child who can work out math problems is now disadvantaged by questions focused on the language development: Explain how you got your answer.  Pick all solutions that apply. 

100% yes! My friend whose son is going into Kindergarten just read to me the handout she got telling her what they expect Kindergarteners to be able to do at the end of Kindergarten. Language arts goes up to write a 3-5 sentence "paragraph" and opinion piece. Math was count to 100 and addition to 10. Let's just say both our boys were there at the end of TK and mine now at the end of Kindergarten while I don't know if he could actually write 3-5 sentences it would be pulling teeth to have him write that much.

8 hours ago, 73349 said:

I think our (US) culture suggests to young boys that it's nerdy (and maybe girly) to like and do well in school and to read a lot of books. It's cool to do things like mountain biking and four-wheeling and drinking beer.

Nobody wants to pay you to go out four-wheeling, bro.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I also think we've been poo-pooing too much on sports and active things, especially in the younger ages. In general boys tend to like the active things.  Those active things even though they don't always a direct to job path does teach them life skills like grit, working hard, discipline, etc. 

Most people aren't going to be paid to sit around and color, read a book, or cut and glue random paper together. We think it's great when little children do those things because we think those things can lead to skills that lead to academic success. For some reason it seems like we no longer have the same view for "boy things".  

[Frances]

55 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Unless it’s STEM (which they are interested in) they want. Then girls are encouraged because they are fewer in those fields. Being male doesn’t help if you want STEM.

I think it depends where you want to do STEM. At an elite university, you’re likely right that being male doesn’t help. But many LACS have pretty skewed male/female ratios, so it’s actually easier to get admitted as a male, regardless of major. And for most fields with the exception of things like medical school, there are still enough slots for most of both genders who are interested, STEM or otherwise. You just might not get into any of your top choices if you are aiming high.

[Roadrunner]

Just now, Frances said:

I think it depends where you want to do STEM. At an elite university, you’re likely right that being male doesn’t help. But many LACS have pretty skewed male/female ratios, so it’s actually easier to get admitted as a male, regardless of major. And for most fields with the exception of things like medical school, there are still enough slots for most of both genders who are interested, STEM or otherwise. You just might not get into any of your top choices if you are aiming high.

You are probably right that it’s a matter of individual schools. At selective schools though it’s much easier to enter stem as a girl than as a boy. Gender imbalance in math/physics/engineering continues to favor boys at those institutions. 

[Frances]

4 minutes ago, Clarita said:

100% yes! My friend whose son is going into Kindergarten just read to me the handout she got telling her what they expect Kindergarteners to be able to do at the end of Kindergarten. Language arts goes up to write a 3-5 sentence "paragraph" and opinion piece. Math was count to 100 and addition to 10. Let's just say both our boys were there at the end of TK and mine now at the end of Kindergarten while I don't know if he could actually write 3-5 sentences it would be pulling teeth to have him write that much.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I also think we've been poo-pooing too much on sports and active things, especially in the younger ages. In general boys tend to like the active things.  Those active things even though they don't always a direct to job path does teach them life skills like grit, working hard, discipline, etc. 

Most people aren't going to be paid to sit around and color, read a book, or cut and glue random paper together. We think it's great when little children do those things because we think those things can lead to skills that lead to academic success. For some reason it seems like we no longer have the same view for "boy things".  

Those LA goals for kindergarten are ridiculous, highly damaging, and contrary to research proven best practices. Why aren’t parents revolting? Why do we even bother with education research in this country when so many schools do the opposite of best practices?

We have got to start incorporating more recess and movement back into school, especially in the lower grades. My large school district has seen great success in improving graduation and engagement rates by greatly improving and expanding votech programs. 

[Frances]

2 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

You are probably right that it’s a matter of individual schools. At selective schools though it’s much easier to enter stem as a girl than as a boy. Gender imbalance in math/physics/engineering continues to favor boys at those institutions. 

No doubt that’s true at selective universities, but many LACs are also highly selective and males in general have an advantage there due to gender imbalance. In general, LACs don’t admit to majors or weigh it heavily for admissions.

[Roadrunner]

56 minutes ago, Frances said:

No doubt that’s true at selective universities, but many LACs are also highly selective and males in general have an advantage there due to gender imbalance. In general, LACs don’t admit to majors or weigh it heavily for admissions.

Why do you think males favor LACs a bit less? I often wonder about it and genuinely would love some brainstorming on this. My older wouldn’t have minded a LAC at all. My younger thinks LACs have toxic culture (not exactly sure what his issue is but he will likely not apply to them). 

 

I disagree though that they don’t take major into account. They need to fill their classes. They can’t admit 80% aspiring computer science majors but also need kids in German and Arabic and sociology and political science….. classrooms. I think it’s somewhat clear from applications which way kids lean. It would be really dumb for them to admit only one or two type of student. 

[Roadrunner]

I wonder if boys would benefit from boys only elementary schools. 

[Frances]

1 hour ago, Roadrunner said:

Why do you think males favor LACs a bit less? I often wonder about it and genuinely would love some brainstorming on this. My older wouldn’t have minded a LAC at all. My younger thinks LACs have toxic culture (not exactly sure what his issue is but he will likely not apply to them). 

 

I disagree though that they don’t take major into account. They need to fill their classes. They can’t admit 80% aspiring computer science majors but also need kids in German and Arabic and sociology and political science….. classrooms. I think it’s somewhat clear from applications which way kids lean. It would be really dumb for them to admit only one or two type of student. 

I’m not sure about all of the reasons fewer males prefer LACs, although I have in the past seen some interesting data on schools adding football and the corresponding increase in male enrollment outside of just football players. I originally thought my son would end up at one, but after doing two years at the local LAC during high school, he felt like he was ready for something bigger.

I also had previously heard about the discrepancy between males and females when it comes to study abroad. Is that usually a bigger emphasis at LACs? It certainly seemed so during our campus visits. 

While I’m sure they do consider intended major to some degree in admission decisions, as far as I know, most don’t have situations where you have to apply to be in a certain major. So once admitted, a student could major in anything. That’s not the case at some elite universities, especially for impacted majors like CS, engineering, etc. Based on coursework and ECs, my son could have looked like either a prospective STEM or social science major with the test scores of a humanities major.

[Frances]

2 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I wonder if boys would benefit from boys only elementary schools. 

It would be interesting to see research on what has worked for boys, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. It’s made me curios enough to look into the increased grad rates in my large school district that have been attributed to increased enrollment in votech classes and see if any of the data is broken down by gender.

If the schools are structured the same as most public elementary schools, that in general are very sedentary and language arts focused, I’m not sure being with all boys would make much of a difference. My son is profoundly gifted verbally, but one of the main reasons I homeschooled was because I didn’t want him sitting in a classroom most of the day, especially as he did not enjoy the mainstream sports played by most boys at recess. We did one semester of middle school for family reasons and he excelled academically, but hated it. And I was appalled at the complete lack of any physical activity at the school with the exception of a short open gym time after lunch, if you finished eating fast enough, which he never did. It was our second choice, as he lost out in the lottery for a much more active charter school with a STEM and outdoor focus.

It seems to me that the early academic, relatively sedentary, screen focused approach that is the norm in many public elementary and middle schools these days is just profoundly wrong, but especially for boys. Ideally I’d like to see play based learning for prek through at least age seven while immersed in a very language rich environment with tons of opportunity for hands-on and physical activity with a minimum of three recesses of at least 20 minutes each, and very limited or no screens at all in elementary school. And lots of art and music. But it will never happen in the US on a grand scale because we mistakenly think earlier and more formal sit down academics are better. And every day we delay completely getting rid of reading curriculums that don’t use research based best practices we are shortchanging millions of students and potentially handicapping them for life. At a minimum, that should be a national, moral imperative.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Frances

[Eos]

8 hours ago, Frances said:

Not sure it’s so rosy out there for girls either. Mental health issues among teen girls are skyrocketing and are significantly higher than for teen boys.

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2023/p0213-yrbs.html

This research and the article's numbers side by side seem, I don't know, dystopian.

[Eos]

5 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I wonder if boys would benefit from boys only elementary schools. 

I have a friend with an EdD whose dissertation suggests this is true. His research is based on upper-class boys who continue to have all the advantages, but he focuses on the strength of the boys' friendships.

Edited May 15, 2023 by Eos

[Eos]

8 hours ago, Frances said:

My son was an excellent student with top test scores, but definitely knows that being male was a hook at some of the elite LACs he applied to and received significant merit money from.

Yes - youngest girl received less merit aid at the same college where her brother went, despite having higher stats.  Sample size of one family...

[EKS]

11 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

i think I am going to buy his book and read it

Of Boys and Men is excellent.

[rzberrymom]

13 hours ago, Roadrunner said:

I wonder if boys would benefit from boys only elementary schools. 

I absolutely loved his book. If you want a synopsis of it, he also has a great interview on Ezra Klein‘s podcast. It summarizes the important parts of the book.

I think he would argue that boys-only education could really help, especially with lower income boys. Upper middle class boys seem to be doing much better statistically.

He also argues for tiered higher education, like they have in Germany. One tier for going to university, another for highly skilled, highly paid vocational work, a third tier for everything else. 

[MagistraKennedy]

On 5/15/2023 at 3:33 AM, Frances said:

It would be interesting to see research on what has worked for boys, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. It’s made me curios enough to look into the increased grad rates in my large school district that have been attributed to increased enrollment in votech classes and see if any of the data is broken down by gender.

If the schools are structured the same as most public elementary schools, that in general are very sedentary and language arts focused, I’m not sure being with all boys would make much of a difference. My son is profoundly gifted verbally, but one of the main reasons I homeschooled was because I didn’t want him sitting in a classroom most of the day, especially as he did not enjoy the mainstream sports played by most boys at recess. We did one semester of middle school for family reasons and he excelled academically, but hated it. And I was appalled at the complete lack of any physical activity at the school with the exception of a short open gym time after lunch, if you finished eating fast enough, which he never did. It was our second choice, as he lost out in the lottery for a much more active charter school with a STEM and outdoor focus.

It seems to me that the early academic, relatively sedentary, screen focused approach that is the norm in many public elementary and middle schools these days is just profoundly wrong, but especially for boys. Ideally I’d like to see play based learning for prek through at least age seven while immersed in a very language rich environment with tons of opportunity for hands-on and physical activity with a minimum of three recesses of at least 20 minutes each, and very limited or no screens at all in elementary school. And lots of art and music. But it will never happen in the US on a grand scale because we mistakenly think earlier and more formal sit down academics are better. And every day we delay completely getting rid of reading curriculums that don’t use research based best practices we are shortchanging millions of students and potentially handicapping them for life. At a minimum, that should be a national, moral imperative.

All the applause --- well said. 

[SanDiegoMom]

I've listened to all his podcast interviews but haven't read the book yet.  I am going to order it now.

Research was mentioned upthread --  just guessing here but I think the push has for so long to improve female performance and equity, and the flip in outcomes now has been so swift and sudden we weren't really prepared for it.  

One of the things Reeves mentioned (at least I think it was him -- it was quite awhile ago!) was that there is no good model/slogan for encouraging young males.  We have "Girl Power", "The Future is Female", "Girls Rule", "Girl Boss"  etc.  But what do boys have?  There's toxic masculinity, and then we have the biblical/conservative model of male as provider and head of the household.  But what if you are liberal, centrist or atheist? 

 

Regarding careers and using math/computer science as an example.  For years there has been efforts to close the gap in a lot of the sciences.  And I absolutely hope there are no barriers to women anymore in what they choose to pursue.  But if computer science is 80 percent dominated by males because most girls just aren't interested, why do we keep on throwing scholarships and program opportunities to encourage girls in some stem programs and bemoaning the fact that the statistics remain skewed?  The latest research I had seen was that in the most progressive countries (Denmark for example) where the gender gap was smallest, the employment skewed the heaviest towards traditional gender norms.  

 

[Lilaclady]

On 5/15/2023 at 12:32 AM, Roadrunner said:

You are probably right that it’s a matter of individual schools. At selective schools though it’s much easier to enter stem as a girl than as a boy. Gender imbalance in math/physics/engineering continues to favor boys at those institutions. 

I don’t think it is much easier. Maybe a little bit but not that much. Most girls applying to top schools tend to be quite strong but boys even when they are not very strong will apply to top schools so there are mostly more boys than girls which skews the acceptance rates. ( but we all know it’s all a lottery anyways) 

[Matryoshka]

19 hours ago, SanDiegoMom said:

Regarding careers and using math/computer science as an example.  For years there has been efforts to close the gap in a lot of the sciences.  And I absolutely hope there are no barriers to women anymore in what they choose to pursue.  But if computer science is 80 percent dominated by males because most girls just aren't interested, why do we keep on throwing scholarships and program opportunities to encourage girls in some stem programs and bemoaning the fact that the statistics remain skewed?  The latest research I had seen was that in the most progressive countries (Denmark for example) where the gender gap was smallest, the employment skewed the heaviest towards traditional gender norms.  

I'm not sure it's so much that girls are so much less interested in CompSci, as that there's still a very male-dominated culture there, with a lot of misogyny, and you need really tough skin to handle it.  My dd is in CompSci, and it helps that she's relatively oblivious about things, or doesn't take them personally.  Also good enough to eventually earn respect.  When she was in middle school robotics club (where she was the only girl), she noted that when they were in groups, the boys kept confidently saying wrong things, taking over the keyboard, and ignoring her.  She had to learn to tough it out and hold her ground, which has served her well.  But a lot of girls decide it's not worth it.

And while she did get in to all of the CompSci programs she applied to (she did not apply to tippy-top schools, but some good solid ones), none of them offered her a package that made them remotely affordable, except for one out-of-state public and one in-state public.  She went to the in-state public.  But I'd kept hearing how all these CompSci programs fell all over themselves to recruit girls.  Didn't see it.

[Roadrunner]

3 hours ago, Matryoshka said:

I'm not sure it's so much that girls are so much less interested in CompSci, as that there's still a very male-dominated culture there, with a lot of misogyny, and you need really tough skin to handle it.  My dd is in CompSci, and it helps that she's relatively oblivious about things, or doesn't take them personally.  Also good enough to eventually earn respect.  When she was in middle school robotics club (where she was the only girl), she noted that when they were in groups, the boys kept confidently saying wrong things, taking over the keyboard, and ignoring her.  She had to learn to tough it out and hold her ground, which has served her well.  But a lot of girls decide it's not worth it.

And while she did get in to all of the CompSci programs she applied to (she did not apply to tippy-top schools, but some good solid ones), none of them offered her a package that made them remotely affordable, except for one out-of-state public and one in-state public.  She went to the in-state public.  But I'd kept hearing how all these CompSci programs fell all over themselves to recruit girls.  Didn't see it.

As a mother of boys, I get really upset by this stereotyping.  My kids will tell you they are fed up with Harmoines everythere they look. So stereotypes abound on all ends. I am really tired of with this "boys are so dumb and those poor girls have to put up with them" is getting really old. In fact the schcool classroom culture is most positively not in favor of boys. 

 

Obviously if you have 10K in applicatons for a major and 8K of them are boys, logic implies that competition is steeper for boys. Nobody wants lopsided groups. So maybe they didn't "fell over themselves" to recruit girls, but given that boys are predominantly opting for technical fields, clearly the competition is steeper for their gender. Colleges are still very much trying to balance the gender not just overall, but also within departments with that idea that balancing of the workforce would be more friendly to entry of females into the field. That's fine, but we also need to encourage boys to pursue what they want. It can be win/win. My kid's CC has two STEM clubs, and both for girls.  So how about physics club for boys? 

[chiguirre]

35 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

As a mother of boys, I get really upset by this stereotyping. 

This isn't a stereotype, it's a lived experience. @Matryoshka's dd personally witnessed this behavior. My dd had a similar experience at a Latin summer school program (of all the bizarro places!!!) Guys really do this all the time. It was constant in my professional life, but I had hoped it would have died out among Zoomers. Nope, they still do it.

[Matryoshka]

48 minutes ago, Roadrunner said:

Obviously if you have 10K in applicatons for a major and 8K of them are boys, logic implies that competition is steeper for boys. Nobody wants lopsided groups. So maybe they didn't "fell over themselves" to recruit girls, but given that boys are predominantly opting for technical fields, clearly the competition is steeper for their gender. Colleges are still very much trying to balance the gender not just overall, but also within departments with that idea that balancing of the workforce would be more friendly to entry of females into the field. That's fine, but we also need to encourage boys to pursue what they want. It can be win/win. My kid's CC has two STEM clubs, and both for girls.  So how about physics club for boys? 

As Chiguirre pointed out, this isn't a stereotype, it's just what happened.  Repeatedly.  My dd didn't join any 'for girls' STEM clubs, though I do think they have their place, as if you don't specify, it ends up 'for boys' by default.  Literally.the.only.girl, she was.  And then again in her high school club.  In her college Robotics club there was one other girl - they're now married, so that ended up well... 😂

However, I think it's NUTS that there would be a single sex version of any club without an inclusive version of the other.  It would be equally nuts to have a "Baking/cooking/knitting club" that was just for boys but have that be the only one available.  But when the stereotype is that only X people are interested in a thing, something that targets 'not X folks' as an alternative, can be helpful to break that sterotype and include others. Because people group, and it's not always intentional.  Many people balk at being the odd one out.  Dd was also one of only two non-Indians at that middle-school Robotics club.  It was not billed as such, and run by a white guy.  Where were all the non-Indian boys (we have equal numbers of ethnic Chinese people here, and the majority are still of course white and a huge number of the parents of all races here work in STEM).  When the numbers are overwhelming in one direction and you're the odd one out, some people just internalize 'not for me' and scoot, even if everyone is nice and welcoming.