
Being a Man in the 21st Century (Part 1) - bhousel
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifestyle/being-a-man-in-the-21st-century-part-1.html
======
req2
I'll note that, at least in business, some research indicates that women do
_not_ earn less than men: "Women executives who do not have children follow
career paths that closely replicate those of their male peers. Successful
M.B.A. couples have similar work patterns, said Dr. Bertrand. Women without
children married to high-earning spouses are just as likely to work and
accumulate post-M.B.A. work experience at an almost identical rate, she said.
Call a woman without a child a man."

Rather, they _work_ less than men: "When women executives return to the
office, after several months of absence, they typically start to work shorter
hours, the study shows: 52 hours per week, compared with an average 58 hours
for their male peers, as they adapt to their new double task."

[http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/business/global/29iht-
ried...](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/29/business/global/29iht-
riedgenper.html)

This is not brushing away the problem, but pointing out that wages are a
symptom of an underlying cause.

~~~
gaius
Equal pay for equal work, I absolutely believe in, but it goes both ways.
Taking a year off - for any reason, for anyone - _should_ mean forfeiting a
year's seniority and pay. The truth is that men have always had to choose and
to compromise between work and domestic life, there are many men who rarely
see their kids not because they don't love them but because they need to earn
to give their kids a good start in life.

Incidentally here in the UK, deputy PM Harriet Harman (known as Harriet
Harperson as she's so PC) had her figures on pay savaged by the National Audit
Office - she compared pro rata salaries of women working part-time to those of
men working full-time.

~~~
gruseom
_deputy PM Harriet Harman (known as Harriet Harperson as she's so PC)_

What a delicious sample of British wit.

------
electromagnetic
I must provide a counter-point in the argument. Whilst only 1-in-5 Young Adult
readers are male, the actual reading rate for males is only ~10% lower than
females. So with such a small margin of difference, what are the males reading
if not Young Adult?

I know when I was 12 years old, I wasn't reading young adult. I was reading
LotR and Discworld novels. I think I had a brief period of reading YA before I
was reading adult fiction. There weren't many good YA fiction when I grew up,
most was targeted towards girls and I stopped reading YA before good books
like Cirque Du Freak (which I narrowly missed) and Inkheart (which I missed by
a few years) appeared.

I personally read Terry Pratchetts YA books, but quickly progressed into his
adult fiction with the Discworld (there was no Tiffany Aching YA discworlds
until the same time of release as Inkheart and I was already well into
Discworld by then).

Does it not say that if boys are only reading slightly less than girls, but
not reading YA, that those boys who do read books are more advanced readers?

------
10ren
The change in action figure suggests to me that our innate drive towards
physical violence is not getting a natural outlet elsewhere.

Traditional outlets include contact sport (ritualized warfare), litigation
(ritualized warfare) and chess (ritualized warfare). That's because the
purpose of physical violence is war: to defend the territory that the tribe
and family depends on (and attack it).

We don't need that any more (...?), at least not in that form (...?), but we
can't yet escape our own nature - and it might not be a good idea (consider
"The Warriors", Larry Niven).

I think humans (men especially) have an inbuilt tendency towards physical
violence - just as we have innate curiosity, humour, aptitude for language,
mathematics, trade, fairness, cooperation, kindness and a wish to understand.
But nevertheless, one of them is violence (consider your experience of anger).

Better to harness this productively, or dissipate it harmlessly, than to
ignore it blindly. Because there is a very convenient outlet for it readily
available to all governments: actual war.

~~~
Tichy
I think it is still a cruel and competitive world out there. Since you mention
chess: maybe it is not all solved on the physical level now, but other fights
can be just as dangerous. We are competing for jobs, success, ultimately for
food on the table and attractive women to marry.

~~~
10ren
True in a way, although much of those things follow naturally from creating
wealth (i.e. creating value in the world), so much so that if we focus on
that, the rest of it works out pretty well. It's like how you can work on
building a better app and getting it adopted... vs. fighting piracy/maximizing
revenue from customers/trying to beat your competitors.

Of course, an organization can do both; but it can't skip the first one.

------
aarongough
I personally believe that a lot of the issues that Men in general face has
come from the changing definition of what a Man should in the face of our
growing reliance on complex, possibly automated, electrical and mechanical
systems.

I think a good indicator of this is the reduced standing of skilled trades
within most people's minds. Not so long ago being a carpenter or a plumber was
considered a great job that paid well, nowadays many people perceive working
in a trade as a last option for those that don't have better prospects. Canada
is suffering a serious shortage of skilled trade workers and I feel this
directly reflects the change in attitude toward those jobs.

While this transition is not so bad for those that are more intellectually
minded, I have to question whether this change is badly warping what society
feels a Man should be...

Traditionally I would say that a Man was perceived as someone that could be
relied upon in nearly any situation, his working knowledge of the systems
around him (mechanical or otherwise, and simpler than they are now) was fairly
good and could be brought to bear whenever there was a problem. These days I
think it is harder and harder to find people (in my generation at least) that
match this description.

I think that one of the effects of this is that the stereotypical unthinking,
unimaginative young man doesn't see the number of options for his future that
he would have 30 or more years ago. Rather than being respected and happy in
his job in a trade he feels that he is being marginalized by society. This
clearly has the possibility to lead to resentment of and violence toward the
world that put him where he is...

------
bokonist
Despite the surface appearance that the gender divide in the workforce has
narrowed, it's actually amazing how deep it really is. Men still dominate the
"making things" segment of the workforce - manufacturing, engineering,
construction, agriculture, transportation. Women are still concentrated in
education, healthcare, human resources, administrative, and non-profits. Part
of the reason for women doing so well in the work force is the continued
growth of government and psuedo-government bureaucracy that generates more
education/healthcare/administrative jobs.

In the 19th century, the model for wealthy families was that the man would be
the bread winner, and the woman would live off the man's support and would
work in charity or the arts or reform movements. Now the pattern of work is
the exact same at the 19th century. The difference is rather than marrying a
man for the income, women vote to tax the income away, and then women get jobs
in non-profits or government agencies. Then, to add insult to injury, you get
articles like this claiming that men need to get with the program. Would
society benefit if the machinist or truck driver who drops out of high school,
instead continues his education and becomes a civil service paper pusher? I
don't think so, in fact, it is the reverse.

(Note, these two paragraphs are observing very general, aggregate trends,
obviously there are a gazillion exceptions on the individual level)

------
samuel
The new SkyWalker is a men's Barbie. It's not tougher, it's just more sexually
attractive to the oppossite sex, and a physical model for boys.

That's how I see it, at least.

~~~
jcl
It's not a new development, either. The action figures for He-Man looked just
like the updated Luke, if not more exaggerated, and they came out around the
time of the old Luke.

("He-Man"... _There's_ a subtle product name. I bet it won only narrowly over
"Male Role Model Plastic Toy Adventure Hour".)

------
zach
When function (of manliness, say) is removed, the form is free to be expressed
in exaggerated and grotesque ways. Including a more gangsta Luke Skywalker.

