[Sir Alemeth]

A Woman’s Place ‘The End of Men,’ by Hanna Rosin “The End of Men”? This is not a title; it is a sound bite. But Hanna Rosin means it. The revolution feminists have been waiting for, she says, is happening now, before our very eyes. Men are losing their grip, patriarchy is crumbling and we are reaching “the end of 200,000 years of human history and the beginning of a new era” in which women — and womanly skills and traits — are on the rise. Women around the world, she reports, are increasingly dominant in work, education, households; even in love and marriage. The stubborn fact that in most countries women remain underrepresented in the higher precincts of power and still don’t get equal pay for equal work seems to her a quaint holdover, “the last artifacts of a vanishing age rather than a permanent configuration.” THE END OF MEN And the Rise of Women By Hanna Rosin And to whom do we owe this astonishing revolution? If there is a hero in Rosin’s story, it is not women or men or progressive politics: it is the new service economy, which doesn’t care about physical strength but instead apparently favors “social intelligence, open communication, the ability to sit still and focus” — things that “are, at a minimum, not predominantly the province of men” and “seem to come easily to women.” And so, “for the first time in history, the global economy is becoming a place where women are finding more success than men.” Human history? Global economy? Her evidence for women the globe over consists of thin, small facts cherry-picked to support outsize claims. We read, for example, that “women in poor parts of India” are rushing ahead of their male counterparts to learn English so that they can man call centers. But will this impressive display of initiative really liberate them? And even if it did, are we to deduce a country from a call center? But Rosin’s real focus is the United States, and here she delivers a blizzard of numbers, studies, statistics. Consider: By 2009 there were as many women as men in the work force, and today the average wife contributes some 42.2 percent of her family’s income — up sharply from the 2 percent to 6 percent that women contributed in 1970. The future, Rosin says, looks brighter for women still. For every two men who will get a bachelor’s degree this year, there will be three women graduates. And even if they remain underrepresented at the top of just about everything, they have “started to dominate” in lower-profile professions like accounting, financial management, optometry, dermatology, forensic pathology and veterinary practices, among “hundreds of others.” Rosin has invented comic-book characters to explain the momentous changes she sees: “Cardboard Man” is rigid, stuck in old habits, mentally muscle-bound and unable to adapt to the fleet-footed and mercurial global economy. “Plastic Woman” (an unfortunate name choice, given the surgical “adaptability” it calls to mind) is infinitely malleable, nimble and endowed with “traditionally feminine attributes, like empathy, patience and communal problem-solving,” that make her the perfect match for the new economy. For her, the only way forward is up. But this “rise,” which Rosin so cheerfully reports, is in fact a devastating social collapse. It starts with inequality and class division. As Rosin herself shows, men at “the top” of society are not “ending.” It is all happening to the lower and middle classes, because “the end of men” is the end of a manufacturing-based economy and the men who worked there, many of whom are now unemployed, depressed, increasingly dependent on the state and women to support them. We know the numbers, and they are bad: since 2000 the manufacturing economy has lost six million jobs, a third of its total work force — much of it male. In 1950, 1 in 20 men in their prime were not working; today the number is a terrifying 1 in 5. And so, a new matriarchy is emerging, run by young, ambitious, capable women who — faced with men who can’t or won’t be full partners — are taking matters into their own hands. For the poor, things are especially tough. One single mother Rosin interviewed fell asleep standing in the elevator of the community college where she was studying to get her degree — between caring for three children and working a night job. No wonder these women don’t want to get or stay married: unless a man can pull his weight, he is just another mouth to feed. But as Rosin herself points out, the new matriarchy is no feminist paradise. To the contrary: we have been here before with African-American women, and it is not a happy story. The matriarchy isn’t just happening at the low-income end; it is happening among the middle classes too. Take the young women who are flocking to school to become pharmacists, one of Rosin’s favorite fast-feminizing professions. Giddy at the prospect of a $100K salary and certain they will never not work, even if they have children, these women are planning for lives without men — or without reliable men. That goes for the bedroom as well. If you thought today’s “hookup” culture was run by young testosterone-charged men who want sex and no commitment, think again. Rosin insists that women are often in charge and the primary beneficiaries. A steady relationship with a guy, as one researcher puts it, is like adding an extra course to an already full load. Who needs it? These women have “hearts of steel,” and the hookup culture gives them sex without getting in the way of ­career-building. Yet Rosin’s interviews with these young women are at times heartbreaking; they really do want love in their lives. Hookups notwithstanding, college-­educated men and women are more likely to marry and less likely to divorce. And although women still do a majority of the child care, men are changing, Rosin says; they are becoming, well, more like women: flexi-, plastic men willing — wanting — to share in domestic life. Some workplaces are changing too, and some women are finding more ways to work and have children. Everyone is happier. Except, of course, that everyone is not — or not quite. Rosin’s chapter on women at “the top” indulges the soul-searching of educated women trying to “have it all.” She gives us Silicon Valley as today’s mecca, insisting that companies like Google and Facebook — flexible, new-economy places — are (in spite of their notorious frat-house cultures) solving the problems of women and children and work. But while I’m happy to learn that a woman at Google persuaded her boss to fly her child and her nanny with her around the world business class, this hardly seems a viable economic model for most companies, or most mothers. And what about Rosin’s faith in the adage that for women to make it to the top, you need to get women like Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer of Facebook, to the top so that they can “remake the workplace in their own image”? Sandberg aside, we know this doesn’t necessarily work: women aren’t always, or even usually, looking out for other women — or even being nice to them. Many prefer to work with men; and some are willing to put in the long hours it takes to wrest their way up the chain of command. In the end, there is something smug — and wrong — about Rosin’s depiction of “Plastic Woman.” Is it really a good idea to say that we are, by gender if not by sex, open, empathic, flexible, patient, prone to communal problem-solving and the like? We’ve known for a long time that men do not hold a monopoly on being rigid, hierarchical, close-minded or authoritarian. Yet the women in this book are almost all organized go-getters, whereas the men come across as lazy, unambitious couch potatoes. It is hard not to cringe when Rosin compares a Type A girl who sits still in school and makes pages of to-do lists every night with a sloppier but equally high-­performing boy who can barely remember what comes next in his day. Rosin holds the girl (her daughter) up to the light and suggests that the boy (her son) will need to find his own “inner secretary” if he is to succeed in the world we live in. Well, maybe, but everything in me wants to defend the boy for just being who he is. Do we really want an alpha-girl model, even if she does succeed in the new world economy, whatever that is? Do we want a model at all? Why should a son — or anyone, for that matter — want to be more like anyone else (much less his sister — or mother)? Above all, is it really a good idea to suggest that women are poised to inherit the economy and that over time men and boys, God bless them, may learn to adjust and become more — more what? More like us (except when we’re not)? To suggest, in other words, that success — material, social, sexual, emotional — depends on (our!) gender traits and not on the legal and institutional frameworks we live in? I’m all for each of us remaking ourselves from within, but this kind of argument seems carelessly apolitical, especially at a moment when we are faced with public officials actively working to undermine access to birth control, abortion, equal pay for equal work. Talk about endings. And I can’t share Rosin’s rosy faith in the global economy. Revolutions, economic or otherwise, have a way of disappointing women. They tear down the old, women step in and make strides, and as a new order sets in the strides disappear. Are Rosin’s Plastic Women genuine victors, or are they — or will they become — unwitting victims? Will the women who are so diligently training themselves as pharmacists today be as flexible and confident when the winds of the feckless global economy turn against them? How flexible can a woman be when she has been training for something for years and suddenly it is blown off the map by the “new” economy? Ask the men who are ended. Jennifer Homans is a historian and a distinguished scholar in residence at New York University. She is the author of “Apollo’s Angels: A History of Ballet.”

Fellow GAF dudes, what say you that the other gender of our time is taking over?

Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/bo...anted=all&_r=0

More related links:
http://www.facebook.com/HannaRosinBooks
http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-En...81740658607831
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/...lantic/262229/

[Volimar]

I think there's a lot of way to go, but more power to em.

[ScreenSplitter]

You don't counter sexism with the tired old male sexisms encountered in that article. Yay! We all just want sex, and all boys at school are lazy. Nice one.

[Lord Ghirahim]

I'm very sorry for her son.

[Enco]

I'm very sorry for her son.

.

[hodgy100]

I thought we were striving for equality not to shift the power over, but distribute it evenly?

[Ein Soph Aur]

I thought we were striving for equality not to shift the power over, but distribute it evenly?

.

[Septimius]

She's applauding that she's ending the dominant era of man, and making way for the dominant era of women? How the fuck can she justify taking power when her main point is that it's wrong for men to be in power?

[cutmeamango]

No throne stays empty.

[Horse Detective]

"The End of Men And the Rise of Women" sounds like some sort of strange Lord of the rings fan fiction.

Ugh.

[maquiladora]

[Tence]

[Eideka]

Oh God another "men are dooomed" article.

[Uncle]

Rosin has invented comic-book characters to explain the momentous changes she sees:

Sounds like a wonderful book.

[Seth C]

Congratulations, they have succeeded. Now women contribute 42.2% of the family income yet the total income has sat stagnant, both partners work, the family is no better off financially, and the children suffer.

This has nothing to do with feminism, directly, but corporate America has certainly taken proper advantage of the opportunity given to them.

[Septimius]

Congratulations, they have succeeded. Now women contribute 42.2% of the family income yet the total income has sat stagnant, both partners work, the family is no better off financially, and the children suffer. This has nothing to do with feminism, directly, but corporate America has certainly taken proper advantage of the opportunity given to them.

Children suffer? Exactly how? I have two full-time working parents, and I was in day-care since I was 1 1/2 - 5,6 years old. Worked out pretty well. Was pretty rad playing with my friends every day.

[Napoleonthechimp]

As much as she wants to believe it the USA is not the entire globe. Equality is non-existent in many countries so saying that her observations carry on to the remainder of the world is silly and ridiculous.

Also, women contribute plenty to the fucked up state of the economy and I struggle to believe they or anyone else will bother to change it unless it completely collapses.

[Brian Fellows]

Within 6 years the world will be just like the one in "Hell Comes to Frogtown". I can feel it.

[ScreenSplitter]

Type A girl who sits still in school and makes pages of to-do lists every night with a sloppier but equally high-­performing boy who can barely remember what comes next in his day.

Yeah, fuck you lady. I know plenty of hard working boys and slack off, do nothing girls.

[cajunator]

This is fine with me.

[Guerrillas in the Mist]

A decent point, largely well-made, although the point about "slacker" boys and hard-working girls was ironically rather sexist and tasteless.

Edit: Same goes for the stupid, attention-grabbing title, but I guess that's the point of it.

[SmokyDave]

I thought we were striving for equality not to shift the power over, but distribute it evenly?

A mistake all too often made. It's about retribution, not redistribution!

[GrotesqueBeauty]

I for one can't wait to see how women will go about screwing the world now that the age of men screwing it up is coming to a close. I raise my glass to a paradigm shift in what sort of ego projections will destroy us all next!

[Seth C]

Children suffer? Exactly how? I have two full-time working parents, and I was in day-care since I was 1 1/2 - 5,6 years old. Worked out pretty well. Was pretty rad playing with my friends every day.

It's great that you turned out well, but young people today have issues. Teen suicide has increased by about 300% since the 1950s, just as an example. In some cases (yours) things worked out fine. I assume you ended up at an attentive day care, and that's wonderful. Many aren't so lucky, and finding a replacement caregiver that will be as effective as a parent is difficult. It isn't impossible, obviously. This isn't to suggest a woman's place is in the home, rather that the shift from having one parent (either of them) being able to support the family to both parents working (and in most cases with the combined income not providing a higher quality of living) has had detrimental impacts on society.

[BGBW]

Rather have a futa future. True equality.

[Steelrain]

That article is hilarious.

[GrotesqueBeauty]

Rather have a futa future. True equality.

*insert FHUTA joke here*

[EviLore]

I'm going to start handling corporate promotions via arm wrestling contests and Starcraft tournaments

[mysteriousmage09]

I'm going to start handling corporate promotions via arm wrestling contests and Starcraft tournaments

LOL!

[Napoleonthechimp]

"A world run by women would be a better place!"

Okay, so what's your plan?

"..."

[GK86]

"A world run by women would be a better place!" Okay, so what's your plan? "..."

For women's eyes only.


Ms. F.

[Septimius]

It's great that you turned out well, but young people today have issues. Teen suicide has increased by about 300% since the 1950s, just as an example. In some cases (yours) things worked out fine. I assume you ended up at an attentive day care, and that's wonderful. Many aren't so lucky, and finding a replacement caregiver that will be as effective as a parent is difficult. It isn't impossible, obviously. This isn't to suggest a woman's place is in the home, rather that the shift from having one parent (either of them) being able to support the family to both parents working (and in most cases with the combined income not providing a higher quality of living) has had detrimental impacts on society.

You think there's something inherently wrong in spending half the day with your friends, half the day with your parents? You're talking like there's something special about my case, and like there's some correlation between suicide rate and not having your mother around all day.

It's the absolute norm that you go to day-care in my country, and there's a great infrastructure for it in place. I have the feeling that America is lagging in that field, and nannies are a higher social status than day-care. I'd say common logic would dictate that day-care is better than a nanny. So if you want to talk about corporate America, blame them for their poor day-care infrastructure. Not for having working parents. Not to mention that you disregard the psychological and social benefits of having a work to go to every day.

You're not really suggesting this one parent should be home and with the kid all day for 5-6 years, do you? This isn't about America abusing shit, this is economy. People make more money, they'll be able to buy more stuff, but the supply is still the same. This has nothing to do with corporate America fucking over two working parents.

Even if you are set on focusing on that, there's still tons of evidence for the fact that people do have more money when both parents work. The percentage of pay that goes to food today per average household is insanely much lower than it was in the 70s. If that's not a sign that we have more money, I don't know what is.

[Dax01]

I, for one, welcome our new female overlords.

[Mr Cola]

I cant be the only male here who would love to sit at home with children than go to work everyday, not saying that role is easy but id much prefer playing games and lego and doing some housework than doing a days grind in a cubicle. If this is the shift i welcome it! I want to play legos damnit.

[pickle]

I, for one, welcome our new female overlords.

and will look forward to the new child support laws that account for the inferior male gene in the new service based economy.

[Tence]

I, for one, welcome our new female overlords.

I already made that joke :(

[Volimar]

I cant be the only male here who would love to sit at home with children than go to work everyday, not saying that role is easy but id much prefer playing games and lego and doing some housework than doing a days grind in a cubicle. If this is the shift i welcome it! I want to play legos damnit.

I'm a man who is raising a child, and I gotta say that's a very simplistic look at it. That said, being the at home parent can be very rewarding.

[pickle]

I cant be the only male here who would love to sit at home with children than go to work everyday, not saying that role is easy but id much prefer playing games and lego and doing some housework than doing a days grind in a cubicle. If this is the shift i welcome it! I want to play legos damnit.

no job is that hard that can be performed in pajamas.

[captainnapalm]

And you could have it all / My empire of dirt

It's sad that so many women are only just joining the rat race and eager for their slice of the pie. The rat race is an awful place and if you don't like what it did to men, it makes women about 1000 times less appealing.

So yeah, they should probably start preparing for those single-mother lifestyles, if they do manage to get some poor schlub to impregante them.

[Tesseract]

then who was war?

[mac]

Thank God you pointed this out

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...of-men/308135/

This article from 2 years ago could tear the world apart if they knew that women were trying to become self-sufficient.

Look what could have occurred had this article been printed 2 years ago! We are living it.

[Darklord]

I'm going to start handling corporate promotions via arm wrestling contests and Starcraft tournaments

He could fit a GAF tattoo on that arm.

[remnant]

Reading these types of articles just makes me want to listen to Tom Leykis

[Madao]

and this is why i don't feel bad about not having a girlfriend and not having any plans to make a family.

the future sure looks weird.

[Dilly]

It's great that you turned out well, but young people today have issues. Teen suicide has increased by about 300% since the 1950s, just as an example. In some cases (yours) things worked out fine. I assume you ended up at an attentive day care, and that's wonderful. Many aren't so lucky, and finding a replacement caregiver that will be as effective as a parent is difficult. It isn't impossible, obviously. This isn't to suggest a woman's place is in the home, rather that the shift from having one parent (either of them) being able to support the family to both parents working (and in most cases with the combined income not providing a higher quality of living) has had detrimental impacts on society.

For this to make any sense, you're going to have to prove that the rise of suicides is in direct correlation with kids going to daycare because both parents are working full-time. And I really don't think that's the cause of a rise in suicides.

Anyway, articles like these suck. Reverse sexism is still sexism.

[Tence]

and this is why i don't feel bad about not having a girlfriend and not having any plans to make a family. the future sure looks weird.

[2MF]

and this is why i don't feel bad about not having a girlfriend and not having any plans to make a family. the future sure looks weird.

You give way too much importance to the ramblings of a zealot.

[Dead Man]

Not the greatest way to reassure papranoid males that feminists are out to help them too.

[mac]

I just read the article.



You made a thread for a New York Times Book Review? Well then, I can't wait to create a bombastic thread for Joe Connellys next book.

Really? A thread for a New York Times Book Review article? Shit, I'm gonna be making two threads a week now.

[SquiddyCracker]

For this to make any sense, you're going to have to prove that the rise of suicides is in direct correlation with kids going to daycare because both parents are working full-time. And I really don't think that's the cause of a rise in suicides. Anyway, articles like these suck. Reverse sexism is still sexism.

Precisely, way too many confounding variables that might affect the young suicide rate variable.

As for this article, it's some awful matriarchal bullshit. She should be wishing for gender stereotypes to disappear, not point to them as some innate quality of women that is making them "better" than men.

To start with, anyone know what "womanly skills and traits" even are?