Move over, girls and minorities; a new class of victims is being introduced: boys.
Colleges and universities across the country are grappling with the case of the mysteriously vanishing male. Where men once dominated, they now make up no more than 43 percent of students at American institutions of higher learning, according to 2003 statistics, and this downward trend shows every sign of continuing unabated. If we don’t reverse it soon, we will gradually diminish the male identity, and thus the productivity and the mission, of the next generation of young men, and all the ones that follow.
John, I saw this sentence in the WaPo article: “Statistics show that a young man who doesn
John,
My favorite part of the article was how bad the diminishing male intelligensia pool is for sophisticated women in search of equal male partners.
Men are nothing more than diversity objects worthy only of being educated so that women can have good mates. Brilliant.
Chetly Zarko,
Exactly. I mean, how many women with a graduate degree would marry a plumber? That men used to marry their secretaries is apparently another thing entirely. Evidently it isn’t practicable the other way round. Gotta have that cachet. (I do think it’s much more likely female pride preventing “marrying down” than male pride preventing “marrying up,” though they’re obviously both factors.)
Michelle,
Given how many have Masters degrees nowadays, and given how many have trouble getting into (say) the academic field, I’m not convinced there is that much of a step-down between Masters holder and electrician.
My understanding now is that upwards of 30% of wives now make more than their husbands (though I’ll bet that the difference between the two is $2K or less, for the most part).
“; a new class of victims ”
What are they victims of?
“And I have to ask the good professor who wrote that if he is aware of how much plumbers, electricians, truck drivers, and coal miners make nowadays.”
What makes you think the statistics aren’t aware?
“What are they victims of?”
AA
“What makes you think the statistics aren’t aware?”
??
Dom
“AA”
That wasn’t in the article. If anything the article talked about the difficulty in recruiting and keeping males. Also, another factor it pointed to was about the lack of participation of the males that DO get in.
“What makes you think the statistics aren’t aware?”
the professor gave statistics on average male pay. And then the guy asks about some subset with high male pay. Whats to say that wasn’t included in the average?
Those jobs I mentioned are fairly common jobs across the country. And no, I don’t think he mentioned them, as mentioning pay in those jobs would spoil his whole (fraudulent) hypothesis.
But then, he’s trying to get his name in the paper, so any old thing will do:)
Brad S,
It’s not the pay; it’s the cachet. “Class” isn’t just about income. I suspect that to many an underpaid, highly-educated woman, a plumber is something that shows up on cue to unclog the toilet. He might make considerably more than she does, but that doesn’t mean that she’s going to consider him marriage material.
“Those jobs I mentioned are fairly common jobs across the country. And no, I don’t think he mentioned them, as mentioning pay in those jobs would spoil his whole (fraudulent) hypothesis.”
Wow. so the existence of some — as yet unquantified — high paying jobs negates the value of a statistic that tells us average jobs are lower paying? Sure there are plumbers out there. There are also walmart and fast food and the military too.
“What are they victims of?”
Institutional Sexism. Obviously, any university that doesn’t reflect the demographic reality of the community, and doesn’t “look like America” is harboring a deep, unconscious, socially-constructed, sexist notion of gender.
This insidious distorted world-view results in bigotry and discrimination.
No doubt, some mandatory sensitivity training is in order, as well as an outreach program to widen the pool of applicants, and a more “holistic” review of applications.
Of course, the Washington Post did not blame AA. I think we all know why. In any case, since one purpose of AA is to rig up the racial make-up of universities, and since no one hides the fact that asians and whites are to be denied opportunity, it’s pretty clear that AA is, at least in part, responsible.
I understand your point about statistics now (“aware” is a strange word to use). But I still want to see the numbers, especially since I know that journalists routinely get statistics wrong. “Less than half” seems absurd. I used to teach in College, and the course work is so dummied down and “sensitized” that I just don’t see that college grads make so much more. Are they comparing College grads to HS dropouts, HS grads, or College dropouts?
Dom
“Of course, the Washington Post did not blame AA. I think we all know why. In any case, since one purpose of AA is to rig up the racial make-up of universities, and since no one hides the fact that asians and whites are to be denied opportunity, it’s pretty clear that AA is, at least in part, responsible.”
It sounded like they were using AA-like language to talk about their attempts to overcome how bad males are.
I don’t think AA has much to do with it. I think it’s a cost benefit analysis done by male HS students.
Again, since AA is a very open attempt to reduce the number of asian and white males in universities, I don’t see how it does not have an effect. It is taken as evidence that AA is not working — and must be pursued even more strongly — if, at the end of the academic year, the proportion of the non-preferred groups is still high at a university. No other reason is needed.
The cost benefit analysis is also a strong reason for the reduced number of males. Like I said before, as a former college professor I think it is obvious that a college degree is not worth much. I’m in the high-tech corporate world now, and even in IT a college degree won’t get you far.
What we need is a study examining the reasons that American education has been dummied down to such low levels.
Dom
“What we need is a study examining the reasons that American education has been dummied down to such low levels.”
Men not paying attention in class?
actus,
Men not paying attention in class?
If you put any other group in that category, even the one that was the lede (remember, the article opens with Howard University), you’d be called a racist, a sexist, or both. Please tell me why any demographic group falling behind doesn’t incur your immediate concern and support. If someone complained thirty years ago that girls in math classes didn’t do well because they didn’t “pay attention in class,” would you have credited it?
“If you put any other group in that category, even the one that was the lede (remember, the article opens with Howard University), you’d be called a racist, a sexist, or both.”
The article talked about men not paying attention in class. Maybe its not true. I certainly saw a lot of people not paying attention back in college.
“Men not paying attention in class?”
This does not explain why the courses have been dummied down.
The one possibility you won’t accept is the obvious one — that the groups who are being courted will not graduate otherwise.
I am partly responsible for hiring at our corporation, and it is becoming increasingly obvious that the best new people are those who come from the specialty schools. Our network admin, most of our programmers, and even our system manager spent only minimal time in academia. Our analysts are hired because of their work experience.
Dom
“The one possibility you won’t accept is the obvious one — that the groups who are being courted will not graduate otherwise.”
But the article was all about how men are the new courted group, and they’re the ones underperforming.
actus,
The article talked about men not paying attention in class. Maybe it[‘]s not true. I certainly saw a lot of people not paying attention back in college.
“People”? Or “men”?
What you’re trying to say, actus, is that if men don’t go to college and succeed at it, it’s their own damn fault. I repeat that if you said that with the the word “Black” before “men,” you’d be chewed out; and if you had substituted “women” for “men” thirty years ago, you would likewise have been chewed out. I think a two-to-one f/m ratio at Howard is rather alarming, don’t you?
The article is not “about” boys not paying attention at all. When that is mentioned, it is done so as an example of how boys need a different learning environment. At no point in the article is it said that boys are dropping out because of an inability to learn. It very clearly states that education is failing them.
Nor does it call boys the “new courted group”. Throughout, it claims that they are anything but that.
Dom
“What you’re trying to say, actus, is that if men don’t go to college and succeed at it, it’s their own damn fault.”
Its certainly not the fault of admissions standards for women being lowered.
“I repeat that if you said that with the the word “Black” before “men,” you’d be chewed out; and if you had substituted “women” for “men” thirty years ago, you would likewise have been chewed out.”
And you’d be an idiot if you thought you weren’t comparing apples and oranges.
“The article is not “about” boys not paying attention at all. When that is mentioned, it is done so as an example of how boys need a different learning environment.”
Or they need to get with the program.
“Nor does it call boys the “new courted group”. Throughout, it claims that they are anything but that.”
The howard guy talks about recruiting to them!
“Its certainly not the fault of admissions standards for women being lowered.”
One more time. The very clear, open purpose of AA is to change the racial and gender composition of universities. When that composition does not favor the preferred groups, the admissions standards is changed accordingly. AA is said to be working only when asian and white males are not accepted at universities.
Dom
“AA is said to be working only when asian and white males are not accepted at universities”
By who?
actus,
If Howard has a two-to-one f/m ratio, as the article says it does, why is “Black men” unacceptable? Why is it apples and oranges? Obviously there are a lot of Black women at Howard; the school is overwhelmingly Black.
If you’re going to claim that Black men have a harder time of it than Black women do, then I think you will have to concede that you’re making John’s point for him.
John McWhorter, in “Losing the Race”, does in fact make the claim that American Blacks don’t pay as much attention in class.
Educated women have a problem finding mates because most women simply aren’t attracted to men who make less than they do. This has become a well known problem in Austrialia, according to timblair.net.
If I were young I’d get pretty excited about attenting a college where men are vastly outnumbered. Unless of course, most of those women were middle-aged returning students.
Actually, I’ve got 2 undergrad degrees and a grad degree in math, and married a college dropout. I’ve got a guy who can put an axle back on a car by himself, rewire the house, administer our websites, and cook (much better than I can).
In a way, I’m thankful other women are too picky, otherwise he would have been snapped up long before.
Anyway, here’s my own reaction to the article:
http://www.livejournal.com/users/meep/1187235.html
And something about the alarmist numbers:
http://blogs.salon.com/0003945/2005/12/04.html#a287
In short: more men (%age wise) are going to college than ever before — but an even higher proportion of women are going, too. Well, =somebody= has to fill the gender studies classes.
Oh, and when my Ma went to college, she picked Clemson, because the sex ratio was 7-to-1. And the guys were engineering students! Yup, she married an electrical engineer (my dad).
I went to an engineering school, too, but for other reasons. The sex ratio wasn’t that skewed (as the school had branched out considerably beyond engineering, but I know in the engineering school the ratio was that bad), but men certainly outnumbered women on campus. I rather imagine that in technical fields, men will outnumber the women for a long time to come. Unless, of course, some college admin thinks they need to restrict the number of men.
A couple of thoughts.
1. In reviewing many homepages that have discussed the article, several men have discussed not doing well in secondary school but finding themselves in engineering or the science fields in college. One thing the article did not point out is that for many universities that middle of the road male high school achiever who used to get into Penn State, Virginia Tech, Auburn just does not get admitted anymore because the class sizes have not grown but the number of higher grade earning females has taken their place. In other words, males are slower starters than females but the secondary school system does not allow for slow starters anymore (if you do not take and do well in Algebra in 8th grade, many universities suddenly fall off the table for male students).
2. Are we training boys to be quitters by putting them into sports. In sports, if you realize you are not among the best, you eventually quit. Eventually most boys learn that no matter how hard you they practice their is a limit to their running speed, jumping ability, or hand to eye coordination. Thus boys, more than girls, take this lessons that if you are in the middle of the pact in academics you are not smart (talented enough) to bother doing it.
George Gilder predicted this in a book entitled Sexual Suicide written more than twenty five years ago. Whatever field women dominate men leave. This gives the lie, incidentally, to all the theories that girls are disadvantaged in school. The bias is against boys, and this is the result. Any society where women dominate in areas that the society things are important is a society in trouble. It’s going to be a society of unstable men ranging from those who can’t work steadily who have no direction in life to those who are actual criminals. And then you need ever more efficient and tyrannical police controls to keep the peace. It’s going to be interesting to see what feminism does to white men. Just as black men were going to get the ability to say no wife of mine will ever work and move into better jobs, white women or black women got alot of them. The result of black women’s economic power is seen in the low rate of marriage in the black community. I know people won’t like this. But read anthropology.
“Whatever field women dominate men leave….Any society where women dominate in areas that the society things are important is a society in trouble.”
With respect, Anita, I think men need to get over it.
“Whatever field women dominate men leave….Any society where women dominate in areas that the society things are important is a society in trouble”
Like motherhood. Oh please.
“What we need is a study examining the reasons that American education has been dummied down to such low levels.”
Another cost benefit analysis. Without quoting directly I believe that even with skyrocketing costs applications for college seats are higher than ever. It seems to be what people want to spend their money on.
Laura and actus, the men can’t get over it. They won’t tamely submit to the loss of the father and breadwinner roles. When a certain percentage of white people become like black people, kids with no fathers, men who can’t keep a job, who have no direction in life, no notion that marriage should precede parenthood, family life being totally identified with the woman, it’s going to be very bad. Black people can do alot of harm, but not as much harm as a group of angry young white men. There are more white people.
‘Black people can do alot of harm, but not as much harm as a group of angry young white men.’
You’re a racist idiot.
“Laura and actus, the men can’t get over it. ”
Oh quit whining.
Anita, I’m supposed to dumb myself down so my husband can feel manly? I’m sure I don’t understand your point.
A group of twenty can do more harm than a group of five. This is not racism. And let’s call each other names.