The Glass Floor
John Tierney on the next wave of fallout from our educational dysfunction: an epidemic of spinsters:
When there are three women for every two men graduating from college, whom will the third woman marry?
It's not a joke, actually - marriages between people of grossly-different educational backgrounds start with a strike against them. Differences in intellectual capacity - not to mention earning power - cause problems for couples.
And the education system is shortchanging our boys, who grow up to be the men who don't figure an education is in their interest anyway:
This is not an academic question. Women, who were a minority on campuses a quarter-century ago, today make up 57 percent of undergraduates, and the gender gap is projected to reach a 60-40 ratio within a few years.
And in this post-feminist era, where Madison Avenue and generations of exhortation and seven seasons of
Sex In The City have trained women that they can have "it all", that's bad news for guys:
I can't think of any friend who refused to date a woman because she made more money than he did...Nor can I recall hearing guys insult a man, to his face or behind his back, for making less than his wife. The only snide comments I've heard have come from women talking about their friends' husbands...The women surveyed were less willing to marry down -- marry someone with much lower earnings or less education -- than the men were to marry up. And, in line with Jane Austen, the women were also more determined to marry up than the men were.
You may think that women's attitudes are changing as they get more college degrees and financial independence. A woman who's an executive can afford to marry a struggling musician. But that doesn't necessarily mean she wants to. Studies by David Buss of the University of Texas, and others, have shown that women with higher incomes, far from relaxing their standards, put more emphasis on a mate's financial resources.
Women's attitudes as a group, though, are less than half the problem. At the root of it all is a growing male achievement gap wrought by a generation of feminization of education - a "war on boys", as Christine Hoff Summer called it in an excellent eponymous book. Education has swung far too far; past "acceptance" and "reinforcement" of girls (Summers fairly well demolishes the case that girls were
ever shortchanged by the educational system) frequently rolling over into barely-muted hostility toward boys and their traits; boys are typically competitive, solution-oriented, and excel at spatial and dimensional thinking; girls tend to develop verbal skills sooner and are more consensus-oriented; schools systematically value the latter at the expense of the former.
Much more on this later. This is going to be regarded as a crisis, someday.
When boys start to matter to the establishment, anyway...
Posted by Mitch at
January 4, 2006 06:44 AM
| TrackBack
Oh boohoo, the system isn't fair! Schools favor students who can read, speak and write standard English!
Any time that different disadvantaged minorities (other than greivously oppressed white males, that is), complain about educational disparities, conservatives helpfully advise that they stop whining, pull themselves up by the bootsraps and compete. So why is it the advice never applies to conservatives?
Would you prefer an affirmative action program for boys? Maybe we should recognize the unique verbal contributions of males by teaching Boybonics - you know, lots of "I dunnos" and dive-bomber sound effects.
Posted by: angryclown at January 4, 2006 08:24 AMI find it amazing how an simple analysis of an established fact can so readily be turned into a political football. I used to think you had a bit of credibility, clown. Now I see you are a simple reactionary. Or a simpleton reactionary. Take your pick.
Posted by: Kermit at January 4, 2006 08:32 AM"When there are three women for every two men graduating from college, whom will the third woman marry?"
If you follow the feminist / public education agenda, one of the other "third women", of course.
Posted by: Nordeaster at January 4, 2006 10:43 AMCurious.
Whiner Berg is whining on whine in the dark. Not all the commenters are hip to blogger berg's unhinged meltdown:
Shot In The Dark
Comments: The Glass Floor
Oh boohoo, the system isn't fair! Schools favor students who can read, speak and write standard English!
Any time that different disadvantaged minorities (other than greivously oppressed white males, that is), complain about educational disparities, conservatives helpfully advise that they stop whining, pull themselves up by the bootsraps and compete. So why is it the advice never applies to conservatives?
Would you prefer an affirmative action program for boys? Maybe we should recognize the unique verbal contributions of males by teaching Boybonics - you know, lots of "I dunnos" and dive-bomber sound effects.
Posted by angryclown at January 4, 2006 08:24 AM
I find it amazing how an simple analysis of an established fact can so readily be turned into a political football. I used to think you had a bit of credibility, clown. Now I see you are a simple reactionary. Or a simpleton reactionary. Take your pick.
Posted by Kermit at January 4, 2006 08:32 AM
Post a comment
Name:
Email Address:
URL:
Remember personal info?
YesNo
How rediculous. I've posted about this on my blog. I've also posted about those loosers Swiftee and LeeernedPhoot because I like to spread rumors, cheap shots and inuendos.
Read my blog.
Eva
Posted by: Eva Young at January 4, 2006 10:46 AMThis is the real Eva here. I didn't write this:
Curious.
Whiner Berg is whining on whine in the dark. Not all the commenters are hip to blogger berg's unhinged meltdown:
Shot In The Dark
Comments: The Glass Floor
Oh boohoo, the system isn't fair! Schools favor students who can read, speak and write standard English!
Any time that different disadvantaged minorities (other than greivously oppressed white males, that is), complain about educational disparities, conservatives helpfully advise that they stop whining, pull themselves up by the bootsraps and compete. So why is it the advice never applies to conservatives?
Would you prefer an affirmative action program for boys? Maybe we should recognize the unique verbal contributions of males by teaching Boybonics - you know, lots of "I dunnos" and dive-bomber sound effects.
Posted by angryclown at January 4, 2006 08:24 AM
I find it amazing how an simple analysis of an established fact can so readily be turned into a political football. I used to think you had a bit of credibility, clown. Now I see you are a simple reactionary. Or a simpleton reactionary. Take your pick.
Posted by Kermit at January 4, 2006 08:32 AM
Post a comment
Name:
Email Address:
URL:
Remember personal info?
YesNo
How rediculous. I've posted about this on my blog. I've also posted about those loosers Swiftee and LeeernedPhoot because I like to spread rumors, cheap shots and inuendos.
Read my blog.
Eva
Posted by Eva Young at January 4, 2006 10:46 AM
How rediculous. Evereebodee knows that I try to tear others down because it makes me feel better. It's all about me. So read my blog.
Eva
Posted by: Eva Young at January 4, 2006 10:51 AMangryclown said "Oh boohoo, the system isn't fair! Schools favor students who can read, speak and write standard English!"
Spoken like someone who has no clue! I have a boy in grade school and I have to FIGHT with the teachers and the administrators to get him anything. If he is struggling with a subject I am the one who has to go to them to see about what can be done to help. When we went through a 3 year period of bully problems we went to the principal every quarter demanding that they do something about it. It was not until I asked "do you want a Columbine type situation to happen here because that is what you are setting up" (by ignoring the bully and the kids he was bullying) that anything was done!
Posted by: The Lady Logician at January 4, 2006 12:16 PMLady,
Posted by: Kermit at January 4, 2006 02:27 PMJust tell them he's got ADD and they'll fall all over themselves to give him an IEP.
What is the crisis?
The world got along for centuries when one marriage partner (the male) had far more wealth, power, and status than the other. I think we can handle a small surpluss of college-educated woman who may or may not be disapointed with their non-college educated male partners.
Posted by: RickDFL at January 4, 2006 04:56 PM"If you follow the feminist / public education agenda, one of the other "third women", of course."
Dude, I spent 12 years in the public education system and you're telling me I missed out on the "three-way lesbian marriage" educational agenda? I hope there were visual aids.
Posted by: Tim at January 4, 2006 07:17 PMThe educational system is not what is short changing our kids. It is the dads who have abdicated there responsiblity to raise there sons. Far to many dads have just given up, caught between the crosshairs of wives who want to be incharge of the family and a social acceptance in our culture of mom's can raise their children without the input of FATHERS!
I have heard it said that it takes a man to raise a man. Even under the best circumstances single moms(by either divorce or a "checked out" husband) can only satisfy 1/2 of the equation. The mystery that swells a boys heart can only be unlocked by a DAD, not a school system, friends, or even a mom. It takes a dad.
There was a time when all boys became uber-males, not just Bono. If you doubt me go and talk to your grandma and ask her how she felt about her husband who she stayed married to all of her life. Have you ever seen a 80 year old womans eyes turn into the eyes of a love struck teenager? It will give you pause to thought...perhaps we are missing the point.
At the end of the day when a boy's heart and mind are quiet,(and for that matter a man's heart also) he wants to hear from his father, "well done son"
And Mitch, I am quite sure that your dad echos this sentiment.
Keep it up Mitch, you are my new uberman hero!
Shalom
(oh,and don't forget people...CARPIE DEIM!)
Posted by: c.reyerson at January 4, 2006 08:37 PMA lot of these single, educated gals are terrific! A single guy (or an un-principaled attached one) could be a real DAWG in workplaces like these. Let us all give thanks. Ha ha ha.
Posted by: PaulC at January 5, 2006 10:49 AMHa ha ha! Single, educated women all love being the office slut.
Posted by: Laurie at January 5, 2006 06:25 PMI agree with your lead paragraph: "marriages between people of grossly-different educational backgrounds start with a strike against them. Differences in intellectual capacity - not to mention earning power - cause problems for couples."
My agreement is based on experience, personal observation of other couples, and post-relationship analyses of (mine and others') of "what went wrong".
I'd like to know if there have been any studies of this. Can anyone give me a pointer to finding such? It would seem to be a prime subject for psychologists and sociologists.
Thanks.
Posted by: Julie S at February 13, 2006 01:36 PM