Househusbands as the wave of the future...

[Custer Laststand]

An editorial headlined “Why Househusbands Are the Future,” in the form of a conversation between David Brooks and Gail Collins, appeared in the 17 Feb. 2010 issue of the New York Times online.

Some excerpts:

Collins to Brooks: “You were writing about the fact that American men have not adapted as well to the changing economy as women, who now have a much higher rate of college graduation and a much lower rate of layoffs during the recession.” ….

Collins to Brooks: “…. [Cougar Town] is the show about middle-aged women who have sex with much younger men. It’s been criticized for suggesting that middle-aged, single American women are so desperate for love they’re robbing the cradle. ‘They’re missing the whole point,’ my friend said. ‘This isn’t about desperate middle-aged American women. It’s about desperate young American men who are latching onto an older woman who’s a good earner.’ “

Brooks to Collins: “This cuts against all sorts of genetic imperatives, by the way. According to evolutionary psychologists, in all human societies, males generally mate with younger women and women generally look for higher status men. A study of online dating found that a guy who is 5 feet 6 inches tall can attract as much interest as a 6-foot-tall man — if he makes at least $125,000 more a year. Don’t ask me why I know that.

Collins to Brooks: “Do you think it’s becoming true the other way, too? Would a less attractive woman get more online dates if the guys knew she made a lot of money? Young American men, particularly young working-class men, really do seem to be in a pickle. Your solution was to encourage them to stay in school and pursue jobs in the reliable service sector instead of manufacturing or construction. Why can’t we encourage — even celebrate — working-class young men who stay home with the kids.”

… Etc. …

See: Why Househusbands Are the Future - Opinionator Blog - NYTimes.com

 

[casie]

ref househusbands so many men are going to loose jobs to more woman who are coming out of higher education than men, and within 50 - 100 years woman will call the shots while men will serve wives and do housework at home more and more , as woman are going to rule the world oneday . in time they will take our rights away from us and every male will be under a female guardian , according to female laws, and its already happening slowly as thet feminize us to be in line with there female policies oneday.

 

[Custer Laststand]

Casie,

Thanks for bringing up some important questions.

Ref. househusbands: many men are going to lose jobs to woman who are coming out of higher education [more] than men...

This is already happening, for several reasons. A letter to the editor in a recent issue of "The Economist" pointed out (as is well-known) that women have historically been, and continue to be, paid less than men for work that is the same or equivalent. This, of course, as been a classical disadvantage for women. During the current severe recession, however, when many or most companies and other employers are in dire straits and facing a need to cut costs, managers (those who are not cut themselves) realize they can cut costs more by laying off men and retaining women — the latter often being capable of doing the same or equivalent work, while being paid less.

An additional reason is that workers in manufacturing are mostly men. As everyone knows, U.S. manufacturing industries have been and continue to be heavily exported and/or "outsourced" to other countries, particularly China, India, and other Asian countries, for cost-cutting reasons. Men have thus been disproportionately losing their jobs due to export and "outsourcing" of manufacturing. Women, by contrast, tend to be employed in service industries, including health care and education, where jobs pay less than in manufacturing but are more secure. (When you get sick you can't go to China to seek health care, and a U.S. or European couple can't educate their child by sending her (/him) to China — and they certainly don't want to.)

A third reason is intelligence and competence. For quite a few years more women than men have qualified for admission to U.S. universities and colleges; women are now substantially in the majority at the undergraduate level nation-wide. Of those who are admitted, a substantially higher percentage of women than men graduate within 4 to 6 years. The same is true in other western nations, as well as in India. Thus, increasingly women are more likely to be hired into "good jobs" than men. Also, studies of management effectiveness are showing that women often have better management skills than men. (If so, this is true only in an average sense, not necessarily for individuals.) A hypothetical question being posed now is: would the financial crash of Sept. 2008 have happened if 50% or more of Wall Street managers were women? A speculative answer is: no, because on average women are more cautious than men, who are more likely to be risk-takers, and women have a greater tendency to think in terms of the long-term future.

...and within 50 - 100 years woman will call the shots while men will serve wives and do housework at home more and more ...

The transition to higher percentages of women in U.S. government at all levels and in the upper ranks of corporate managements, as well as in the military, is happening very slowly — but 50 to 100 years might be about the right time scale for leaders in the U.S. and other western countries to be mostly women. To predict that in the future all leaders will be women would be a stretch, though, because... well... leadership and management talent is where you find it.

...as woman are going to rule the world one day.

Could happen, eventually. But would this necessarily be a bad thing? Men have certainly made a mess of ruling the world throughout recorded history.

...in time [women] will take our rights away from us and every male will be under a female guardian, according to female laws.

Hm... maybe, on average, men would be better off managed by women than women (and men) have been managed by men — and perhaps the world as a whole would be better off as well. As for "women taking rights away from men:" men are always trying to take rights away from other men *and* women. Throughout most of human history, large percentages of the population have been slaves subject to brutal treatment.

And it's already happening slowly, as [women] feminize [men] to be in line with their female policies one day.

Well, there are certainly enough web sites on the subject of women "feminizing" men... but this requires men who, secretly or openly, want to be feminized. The fact that some women want to feminize their man and some men want to be feminized by their woman does not, however, imply widespread acceptance of this concept among either women or men (or both). My impression is, most women are sexually attracted to men who look and act masculine, and are definitely turned off by the idea of their man looking and acting like a woman.

Thanks again for raising these points.

—Custer

 

[Custer Laststand]

Addendum

Casie,

One result of trends like those outlined in the first three paragraphs of my post no. 3 (above, in this thread) is that now, for the first time, women are in the majority among working-age people in the U.S. who are employed. This was in the news recently.

—Custer