The End of Men

[Obscuron (imported)]

I just finished the book The End of Men and the Rise of Women, by Hannah Rossin. I don't know if anyone else here is familiar with it; I only picked it up myself after they mentioned it on TV. Basically, the author argues that, all over the world, women's employment rates, education levels, and incomes are all going up, while men's are stagnating or dropping. She points to many examples where women choose not to marry at all because they don't want to have to support a man or put up with a man who is less educated and will just drag them down. She gives a lot of explanations for why men aren't getting ahead in the new economy, but basically it sounds like hey just have too much testosterone, which makes them too competitive, aggressive, excitable, and physical in a modern workplace that values people skills and could care less about physical "muscle work". The men who are able to adapt are those who become more feminine, or at least less male.

I don't agree with everything she says, but the book seems well researched and her basic arguments hold together. I have to wonder, though: if this really is the trend, does it mean that more men will start choosing castration as a viable option? It seems like a eunuch would have a real competitive advantage over a man in the future. Even if this isn't the case, it seems like the eunuch lifestyle might be more pleasant than being a hetero male when the chances of finding a mate in your own social class are vanishingly slim (Rossin mentions Japan, where there is apparently a huge market now for electronic girlfriends and woman-shaped body pillows).

For that matter, maybe we are already seeing an upswing in the number of voluntary castrations? It doesn't sound like there is any good data out there to go on.

Any thoughts?

[YodaNell (imported)]

I agree to some extend, but I do not believe humanity will get to the point where the majority of woman will outnumber men employment wise. Maybe this it somewhat true with high level careers. I also do not understand where she gets her info that men are stagnating and dropping in being educated. I think she is generalising. Women also have a strong paternal instinct to want a baby.

So yes, there will be women who will choose a career over marriage. There will also be the case where women will get a job in preference to a man (In my country there is a quota system).

I also doubt that male sportsman will remove their testicles, the same with soldiers (they will be fat and weak). The Jews and Muslims will never castrate themselves.

I believe an Eunuch is a special breed.

[cheetaking243 (imported)]

Uh... no...

Okay, women are making progress. But the basis of the argument is that women's employment/education/everything is "rising" while men's is "stagnating" is not a very good argument. If men are on the decline and women are "taking over," then why is Congress still 82% male? Why are only 24 CEOs of Fortune 500 companies women? (4.8%). How come at EVERY single job I've worked there have maybe been one or two female supervisors amongst an entire crowd of male owners and managers and supervisors?

Why does it even matter if women are getting more college degrees and doing better in school if they aren't actually taking those degrees and skills and actually using them for something meaningful?

And most importantly, if women's skills are seen so highly in this modern culture, if caring and compassion and people skills are so valued, then why does this study exist? http://fortune.com/2014/08/26/performan ... nder-bias/

(It basically shows that women are 30% more likely to receive critical feedback in evaluations than men, Men are 3.5 times more likely to receive only positive feedback in evaluations, and men's negative feedback was 4 times as likely to be "constructive criticism" as women's. Men received constructive criticism 41% of the time, while women only received it only 12% of the time. Basically, women are more likely to be rated low in job evaluations, and their negative feedback is more likely to be pure criticisms of their character or performance such as "I wish she'd be less abrasive," while men's evaluations are more likely to be things like "he needs to learn to be a little more patient, but who doesn't?" where the blow is softened and character flaws are seen more as personality quirks rather than pure detriments to their character.)

So yeah... take it easy, men, you aren't going anywhere yet. :p

[devi (imported)]

But why are eunuchs fairing so much worse off than normal men at this point? Most eunuchs are on the street at this point, or else at the mercy of others for a place to stay,

I think.

[Obscuron (imported)]

Thanks, good points from all of you. I do find Devi's assertion that most eunuchs are on the street a bit bleak, though. Is it really that bad?

[kristoff]

Thanks, good points from all of you. I do find Devi's assertion that most eunuchs are on the street a bit bleak, though. Is it really that bad?

if you count all the hijra in India, yes it is that bleak. Taking them out of the loop, no it is definitely not that bleak.

[Obscuron (imported)]

if you count all the hijra in India, yes it is that bleak. Taking them out of the loop, no it is definitely not that bleak.

I must say, that I was mainly thinking about the developed world (North America, Europe, parts of Asia). But I can see where that is a little chauvinistic of me. Certainly, most hijra are a hell of a lot poorer than most of the people on these boards, for instance. But India is more than a little behind us in North America when it comes to social trends, much as we seem to be at least a few years behind Europe or Japan. I thinking more 20-30 years out, and from a North American frame of reference. What can I say? I've only ever lived in the US and Ireland, and I forget how different the frame of reference can be in other places.

[devi (imported)]

I think if you remember back to the high school days, it was basically women first, strong men next and us puny little shrimps probably next but certainly not always. And yes I still do occasionally talk to persons on the street. Certainly there are women dressing as men but not all of these are actually women right here in North America.

[Cainanite (imported)]

This notion has been debunked quite a few times now. It is feminist wishful thinking. It doesn't hold water, or hold up under real world examination.

There are simply too many vital jobs that women are simply either not capable or not interested in doing. There are exceptions, but they are exceedingly rare.

Just off the top of my head;

The construction industry, Engineering (women go into this field less than 1% of the time), Emergency first responders (of the 414 first responders that died in the WTC collapse on 9/11, only 2 were female.)

It has been proven time and time again that women generally enter fields where physical labor is minimal, and flex time is abundant. Even women without families to care for are still attracted to such careers and positions.

As such we seldom see female leaders of military, construction, engineering, software design, agriculture, mining. The stuff that keeps civilization going are conspicuously absent of female participation.

This is not to take away from the rare women who DO participate or are leaders in these fields, but they are and remain in an extreme minority. Despite what anyone wants you to believe, women and men are wired differently. We seek different things. This is not bad, just different. Nor is this to claim that women cannot do these jobs. Women just do not apply for these jobs, they do not train for these jobs in University or College, they just seldom enter these fields.

What HAS happened with far more success since the beginning of the sexual equality movement is that men are more frequently entering fields traditionally dominated by females at a far greater rate than females have entered roles traditionally held by males.

Males aren't going anywhere, but neither are females. The birth rate remains around 50/50. We are going to have to share this planet for a long time to come.

[SplitDik (imported)]

Uh... no...

Okay, women are making progress. But the basis of the argument is that women's employment/education/everything is "rising" while men's is "stagnating" is not a very good argument. If men are on the decline and women are "taking over," then why is Congress still 82% male? Why are only 24 CEOs of Fortune 500 companies women? (4.8%). How come at EVERY single job I've worked there have maybe been one or two female supervisors amongst an entire crowd of male owners and managers and supervisors?

Why does it even matter if women are getting more college degrees and doing better in school if they aren't actually taking those degrees and skills and actually using them for something meaningful?

And most importantly, if women's skills are seen so highly in this modern culture, if caring and compassion and people skills are so valued, then why does this study exist? http://fortune.com/2014/08/26/performan ... nder-bias/

(It basically shows that women are 30% more likely to receive critical feedback in evaluations than men, Men are 3.5 times more likely to receive only positive feedback in evaluations, and men's negative feedback was 4 times as likely to be "constructive criticism" as women's. Men received constructive criticism 41% of the time, while women only received it only 12% of the time. Basically, women are more likely to be rated low in job evaluations, and their negative feedback is more likely to be pure criticisms of their character or performance such as "I wish she'd be less abrasive," while men's evaluations are more likely to be things like "he needs to learn to be a little more patient, but who doesn't?" where the blow is softened and character flaws are seen more as personality quirks rather than pure detriments to their character.)

So yeah... take it easy, men, you aren't going anywhere yet. :p

I totally agree. I would say that the author of that book is actually anti-feminist because she doesn't realize how far women are behind men right now. I do think the opportunities for women are actually there, but something (you can argue if it is innate in women or result of culture) in women themselves seems to prevent them from really trying. I work in Silicon Valley and there is decent rate of female engineers I work with (although still only about 20% of the workforce) and they are well accepted; however I've never seen any of them interested in moving ahead in terms of management. They seem very content to work away. In contrast about 1 in 4 guys is like "where's my promotion", "f*ck that I'm going to run this place some day" sort of attitude. We do have a couple women execs though, so I'm not saying never, but it is still really rare even in the most fair-minded profession (high tech is really a meritocracy -- people with merit are recognized no matter what their race, gender, disability, background) -- we have a couple full on transgender people working with us.

I do think some of it is innate in the female brain though. I don't mean they don't have ability, but they don't seem to have the drive to dominate like men do. I think the whole Fifty Shades Of Gray phenomenon was the best indicator of the state of women's mindset. A huge majority of women seem to be entranced, even turned on, by the role of being in a submissive but supportive role. I really couldn't believe how many women I know who found Fifty Shades to be a turn on. It was really sad actually. I think that prototype of them sticking with a broken but dominant man plays out for women everywhere. I'm fairly left-leaning in my politics but Hillary staying married to Bill took away every feminist credential she had. This Ray Rice scandal where his wife is telling media to leave her alone because she wants to be with a guy who knocked her out and dragged her along the floor?! Women really aren't very far along.

Last thing about employment. There were certain jobs like construction flag person that when I was young were only done by men. Construction managers didn't want women on the crew for similar reasons military makes -- it will distract the men, raise exposure to sexual harassment liability, etc. I remember in the 80s there were some cases of discrimination and construction managers were forced to hire indiscriminantly. So lots of women became "flagmen" -- I remember my neighbor lady was so excited to get the job. But I'll tell you a secret -- men didn't want that job. It sucks. You basically stand in hot sun with nothing to distract you and worried about being hit by cars. Same thing with military -- men would be perfectly happy if women did all the grunt jobs there too.

Anyway, while I agree that the opportunities for women are definititely better now, anyone thinking that women have made enough progress to somehow be getting ahead of men is pretty far stretch.