The Unspoken Crisis: Why Ignoring Men Problems is a Risk
Behind closed doors and in private conversations, concerns about the challenges facing boys and men are growing. Yet, publicly, particularly within progressive political circles, the focus often remains steadfastly on the difficulties encountered by women and girls. This disconnect highlights a significant issue: the widespread reluctance to openly address the real Men Problems plaguing society today. Ignoring these struggles, especially those impacting working-class and Black communities, not only fails vulnerable populations but also creates a dangerous political void readily filled by populist narratives.
Why Ignoring Men Problems is Risky
The tendency to downplay or sidestep the difficulties boys and men face is understandable, particularly following setbacks to women’s rights like the fall of Roe v. Wade. The fight for gender equality for women is far from over, encompassing reproductive rights, political representation, corporate leadership, and more. However, acknowledging and tackling Men Problems does not necessitate abandoning progress for women. This zero-sum thinking is counterproductive and politically damaging.
Author Richard Reeves discusses overlooked men problems highlighted in his book Of Boys and Men
Richard Reeves, in his analysis and book Of Boys and Men, argues that Democrats and progressives should champion a pro-male agenda alongside their commitments to women. This approach could mitigate attacks from the right and offer tangible support to males in need. However, achieving this requires confronting two significant hurdles within the progressive mindset.
The Flaw in Framing: “Toxic Masculinity”
A major obstacle is the pervasive concept of “toxic masculinity.” Reeves contends this term should be retired. Labeling masculinity itself as inherently flawed is alienating. Telling boys and men they possess a negative essence that needs purging fuels the culture wars and breeds resentment. Peggy Orenstein’s research for Boys and Sex found many young men struggled to identify positive aspects of being male, often hearing more about perceived flaws. A college sophomore admitted, “You hear a lot more about what is wrong with guys.”
This sentiment is reflected in broader society. A Public Religion Research Institute survey found half of American men believe “men are punished just for acting like men.” This feeling potentially contributes to declining approval ratings for figures like President Biden among young men. The “toxic masculinity” framework often shifts blame onto men themselves for systemic issues. Anxiety is attributed to emotional repression, illness to neglecting health, academic failure to lack of discipline, and early death to poor lifestyle choices.
Crucially, this focus on masculinity often obscures deeper inequalities related to social class and race. Elite progressives, observing their own professional circles, may struggle to see the broader picture of men struggling. While gender gaps have narrowed in some areas, economic disparities have widened significantly. Men at the top have seen wage growth, but most men’s pay has stagnated. The gender gap in college attendance is starkest among low-income families. Intersectionality is key: white women now earn more than Black men on average, and Black women outperform white men in many educational metrics. A truly progressive platform must consider gender, class, and race together.
Gender Inequality Cuts Both Ways
The second major shift required is the recognition that gender inequality can negatively impact men and boys too. In 2021, the Biden administration established the White House Gender Policy Council, replacing the previous Council on Women and Girls. While the name change suggested a broader scope, its initial strategy document focused exclusively on inequalities affecting females.
There was no mention of the significant gender gap in college degrees, which now favors women by 15 percentage points (compared to a 13-point gap favoring men when Title IX passed in 1972). This gap directly contributes to women holding nearly two-thirds of student debt, a fact sometimes framed solely as a women’s issue without acknowledging the underlying educational disparity. Also ignored was the six-point gender gap in on-time high school graduation favoring girls, the alarming fact that “deaths of despair” (from suicide, drug overdose, or alcohol) are three times higher among men, or that a quarter of Black boys repeat a grade in school.
The strategy failed to address any issue that didn’t fit the narrative of female disadvantage. This one-sided approach undermines the goal of true gender equity. Society needs the maturity to acknowledge that major social changes, even positive ones like women’s economic advancement, can have complex side effects, including impacting traditional male roles. Addressing these effects directly is crucial for progress.
A Path Forward: A Progressive, Pro-Male Agenda
Reeves proposes a concrete, progressive agenda to support boys and men. This includes significant investment in vocational education and apprenticeships, which often benefit men. It involves actively recruiting men into growing HEAL professions (health, education, administration, literacy) where they are underrepresented. Other suggestions include starting boys in school a year later to accommodate developmental differences, ensuring fairer child support systems and access for unmarried fathers, and implementing generous paid parental leave for fathers, not just mothers, similar to policies recently adopted in Finland.
Interestingly, even when current policies disproportionately benefit men, this often goes unheralded by Democrats. For example, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is projected to create around 800,000 jobs annually, with approximately 70% expected to go to men due to growth in male-dominated sectors like construction, manufacturing, and transit. This insight comes not from government promotion, but from an analysis by the National Partnership for Women & Families, which framed it as women potentially “losing out.”
The beneficiaries, particularly working-class men of color, represent a group Democrats aim to support. Yet, the reluctance to claim this as a win stems from a fear that acknowledging benefits for men might dilute the message about supporting women. This reflects a zero-sum political calculation that underestimates voters’ capacity to care about the well-being of everyone.
Conclusion: A Call for Inclusive Progress
The reality is that many boys and men are facing significant challenges in education, the economy, and family life. These are not just individual failings but reflect broader societal shifts and systemic men problems. When liberal voices acknowledge these issues privately but remain silent publicly, they create a political vacuum that can be exploited. Continuing to ignore the struggles of boys and men is not only detrimental to them but also poses a political risk for progressives. Most people desire well-being for all members of society, male and female alike. Addressing the problems men face is not contradictory to advancing women’s rights; it is essential for building a healthier, more equitable society for everyone. Recognizing and acting on this reality is a necessary step for genuine progress.
