Showing posts with label income. Show all posts
Showing posts with label income. Show all posts

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Peter Lawler & Nina Easton - Perspectives on the Economic Struggles of Men

In his column at Big Think, Peter Lawler breaks down an article from CNN Money on why men are falling behind economically. First the original article and then the response from Lawler.

6 reasons why men are falling behind women

Readers weigh in with their personal observations about why American men are struggling economically


By Nina Easton, senior editor
May 8, 2013


FORTUNE -- There is a growing consensus among scholars on the right, left, and center that the state of median-income men in America is in distress.

They've endured a three-decade drop in earnings. Even before the financial crash, prime-age men were dropping out of the workforce altogether, and the problem has only worsened since. Meanwhile, women are far outstripping their male counterparts in the area that's most important for a 21st century global economy -- education.

The big question remains -- why? On this, the research still falls short. So the outpouring of reader feedback on my column in the April 29 issue of Fortune -- "America's Wayward Sons: Why They Can't Carry On" -- offers some valuable on-the-ground perspective.

The focus of that column was an MIT study showing the sharp rise in single-parent households hurts boys more than girls. Other scholars have blamed a rise in more readily available government assistance, making aid checks more appealing than paychecks. The decline of well-paying manufacturing jobs, combined with fast-paced technological change, also factors in.

Here's what readers, reporting on what they see in their own backyards, had to say:

Flight of fathers. There was broad agreement with the MIT study's conclusion that the rise of single-parenting has set back achievement levels. "My father was a small-time white-collar criminal that fled the country prior to a court date when I was just a few months old," Adam C. Dudly writes. "Even now, in my 30s, I struggle with laziness, sense of identity issues, figuring out who I am or what I want to be, and what kind of man I'm supposed to be ... I would have to assume most young men are not as proactive as I am."

"While this may seem glamorous for those who admire movie stars and athletes, such family arrangements in the real world often doom children to lead lives of emotional and material privation," writes Jason DeSena Trennart. "It is a clear and present danger to the fabric of our republic. Senator Moynihan spoke honestly about this problem in the African American community as long ago as 1965. Sadly, the phenomenon of single-parent households has only grown."

A rise in autism and ADHD. "Unfortunately, the current debate is being waged by social scientists and psychologists who are quick to blame the issue on vague societal trends (globalization, decline in manufacturing) and of course, single mothers and the lack of a male role model," writes Michelle Linn. "I suggest you consider exploring how biological (real) science may be playing a role in this alarming issue. The generation of children born since 1988 are by many accounts the unhealthiest on record. The rates of ADHD, asthma, autism, bipolar disorder, diabetes, and allergies have skyrocketed in the last two decades. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control published a rate of 1 in 5 children having a behavioral disorder or chronic disease.

"It is well known that neurological disorders affect boys more frequently than girls (for autism, the rate is fivefold)," she continues. "Could it be these illnesses and diseases of the central nervous system are actually affecting our economy? It is very easy to blame the lost potential of up to 20% of our youth on social stereotypes and psychology 101 blithering."

Video games. "As the mother of two boys ages 14 and 15," writes Chris Olofson, "my biggest fear is that it's the video gaming, in addition to the factors you mentioned in your article, that is causing the lack of motivation and initiative to work and thus get a firm hold on the economic ladder.'' She wants to see more research on how video games lead to a decline in reading and thereby college performance.

A K-12 education system biased toward girls. As Rob Ritzenthaler bluntly put it: "Who was the nut that thought that boys should sit at a desk for 6-8 hours a day while they were growing up?" Some readers also criticized the emphasis on obtaining college degrees.

Microbiology professor Pinghui V. Liu cited Japan's system of vocational schools for high school students who can't afford college -- offering engineering and mechanics, commerce and accounting, schools of agriculture and forestry, and even schools of fisheries. With this kind of schooling, teenagers "can start looking for jobs at the age when American students are just beginning to worry about how to pay for their college education," he writes.

Likewise, writes Dave Danson, "the constant message to your our young people that they are going to be a failure in life without a four-year degree is the wrong message to send to parents and young people ... The food in your grocery store was delivered by a trucker who most likely did not have a degree. The store mechanicals are maintained by someone without a degree ... Post-secondary training is vital ... But please try to look at the bigger picture."

Several readers noted that in school, boys and men still outpace women in science and math. And they still dominate in high-paying industrial jobs. Corey Planter, who graduated with a paper-engineering degree, notes that men mostly fill factory jobs as millwrights, pipe fitters, welders, and ironworkers -- paying up to $28 an hour. "You may be thinking that these jobs are rapidly disappearing, however they are not," he writes, noting one machinist shop that was on a nationwide search for enough machinists to keep up with his orders.

The financial gains of women. Gustavo A. Duran makes clear he supports the recent economic gains of women -- his own daughter has a masters from Stanford -- but he sees more and more men taking a backseat. "I am now seeing many women in their 40s being the main breadwinners while their husbands diddle [around] daily in odds and ends," Duran writes. "I think this trend will just get larger as we move on the next two to three decades unless we as a society become more demanding of our male children to be disciplined and accountable ... Men need to be equally responsible for themselves so that they can contribute to taking care of their children and their spouses."

Affirmative action. "I was surprised, however, not to see any mention of affirmative action as a contributor," writes T.J. Wilsson, echoing a number of readers. "With so many major employers obliging 'guidelines' pressuring them to, effectively, discriminate against males ... For example, I read that a major employer in one state had guidelines that some 80% of its newly hired veterinarians be female." Ron Goddard complained that "every step of the way my sons and I were put on notice by corporate America that we were their second choice."

Whatever their perspective, most of the readers who responded wanted more discussion, more research, and more attention to this vital conversation.
* * * * * *

And now the response - and an alternate viewpoint.

Men Fading Badly?

by PETER LAWLER
MAY 10, 2013



Here’s a good article that offers six explanations for why “median-income men in America” are “in distress.” Their incomes are dropping. Lots of “prime-age men” have been “dropping out of the workforce altogether.” Maybe most importantly, men have been disappearing from our institutions of higher education. If our future leaders are to be those who graduate from our colleges in the most serious programs and with the highest levels of achievement, then most of our future leaders will be women.

At my college, which is fairly typical, we've been worried about the “man dearth” for a while now. We can get filled up pretty easily with solid students, but recruiting men is a challenge. We just started up intercollegiate football, which did reduce the “gender gap” for next fall. But everyone knows that that remedy is temporary.

Where are the men who should be in college? The credential of a college degree, of course, is more important than ever, given the “decline of well-paying manufacturing jobs.” Everyone talks about picking up flexible skills and competencies outside the formal academic structure, but it’s not like that’s so easy for the ordinary guy to do. Peter Thiel ain't offering his entreprenurial grants to guys like that.

I’m not talking about my college now: It’s pretty clear that many or most colleges now have a kind a covert affirmative action for men. They’re knocking themselves out looking for them, and (perhaps) they’re compromising standards just a bit on their behalf. But the various schemes just aren’t working that well.

I’m not complaining about having to teach a disproportionate number of women: While I had a good number of really fine male students this spring, there’s no denying that women, in general, are more mature and have better personal discipline at 18 (or 19 or 22). They also have much better social or relational skills, and so they are much better at flattering (someone might say playing) me. Given my self-esteem “issues,” I really appreciate that.

I want to talk about all six causes of the decline of the middle-class man. The somewhat mysterious epidemic of autism is above my pay grade, but I do see it with my own eyes. And then there are video games, which really do cause some young men to exhibit another kind of asocial behavior.

Whatever I might want to do (eventually), I’m just going to put forward for your consideration what might be the most controversial cause.

I call your attention to the “MIT study showing the sharp rise in single-parent households hurts boys more than girls.”

The “flight of fathers,” for one thing, creates “identity issues” for young men. They haven’t been given guidance—or role modeling—about “who I am and what I want to be.” The result is “achievement levels” suffer.

I would add that fewer young men are either being responsible fathers or thinking of themselves as fathers in the near future. Surely one powerful incentive for personal achievement is parenthood. And parenthood isn’t what it should be if the father isn’t present at home and doing his part.

Because most single-parent households are headed up by women, the toll on motherhood just hasn’t been as great. We might even say that moms seem more noble than ever. Maybe one powerful incentive for the personal achievement of women these days is the knowledge that they can’t and shouldn’t rely on men.

So it’s very possible to speculate that the achievement level of our men fades as their participation in genuinely responsible relational life fades. Or at least we can say that the two forms of fading are interdependent.

Friday, July 20, 2012

Post-Traditional Men Not Bothered When Partner Earns More Income

 

Most of the headlines for this study read something like, Macho Men Threatened When Women’s Income Higher - which is how Psych Central posted the study in their news feed. I'm getting tired of always seeing articles about men framed in the negative. By making the article about macho men, or traditional men (as many other sites phrased their headlines), we reinforce the idea that these men are the norm.

Maybe if we highlighted the fact that non-traditional or "post-traditional" men are not bothered - and are not afraid they are less of a man - if their wife/girlfriend earns more than they do, maybe then being a post-traditional man would be the norm (which, in reality, it may be already).

Speaking as one of those post-traditional men, I'm perfectly cool with Jami earning more than I do. Let's be realistic - she's very good at what she does, she's been in her professional longer than I have, she has better training than I do, and for good or ill, I have three professions (therapist, fitness & nutrition coach, and writer & editor).

And by the way, the study points out that guys like us, the ones who are not caught up in traditional ideas of what it means to be man, have better relationships with our higher earning partners because it does not threaten our masculinity or self-worth.

Macho Men Threatened When Women’s Income Higher

By Associate News Editor
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D. on July 18, 2012 
 
Macho Men Threatened When Womens Income Higher 

Macho men whose partners earn more than they do have worse romantic relationships, according to a new study.

The study, by Patrick Coughlin and Jay Wade from Fordham University, also found that men who are not as traditional don’t place as much importance on the difference in income and, as a result, appear to have better relationships with their female partner.

According to the researchers, the man as the breadwinner is still the accepted norm in marriage, supporting the husband’s power and authority in the family.

It follows that when a man earns less than his female partner, he will feel removed from this traditional role and feel a void because he does not fit the norm, the researchers said.

However, the reality is that marriages in which both partners work are becoming the rule rather than the exception, add the researchers, who note it is “increasingly possible for both partners to either earn equal amounts or for the female to earn more than the male.”

For the study, 47 men who had a female partner who had a higher income took part in the study. Through an online survey, the researchers assessed their beliefs about masculinity, the quality of their relationships, and the importance of the disparity in income between them and their partners.

The researchers found that the stronger a man’s endorsement of traditional masculinity ideology, the more likely he was to report a low-quality romantic relationship, and the more he perceived the difference in incomes as important.

However, the more a man endorsed non-traditional masculinity ideology, the more likely he was to have a high-quality relationship with his partner and not place too much importance on the income disparity.

“Our results demonstrate the importance of masculinity ideology in understanding how and why men with higher-earning partners will have low or high quality romantic relationships,” the researchers said in the study, which was published in the Springer journal Sex Roles.

“The findings are relevant to men who are married as well as non-married men in a romantic relationship.”

Source: Springer’s Sex Roles