Panel 6: Could These Both Be True?: Reconciling "the End of Men" with Women's Continuing Inequality

Just another WordPress site

Panel 6: Could These Both Be True?: Reconciling "the End of Men" with Women's Continuing Inequality

it is with great pleasure that I began the final panel of the evaluating that it claims about the end of men has been a great two days and I hope I expect I promise that this last panel will be a great ending to a great conference and so just to give you a brief sort of preview of what’s going to happen i’ll be speaking first on PR bridges the professor here following me to the podium will be Philip Cowan then Frank Rudy Cooper and then Nancy doubt and then we will have time for a colloquy and we will take questions for the from the audience so for the past two days we’ve sort of been I think we’ve done a pretty good job of evaluating claims about the end of men and i think the weight of the opinion is that good news guys men are not actually ending i think it’s fair to say that the book might have been titled something along the lines of transformations and gender obligations and expectations in a particular and a particularly narrow swath of the population but you know not quite not quite as catchy who might not have sold as many books but nevertheless if we define the end of men as a state of affairs in which women are not marrying men and are choosing to raise their children if they choose to have them outside of the institution of marriage and the reason why women are doing this is because one men cannot find jobs that can support their families and two women can find jobs that can support their families or can otherwise support themselves independent men if that is how we’re defining the end of men that I think it’s fair to say that poor black men ended a long time ago and Serena Serena McGarry raised the point before and yesterday but this is precisely what senator Patrick Daniel moyna Daniel Patrick Moynihan pointed to you and his notorious report that he wrote in 1965 on the Negro family right so close to 50 years ago senator Moynihan observed that almost twenty five percent of quote-unquote urban Negro marriages were dissolved right almost 20 five percent of quote-unquote Negro births were illegitimate and almost twenty-five percent of Negro families were female-headed households and he even noted the gender role-reversal that had occurred among black families but there’s a very important difference between the way that the problem that Moynihan described almost half a century ago was talked about and the terms of the current debate around the end of man today the female headed a family form in which men were absent and women were the only parental presence was pathologized and viciously so when it could be identified as a feature that was unique to the quote-unquote Negro family in contrast the language of pathology has not been used to describe the same family for me as it has been replicated in the general non black population and so the question then becomes why why pathologize the end of men when it happened to black people but now pathologize the end of men when it is happening to a particular segment of non black people well I took a look at the Moynihan report so I got a glass of wine and I printed out this and I had neat wine because I need a sedative when I read the morning report and it extensively cite statistics demonstrating the disproportionate receipt of by black female female-headed black families of assistance from the a for families with dependent children program welfare and so it got me to thinking that maybe dependence on the state is that which determines whether a phenomena will be constructed as a problem and a case for a national action right as opposed to a mere fact which is to say maybe the end of non-black men has not been pathologized because there does not seem to be a threat that with men’s demise women will be turning to the state for assistance in contrast the end of black men was pathologized because women needed state assistance as a product of their demise which made me think well how does the current program that assists women who are heading these female-headed families how does temporary a for needy families how does Tanith approach the end of men so Tanith is famous for many reasons but two of the most salient aspects of the program is its dual emphasis on one incentivizing recipients to get a job and two incentivizing recipients to get married right it’s the get a job get a man paradigm and so with respect to incentivizing beneficiaries to work there is an under most under and mistake about under current and they’ll in the

legislation that pushes beneficiaries into them into the labor market and so if a woman should answer the call of the statute she will be the woman who is reflected in Rosen’s Atlanta guard article and in her book and so in that respect Kenneth kind of embraces a model in which men have ended and so the state refusing to be to assume the role that men assumed in a bygone era compels beneficiaries to become the women that Rosen assumes that all women will be will come to be in this rapidly approaching brave new world now on the other hand as strident as the calls are for women to get a job by Tanev I straighten as those called are the calls for women to get a man get married so when passing tennis Congress presented the lack of marriage and the necessary that mothers parent outside of the heteronormative family as the reason why there are just so many dang problems in the US to begin with right and the personal responsibility and work opportunity we can sell a conciliation act and the legislative findings there’s a whole slew of problems that are presumably bore out by the failure or the disappearance of marriage among the poor and marriage is offered as the solution to these ills and so the legislation it lists a series of activities that states may do to promote promote healthy marriage all of which states may fund with TANF monies as opposed to giving those ten of monies to recipients to actually take care of her kids moreover when Kenneth was reauthorized in 2005 the government reaffirmed his commitment to emphasizing marriage to TANF beneficiaries on the Bush administration increased federal funding for the healthy marriage initiative and through this initiative through which 150 million dollars are allocated each year states can use community-based contractors to promote marriage through such avenues as couples counseling marriage education and media campaigns and so if one just regards the marriage promotion piece of TANF then the program would appear to be encouraging independent women to become independent of the state by becoming dependent on a wage earning man and as such the program would appear to disbelieve that men have actually ended they steered to believe that men are very much alive the program assumes that if the state campaigns hard enough about the benefits of marriage than women and men will realize how beautiful and wonderful marriage is and will enter into it happily and so when one reads tennis emphasis on job promotion together with its infamous on marriage promotion one can perceive the programs and vivillon’s it appears to be just as committed to men’s and as it is to men’s continued survival but there is an argument to be made that even through its job promotion even through its called to get a job the statute assumes that indecision women can and should marry so through its called to get a job and never that says get a man and if I’m under its breath and so one can hear the call to marry within tennis call to work by looking at the different ways in which women may satisfy their work obligations and so the statute provides that a single woman with a child under the age of six months may be exempted from the work requirement a single woman a woman between the ages of with a child between the ages of six months and six years is required to work 20 hours per week meanwhile single weathers with children over the age of six years must work 30 hours per week but things get interesting and illuminating when the legislation contemplates the married mother members of two-parent families must work together 35 hours per week and intriguingly the statute does it require that the parent evenly split the workload the statute doesn’t even require that both parents work instead one parent may engage in all 35 hours of the requisite work while the other parent does not engage and work under the statute at all differently stated the program allows one parent to work in the labor market for 35 hours and the other parent to stay home with the kids and gender realities as they are and how they have been historically unless they are likely to be in the future it’s not illogical to assume that the statute presumes that the parent working will be the male and the parent staying at home and caring for the kids will be the female and so to sum up even through the call to get a job one can hear the call to get a man its own troop here that the authors of TANF do not appear to believe that the men that tennis beneficiaries would marry had ended and remaining ultimately unconvinced that men have ended tennis constructs indigent women’s refusal to

marry as a matter of personal choice and it’s not a coincidence that the name of the legislation that enacted tennis was the personal responsibility and work opportunity reconciliation act if you got your personal issues together you would go ahead and get a man get a job and stop turning to the state for money and so according to TANF women have decided that for whatever misguided reason they will not marry the marriage able men that are out there waiting to be found even though marrying them is likely to lift them out of poverty or simply just make them happy as such the cause of the female head of household among the poor can be located in individual decision making and individual bad decision-making and contrast individual decision-making plays a relatively small role and discussions about the end of men phenomenon as it affects the general read non-black non poor population instead of structural forces a changing instead structural forces or a changing economy are pointed to as causes of the female head soul and without a doubt individual women are making individual choices not to marry given these structural transformations but the structural transformations remain the focus of the debate not quote unquote personal responsibility and moreover the women who are choosing not to marry given these structural plan transformations are making rational choices not to marry they could create a perfectly happy self fulfilling self sustaining life entirely independent from men and it makes perfect sense for them not to marry but in contrast Tanith offers the indigent women electing not to marry as making entirely irrational choices not to marry presently on Mary they are mired in poverty living off the government dole marriage on the other hand promises them freedom from indigents nevertheless they remain unmarried and so the question then becomes what if the structures within which antigen individual women were deciding not to get married were illuminated what if it were revealed that like their non poor sisters it is an entirely rational choice to remain unmarried what if it revealed that the men that they would marry are being incarcerated like positively warehouse right massively incarcerated that their being disenfranchised and as a result of their disenfranchisement they’re just not marriage material what if that were revealed with the language of pathology disappear from the female-headed households as is reflected among poor black families or with good old-fashioned racism rule the day and it will remain pathologize nevertheless I have a theory and I will my life’s work is to prove myself correct is that when behavior is demonstrated the same behavior is demonstrated in black folks it tends to be the subject of scorn and pathology meanwhile when it’s demonstrated and folks with race privilege it tends to be explained away as something outside of them and so I’m curious as to whether given that this end of men phenomena is now beginning to affect non-black ppl whether we’ll see that same my theory demonstrated once again and that’s the end of my comments I would like to bring Philip Cowan to the stand give me the same time oh cool all right thank you very much Kira and thanks Linda and the organizers of the conference and all the people who came before us to present it’s been a great been a great conference so far and I’m glad there are still people here not including Hanna rosin which is fine she’s she had enough I and she’d she’ll she’ll have to catch it all later online I’m going to talk about the book in particular somewhat and but I also i’m going to try to talk a little bit more about the claims similar claims that sort of come from the the general environment not strictly strictly from the book and I want to make 20 sorry I want to make two points to low 22 general points1 and I’m going to do a lot of data in this talk one is that women are not actually dominant this is pretty important because a rather than just run through a lot of specific details and errors and distortions in the book which I could do in which I have there’s a number on of

them on my blog if you want to go look I want to try to make the argument that the story is fundamentally wrong not just that there’s a lot of particular errors right and in the way that information is presented and interpreted and and one of the reasons that I think it’s important to establish that baseline women are not actually dominant right now and that’s not surprising at this point in the conference is that the theory for how we have gotten to this place which we aren’t actually at is really very disempowering and distance ort of disembodied of how about us as as how these things actually happen it’s not continuous and inevitable that women will rise and in fact the the what I’ll show in the second half is how just how that’s not happening okay okay number one and this has become this is achieved almost meme like status out there young women earned more than young men which is not true this is just earnings by age and it’s pretty close there in the upper 20s among full-time workers comparing all full-time working men to all full-time working women the actual data that this comes from is really much more narrow than that it is actually when she says young men or young women or when David Brooks in quoting her just says young women earned more than young men these days they’re really referring to a study that was done that compared full-time year-round working never marry 22 to 30 year old metro area workers with no children and that is a not a random a collection of variables to select on actually it’s it’s really if you really tried to find the group where you would expect to see the least labor market inequality that’s where it would be right young people never without the young people in which the women in the people never had the burdens of marriage or children and they’re working full-time but if you break those out by education you quickly see that within each education level in that group men are earning more it turns out that that group has selected in odd ways there are a lot of latino men in this category and a lot of white women it’s it doesn’t make sense and it’s not true okay women are not taking over the middle of class number two we really like in this day and age fifty percent people like to call fifty percent a tipping point confusing a tipping point with them milestone right a milestone is just a neat number that you might like to focus on a tipping point is a point at which whatever trend you’re talking about accelerates and and starts to take on speed anyway so if you massage the labor force data enough to you get to a fifth over fifty percent you get this category managerial and professional jobs and it is true that women are more than half of the workers in managerial and professional jobs this is part of how rosenstein’s them taking over the middle class but this categories you can see includes the eighty-nine percent of women who are nurses and the seventy eight percent of women who are elementary middle school teachers as well as the twelve percent of women who are engineers or twelve percent of engineers who are women I should say so a lot of segregation in this category and without if you didn’t include all those professionals if you just had the managers you would see it was a lot more more male than that especially the top executives which includes the people who run small enterprises by the way that’s why it’s so high twenty-six percent female okay the other way that women are taking over the middle class is by taking over education we know they are receiving the majority of many kinds of degrees nowadays we learn in engineering and science women are beginning to crowd out men when she says beginning to what it means is it’s not happening yet what she’s saying but it’s moving in that direction and again here what’s missing is the segregation angle that if you look at the gender composition of people in there 25 to 39 year old range early career early to mid career people I supposed to have these degrees this is all engineering and science and you can see that it includes 75% female in psychology and and all of the way down to twenty percent female and engineering okay within families somebody mentioned this picture yesterday actually from this is from her new york times magazine excerpt that’s the woman standing next to the sad man who was sitting in the chair i guess anyway uh women earning more than their husbands has become more popular but i would still classify it as kind of rare twenty-eight percent now this number can be massaged a lot also

because if you include just women who are working full time or just women who are employed you can get this number up around forty percent but among all women all married couples about a quarter or over a quarter or she would say about twenty-eight percent nearly a third are earning more than their husbands it’s a real example from the book I’m not just picking on her okay I’m the other way to look at this is women earning more than their husbands instead of just looking at that cut off that fifty percent cut off are the earning more or not is to look at the overall distribution here you can see the dark bars are 1970 all the way down to the light bars in 2010 this is the distribution of income within married couples and you can see that back in the day in 1970 forty six percent of married couples the wife are none of the income and that’s all the way down to 18 point seven percent so that’s the dramatic rise of women’s married women’s labor force participation on the other end you can see the dramatic increase in families in which the wife earns all the money it’s quadrupled from point six percent to two-point-three percent and the whole curve has shifted off to the right somewhat but we really don’t want to get too carried away with this okay also in the category of earning more than their wives more than their husbands being kind of rare is this idea that in marriage nowadays marriage is totally changed by this dynamic because young women are more than young men when they start their married life they’re starting off with more income than their husbands single childless women on 30 make more this means that among the elites especially there’s a high chance that a woman is making more than the man when they first get married if you look at the people who just got married in the last 12 months which the American Community Survey lets us do you can see that thirty-six percent of the college graduates have income greater than their husbands the year after they got married you can see a much higher that is among african-american women but still there only forty-four percent okay okay then she shifts gears and she talks about the the disappearance virtual disappearance of sexual assault as part of women’s empowerment partly because women are so economically independent they’re able to walk away from bad relationships I hope that’s true but it is not has not caused the disappearance of sexual assault there has been a big decline in sexual assault whether both as reported to police or as reported on the National Crime Victimization survey which is captures unreported crimes but she says it is declined so much that the rates are so low in parts of the country criminologist can’t plot the numbers on a chart which is I guess a dig at criminologists ability to plot small members on chocolate anyway I’ve plotted these numbers on a chart the interesting thing is and then maybe areas within these states that have very low rates the state with the lowest rate of a forcible rape per 100,000 from reported crimes is New Jersey at 11.2 that’s more than twice the median a rate of forcible rape reported for European countries okay so we may be off the bottom of the chart for and some were not okay I can’t I pen make a joke out of that okay then she switches gears again and says well in fairness this isn’t such a great story after all we should realize that now that women are seizing power we’re going to have more crime of more female violence and female crime because she’s not an essentialist and women actually are capable of being of behaving badly like men the evidence for this is extremely weak there is one trend which is upward which is the number of arrests of female juveniles for violent crimes but all the measures of actual violence show declines the female violence so you can see female offenders per thousand women this is from Crime Victimization surveys when they ask who victimized you this is declined by about half just in the last 12 years a slight upward increase in the percentage of violent violent crime committed by women but not very much and an extremely sharp drop in intimate partner homicide but much sharper drop among male victims than among female victims in the last four this is 40 years okay ah okay this thing about Alabama being a place of female dominance I have to just pause on women do not dominate alexander city and auburn alabama and i can say that never having been there and so the problem is if the facts don’t support the generalization then the anecdotes are not illustrations of a trend they’re just they’re just little stories she says suddenly it’s who we are relying on the women it’s it’s it’s also relying on women that she’s quoting this man who was laid off suddenly we got women in control and she has this year Alexander

had its first female mayor well actually that female mayor barber young was elected eight years earlier she’s a very traditional southern Republican politician she’s the widow of a state’s attorney or some other politician her children are politicians she’s stepping down this year and there are five men competing to replace her so there will not be a female mayor in alexander city next year the city council has one woman out of six the department heads of the city are 14 out of 15 male but more importantly as far as the deadbeat men in her story the young guy you only know he’s awake because the cigarette smoke starts coming out from under his door in the trailer park in the morning the truth is men in their 20s and alexander city seventy-seven percent of them are employed more than the women fifty-three percent I’m not saying the men are better than the women is just a pretty normal pattern unemployment rates are higher for men at all ages the labor force is over fifty percent male the high end of the earnings distribution is overwhelmingly male and men earned more on average down the road in Auburn she says it’s one of the economic powerhouses it’s the region’s economic powerhouse it has turned himself into a town dominated by women I have no idea how she can say this the City Council and the mayor the the department heads the University of Auburn okay obviously as you would expect about eighty-five percent female but more importantly look at the look at family income between husbands and wives you can see thirty two percent of the family of married couples the wife earns no percent of the income or under ten percent about two percent does the wife earn over 20 so it’s about the same as the rest of the country the workforce is majority male women aren’t seventy percent of what men earn men are seventy percent of the managers etc it’s not happening this is not true okay okay finally and I’m going to run out of time before i do a lot of some of my trends but i want to say this she is this idea that the velocity of change is so great that it’s unstoppable and women will crash through fifty percent of our equality and reach dominance just by sheer force of the rapidity of change but the truth is we’re stalled and have been on many indicators for 10 to 20 years so she says and this is an important example not just picking on her for for being loose with the facts women are now lead TV anchors ivy league presidents bank presidents corporate CEOs movie directors scatological savvy comedians presidential candidates all unthinkable 20 years ago not only are those not unthinkable 20 years ago those had all happened 20 years ago okay with the exception of ivy league president which was not until nineteen ninety three nineteen years ago so marlene sanders did jessica savitch were anchoring the news shirley Chisholm and pat schroeder had major presidential campaigns Roseanne Barr was pretty scatological Penny Marshall was already directing her fourth feature film for hollywood by 1992 Maggie Lena Walker founded a bank in 1902 etc okay so but the important point that what’s lost here in this idea of this this unstoppable force is that it doesn’t just happen it’s not just technology or economic change that moves us in the direction of gender equality but there are other things that have to happen things like politics and social movements and policy right so I think technology has given women a boost but you can see here women’s labor force participation has an increase since the late 1990s skip that one the gender gap in pay had a big run up in the 80s and early 90s that is trickled upward since then not very much the gender gap by education shows that women with college degrees are doing worse compared to men with college degrees than they were 20 years ago segregation the blue line is women without college degrees no progress in 20 years the green line is women with college degrees some desegregation in 20 years not much the 70s and 80s are when this change happened women entering management big increase in the 70s and 80s virtually nothing since then okay time is up so let me conclude by saying we need to think more about why we’re stalled than we do then we need to think about how far we’ve come I think to put it to put it bluntly and and the problem what I find problematic about the book and the narrative is the idea that all we have to do is sit there and watch women reap their gains these are the these are the mentions of feminism and the word feminist in the google books a database and you can see they both peaked in the 90s uh we need to think about things like culture and politics and policy and not just um watch

technology do its do its magic okay I am really pleased to be here obviously I’m Frank Rudy Cooper I’m in your program I want to start by thanking the organizers of this first kiara then also kate and kristen and especially Linda it’s been really an interesting provocative conference and I just hope to do a little make a little bit of a contribution to that the way I intend to make contribution to that is to talk a little bit about masculinity and hyper incarceration and I’ll say in a nutshell this is my point how can you possibly write a book about the end of men and not talk about hyper incarceration of men of color it’s a strange thing to me and i have to say that a lot of the criticisms that Philip had I have as well in terms of a seeming sort of disconnection between some things that aren’t you know that are maybe good happening versus being able to call that a real trend towards women’s equality that doesn’t see that seems like a quite a stretch all right so I want to talk about masculinity theory so masculinities theory you can see I’ve sort of broken it down quickly here masculinities are concepts of what is manly so what does that mean obviously there’s a tautology in there right the reason that so is because we are defining what is manly and what is masculine by both looking at in culture what seems to be masculine and manly and then also by changing over time what seems to be masculine and manly so there’s a sort of circuit of culture that Stuart Hall talks about and I want to talk a little bit about a sort of circuit of identity and so we can think about masculinity as affecting self-identity right how do I see myself as a man amongst all the other identities that I see myself as and this is obviously going to have some effect on behavior but also there’s attributed identities so here I’m thinking of car bottle and galati’s idea of the idea that you can have an identity which is attributed to you regardless of how you think of yourself and here we’re thinking stereotypes but also institutional structures are affected by masculinities and here we’re thinking about the stereotypes applied and part of the reason to think of this as a circuit is of course I go with my self-identity to the law school I look at my students out there I make judgments about them I am in a sense applying stereotypes to them but then they do things to try and change that stereotype so if I look at a student and I say white male student probably going to be lazy uh he’s not going to stand still right he’s going to try and perform his identity in a way that negotiates with my stereo types of him so he might sit in the front of the class he might make it very clear that he’s paying attention in class he may ask questions he made a gunner and this circuit works over and over again so that’s just to talk about masculinity and how it affects the circuit of identity so next is to talk about the fact that there are hegemonic masculinity and of course Michael Kimmel wrote an excellent essay masculinity is homophobia that draws on this idea of the there being a hegemonic masculinity and the definition of hegemony of course is dominance by persuasion and what I want to talk about here is again a Stuart Hall idea to bring culture back into it or the sort of circuit of play around the idea of masculinity there are messages about masculinity that are encoded in one sense we sort of make a message and everything is a message but especially some of the cultural images that we see our messages and so one idea about masculinity that gets encoded is that men are breadwinners but encoding is just sort of the message as it’s put together and then you might say there’s a text and then that text gets decoded so if the text goes out men are breadwinners you can see from our TV shows men are supposed to be the breadwinners then that gets decoded by people so that we get some of the characters in Hana Rosen’s book saying I’m failing as a man I’ve decoded that message I’m supposed to be a breadwinner I’m not the breadwinner I’m failing as a man which is to say they’re coming to conclusions about their own masculine identity and then of course there are alternative masculine days just as an example I through you know a sort of stereotype right gay men dress well well

what we’re talking about is segmenting masculinities into different subgroups and seeing how those men think of themselves and others so and mostly here we’re concerned about how they think of themselves all right so multi-dimensional masculinities theory so I’ve co-edited a book with an mcginley who you saw yesterday called masculinities and the law and multi-dimensional approach and part of a number of folks here are authors in there and nyomi Khan who was here and Nancy doubt who’s going to follow me the idea is to look at masculinities and note two important things one that identities are intertwined so I’m a black man I’m straight I’m class privileged all at once as the intersectionality theorists have been showing us for a long time it does not make sense to say that I’m black and therefore you can just sort of suppress my masculine identity my masculine identity may be invisible to others or to me as influencing my identity but it is always working at the same time as my blackness and other aspects of my identity they work together and where that becomes especially important is that in different contexts we’re going to see different combinations of my identity that are going to be more salient over time in different places and another way of thinking about this is that we sort of turn different facets of ourselves towards our audience depending on what we think is most important or internally we feel different facets of ourselves to be more important in different environments so in mostly white environments my race tends to become more salient to me and mostly female alignment side my masculine might become more salient to me and so forth and then the sort of methodology that we’re suggesting with respect to masculinity is to keep shifting lenses and looking at things from different perspectives so with that in mind I want to look at the narrative about the end of men and so this is a discourse that is being encoded about men’s dominance coming to an end so where do I see that the old christina hoff sommers book the war against boys the hymowitz book which was mentioned yesterday Manning up and of course the end of men there’s about a dozen of these books now just in the last couple years that are suggesting a war on boys a war on men the end of men that men need to man up that men are failing somehow and that men’s dominance is coming to an end and I’m going to put these all together as a sort of war on men narrative I’m sorry I have a cold so I’m going to have to pause every now and then so two things I think become really important here why isn’t hyper incarceration mentioned in the book and here I’m sort of figuring on some of what Rick banks said yesterday and I’ll actually get back to what Rick bank said yesterday at the end of my presentation and then I think that I have some idea why this isn’t really important to hona rosen in the book and that’s that hana Rosen has written another long article where she talks about how section 8 which spread poor people read racial minorities to the suburbs thereby spread crime to the suburbs that is racial minorities equal crime and so if you think racial minorities equal crime it makes sense to think well that’s not part of the end of men when we see that there are these incredible rates of incarceration of men of color that’s just the criminal justice system operating neutrally so and here I’m thinking at this point so does it make sense as to look at this as Hana Rosen does you know that black men are sort of miners canary right so yes right the crisis for black men as number of people have mentioned including kiara just now precedes white men’s crisis if there is such a crisis but there’s two problems here with looking at it that way that I see one it suggests that our problems only matter when it happens to whites and so there is definitely a strand of that in the book that I’m concerned about but second thing and some people disagree with me but I think Canaries have to die in order for you to notice stuff and I don’t want us to have to die in order for people to notice like oh yeah there used to be these people called

black men alright so the narrative that I need to talk about then of course is the war on drugs because that’s what’s causing hyper incarceration and I’ll make the point here that we have Ronald Reagan a sort of quintessential manly man and he’s manly in a couple of ways when he declares the war on drugs in 1982 he certainly already has been come to see it as a strong aggressive masculine sort of leader but also being tough on crime is something that politicians fight over not just because it moves votes or rather because it moves votes and the reason it moves votes is because it is seen as masculine as people mentioned yesterday leadership looks masculine and so one way to be masculine is to be tough on crime and Reagan’s sort of biggest way in which he was tough on crime was to declare a war on drugs so two things to note that i put at the bottom of the slide here and hopefully you can see them one is that there were two percent of the population that thought that the use of illicit drugs was a big problem when reagan declared his war on drugs and second is that people knew that reagan was talking about racial minorities as a number of scholars have discussed there’s been a law and order Law and Order narrative that’s been running at least since Nixon and which is part of a Republican strategy and tied in with the southern strategy which is to essentially I would argue recode black people as criminals and then say I want to fight criminals right and when you say you want to fight criminals you have that one step removed that allows you to say that you are not being racist but we know that the strategy was born in the sixth these because of a concern on the part of whites especially southern whites about the rise of black people and as people joked yesterday there is no in the white people that hasn’t seen so the explosion and incarceration this graph I just want you to note the way that our incarceration has gone since 1982 the war on drugs so we see this sort of gentle incline and then we see a steep mountain of incarceration and I didn’t include this slide in this version of the presentation but you know we are way out of step with the rest of the world so depending on who you look at we can see that maybe the second country in the world is Russia and the third is Rwanda or South Africa we certainly think of Russia as not being a particularly a gala tarian society and we think of those other societies as potentially being crime ridden for a variety of reasons which I won’t go into here but the shift lens is a little bit I’ve talked mostly about race let’s get back to masculinity what’s going on in terms of the incarceration well we’ve got the racial nature of it and then we’ve got skipping ahead hyper incarceration as gendered as well all right and hyper incarceration if you can see in this chart it’s a little hard to see the bottom lowest line the Green Line is the incarceration rate for women the red line is incarceration rate in general and the blue line incarceration rate for men I don’t claim to have a good grasp on statistics I just want to use this illustratively to say look this is not just a racial problem it’s a men of color problem and so what does it look like and what is are the implications of this so what it looks like is a bunch of black men stripped naked being processed mostly by not entirely by white men and so I two things I think that hyper incarceration or what I call a war on men of color means one is routinized attacks on your dignity and secondly is this sort of implication of an intra gender warfare so a person who I think is probably the best on this is Loic wake on the sociologists and he talks about the fact that it’s actually not just race and gender but it’s even more targeted than that when we look at how the war on drugs has resulted in hyper incarceration it’s men of color in inner

cities who are poor and so I just want to end on this note these attacks on dignity are going to happen to these targeted populations why don’t we care and if you’ll indulge me with 30 seconds thank you so why no concern about men of color well I’m thinking of what Rick’s banks said yesterday as a society we don’t imagine black people as us right and so when we think about this whole idea that there’s a war on man we don’t think oh that war that happened to men of color was a war on men and if we’re going to move forward as I would I would like to suggest that we have to require those people are who are claiming that there’s a war on men to extend their sympathy to men of color thank I’m very glad to be here and to have a voice in this dialogue and you will see that there’s a lot of interconnection actually between Karos presentation and frank’s actually all of ours because i think we’re all critics of the book as many people have been so the end of men assumes a beginning men’s prior place of power and privilege and to assume that is true of all or most men ignores significant differences among them it makes the end of men argument one event predominantly if not exclusively focused upon white middle and upper-class men and women it ignores a fundamental aspect of male dominance that it is not only about the relationship of all men to all women but just as importantly it is about the relationship of men to each other by rendering this hierarchy invisible rosen excludes those men at the bottom of the male hierarchy suggesting a false or at least a limited perspective on men’s position now as a whole her argument therefore I believe reinforces male hierarchy by ignoring persistent subordination that benefits only those men at the top of the patriarchal heap the end of men recasts hegemony so one of its most serious shortcomings then is its essentialism particularly its essentialism about men male hierarchy is raised class and gendered on the basis of sexual orientation at the bottom of male hierarchy are black males they’re disadvantaged position is reflected in virtually every measure health education employment income overall well-being all of the most reliable data consistently indicate that black males constitute a segment of the pop relation distinguished by hardship disadvantage and vulnerability and one of the most powerful and horrific statistics is though is the hyper incarceration statistic that one in three black males one in three black males will experience incarceration in their lifetime and this pattern begins much earlier in the juvenile justice system presence in the in the juvenile justice system particularly at the deep end of the system at incarceration has harsh consequences going forward it links to a very highly negative employment and education statistics and the likelihood of a fragile family structure it also predicts for further involvement with the adult criminal justice system although some juveniles are being transferred over early into that system but working backwards it connects to an even more disturbing picture so working backwards again from this that the pattern we see in the juvenile justice at justice system the so-called helping systems those we have in place to help and support children not only are inadequate but appear to be actively funneling black boys in particular into an end result that will lead to lost opportunity on a massive scale if we were to construct a normal developmental trajectory for children and young adults and compare that to the life course of black boys it is not a picture of support and resources devoted to individual development and movement toward adulthood rather it appears to be a systematic effort to undermine and subordinate so i would like to sketch

this briefly and challenge you to keep black boys in mind imagine if you will that this is your son or your brother so let’s start with this newborn baby this baby will have a one in three chance of being born into poverty twice the chance of white children and the impact of this cannot be underestimated it includes hunger poor nutrition inferior health and education outcomes poverty impacts early development which is critical to later functioning poor children are less likely develop their cognitive and academic skills and they therefore enter kindergarten at a disadvantage they’re unlikely to have high-quality childcare or be going into good schools that might attend to or eliminate that gap there are two primary helping systems for young children in poverty are welfare for income support and the dependency or child welfare system to deal with issues of family breakdown neglect and abuse both are racialized systems that provide inadequate services and in the case of child welfare arguably exacerbate bad outcomes for children the median benefit the TANF that was talked about in the first presentation today the median benefit for a family of three is approximately one-third of the poverty level and it is time limited so this is not a system that raises children out of poverty and as with the income support system the child welfare system is very racialized as well remember that the primary problem that we deal with in the child welfare system is neglect not abuse in other words system involvement is linked to poverty black children are approximately fifteen percent of all children but they are thirty one percent of the foster care population and the disproportionate awite children increases dramatically in cities in Chicago for example eighty percent of the foster care population children are our black this same disproportioned does not exist for Asian or Latino children separation is simply more common for black kids it seems they are more easily removed from their families and they are removed into a system that does not generate good outcomes for children arguably it makes them worse so this lack of effective positive intervention early in children’s lives would make school the most powerful system in their lives that could affect their future opportunities and development instead of fostering growth and providing support it is an institution that particularly is particularly harmful for black boys so the pattern of disproportionate racial outcomes in the first years of life becomes erased and gendered outcome at school black males are more likely than any other group to be punished typically through some form of exclusion labeled categorized for special education often without apparent disability and to experience academic failure in fact the failure is so pervasive that it appears to be the norm and so does not raise any alarms black males are physically marginalized in basements detention centers special classes and psychologically and socially isolated separation reinforces failure it does not cure either behavior or academic achievement problems the racial achievement gap is persistent and even more disturbingly it begins early it is measurable by age three and I have seen some work that says it’s measurable by age two it does not get better ones children start school so we then would not be surprised at at the other end dropout rates are disproportionate by race and the high school graduation rate for black boys is fifty two percent so one in two of black boys who go into the education system will not graduate from high school this achievement gap seems particularly linked to stereotypes about black boys capabilities what one scholar

identifies as the 5 d’s dumb deprived dangerous deviant and disturbed they are disproportionately disciplined and this begins we had a statistic earlier today about preschool but there is a very high rate also in elementary school and it rises in particular at fourth grade what one scholar calls the fourth grade phenomenon when young black boys begin develop mentally physically to start to begin to look like young men and we have to remember that discipline is criminalized that is the arrest of students often occurs for behavior that in the past would have been dealt with within schools so then where black males become again disproportionate is in the juvenile justice system not just because of arrest at school but on the streets as well and at current incarceration rates again one-third of african-american males will experience incarceration not system involvement but incarceration at some times in their lives and if they are black males of low socio-economic status that rate doubles doubles so and changes in the juvenile justice system have been in the direction of harsher punishment more incarceration despite the lack of empirical data to support the effectiveness of those outcomes for Public Safety recidivism or rehabilitation the shape of the juvenile justice system its focus on punishment rather than rehabilitation i believe is linked to its objects which historically as it is really a boys system it has been focused on boys as as its objects although certainly there are there is a rising percentage of girls in the juvenile justice system it is still overwhelmingly populated by boys just as in the adult criminal justice system is a mens justice system and again a disproportionate color that we said see replicated in the adult system that Frank has been talking about Victor Rios’s brilliant study of urban black and latino boys in Oakland tells us about a vicious cycle producing hyper masculinity and then criminalizing it through constant surveillance Rios names this the youth control complex a system in which schools police probation officers families community centers the media businesses other institutions systematically treat young people’s everyday behaviors everyday behaviors as criminal activity so the boys are defined as criminal for any form of transgression or disrespect of authority so what does this promote in the boys and over conformity to aspects of masculinity toughness dominance the willingness to resort to violence to resolve interpersonal conflicts are all aspects of classic aspects of masculinity again and over conformity by these boys in response to again the oversight their surveillance of their everyday activities so their behavior then runs into a collision course with a criminal justice system that demands passivity compliance and conformity to a subjugated racialized social status so the lifetime opportunity consequences of this are particularly evident in employment so black boys are disproportionately likely to begin their work and jobs with poor were conditions low wages and job instability the chances for upward mobility are slim and none of this is lost on black boys in in the sense of their self-awareness and sense of powerlessness this is not cardboard boy or cardboard man disadvantage is not by choice but by design the design of systems and cultural stereotypes that are treated as norms the systems implicated in the context of black boys do not work for anyone in order to address the near extermination of opportunity for black boys we only need to we not only need to eliminate disproportionality but to demand positive outcomes based on evidence based programs that serve children’s needs limit confinement and foster resilience and opportunity if we’re

going to get beyond the limitations of the end of men we must insist on asking a richer set of questions the inequality most lost in the way that the questions were asked in this book and the assumptions that drove the answer is the essentialists error and particularly it renders race invisible in the name of gender I would want to suggest that there’s a couple of other errors as well the error of neutrality treating the world as if its objective and neutral and ignoring embedded ways in which structures and culture are racialized gendered and in other ways infused with norms and outcomes that reinforce hierarchies and an error also of reconstructing equality as a flip leaving hierarchy in place and one final clap the question I think we should ask is who benefits from the end of meant argument I would argue the most privileged men have benefited and its greatest harm is in rendering invisible the boys and men who have been subordinated historically and still under this claimed new gender order thank you so we have about 20 minutes worth of good ol colloquy go so we’ll start with SEK teselle balls hand so if we can get her microphone that would be wonderful here I come so we’ve all I feel like this has been the lunch and dinner conversation the way through the conference but I am really interested in how you reflect on why this thesis is so attractive and what is it about this not hana rosen but the the whole concept and the all that’s coverage in the media of the concept from different books why is this so attractive given you know given its demographic and sort of empirical weakness what’s so why is this so compelling this narrative actually I’m going to take a stab at that if you don’t mind please that’s rude but I’m going to take a stab at eight-thirty oh I actually think it’s because people don’t think it’s true um i don’t i don’t think people think it’s true i think that so i was i was thinking about this and i’m thinking about how this phenomenon is kind of reflected in popular culture and when it’s reflected in popular culture is an alarmist sort of books like that but then on TV it’s always in a sitcom it’s all it’s never in like you know the HBO dexter dark series is not boardwalk and you know people aren’t dying at the end of these popular reflections of the end of men it’s always haha how funny he’s at home with the baby and she went to work so i don’t i don’t think that it’s actually that threatening to people i don’t think that people actually believe it and that’s that that’s kind of why I think it’s like a it’s like a science fiction like it’s entertaining but we don’t really think aliens are going to come and take over the White House right I would say that the big thing is as my colleague Jeff poker access those who are privileged experience the imposition of equality as oppression so it really answers a need for some people to sort of express that hey these changes are happening and they’re hurting my feelings and they’re taking things from me that I’m entitled to so I think it’s sort of really it’s addressing that need I think there’s also and I wouldn’t I don’t think these are mutually exclusive explanations there i think this also is part of or plays into or reflects partly the backlash the continuing backlash against feminism the idea that feminism overshot demanded too much that women women who work full-time for pay and neglecting their children and so on if you look at the attitude data there’s a really good paper by my colleagues at maryland ravana minh and and his co-authors that show that the the trends toward approving of women’s employment of thinking it’s okay if women work of thinking there’s four of them of thinking that women can be as good at politics as men so these things that are in the general social survey those

really peaked in the 90s and leveled off after that and that’s about when we start talking more about ratcheting up the demands of parenting and trying to respond to the winner-take-all economy by over you know what bye bye increasing intensity of time and energy spent on children and that affects men but it affects women also and the idea of of that women are selfishly destroying their families in pursuit of a feminist ideal is at least one strain of of a popular thought I I’m just going to say I think it’s also it’s sensation you know you you see it and you go what so so so there’s some some pull of you got to be kidding me so you know so it so the title I mean I was saying I think you know what if it said if the book was titled the end of white middle-class and upper-class men and the rise of white middle and upper-class women and nobody would buy the book you know I’d be like who cares or maybe they would I don’t know but I think when it when it’s it’s such a seems counterintuitive it’s intriguing and and and the other thing is I think it may have been Joan Williams yesterday who is talking about how we love to have this battle of the sexes thing going on right so as if that’s what the qualities about so so if i were a conspiracy theorist why don’t like we’re all it’s to get us all distracted isn’t it keep our attention away from the things that are really important it’s did not make us pay attention to you know as Frank forcing why aren’t we paying attention to to the things that we really should be paying attention to ok so we have a cute going I’m going to stephanie coontz in the back I have Rick banks over here Marion case I don’t know your name okay why don’t we show Shauna okay and yeah i got i got it in here so we’ll start with stephanie codes yeah okay I I loved all the presentations but I take issue with all those for answers I think that they speak to different parts of it that may be correct but I as someone and I think most of us here are passionate about being able to connect with real people when we describe our research and I think you’re missing something very very real and that is the white working-class audiences I speak to that whatever their racial and gender prejudices are not the racist ones who are simply turning their back on all of these changes and certainly not the anti woman thing that are turning their back on it they are in pain and there is tremendous sympathy for their pain from the women folk among them they’ve they’re worried about raising their kids in this they see this so I think that intersects in a way that it is very important that we give credit to when we answer these misconceptions can we get a microphone to Rick banks right there my father was talking too loud on my children tell me that but the follow up with Stephanie I was wondering in terms of the popularity of these issues I mean again I am struck at how many of the journalists across different publications and different settings from The Wall Street Journal to the New York Times to Fox News to CNN I mean all of these settings find that when they feature stories on this whole set of issues not just the end of men but changing gender roles issues about parenting they get more clicks than when they actually feature more substantive stories and it’s unconnected to the stew the real whether there’s a foundation for the story so you know my sense is that people are is that however wrong an account may be on the facts it does provide an opportunity for people to explore issues that they are rethinking and they feel conflicted about about the role of men and women in society about you know is it you know all sorts of things about gender relations and and and so there’s a sense that things are in flux at the level of values more even than at the level of social reality and so it’s almost as though the discussion you know the argument that society is changing in this way is really just a way to tee up the question of you know how would you feel if your uh you know if my niece wanted to marry this guy who’s not working right does that matter to me and that’s part of the same-sex marriage debate as well I mean it’s the

same issue there and so that’s just my that’s my intuition about it’s one to see if that seems right that people are trying to rethink their ideals and trying to interrogate the or trying to you know they’re conflicted about their own values now because there’s some sense that things are shifting a little I’m thinking that they’re there have been because I I do a lot of work on fatherhood as well and there’s been a number of stories in The Times I mean I’m thinking the one relatively recently it was like an op-ed almost who needs men I mean it was the craziest vertically it ever read you know it’s kind of like hey I was in the New York Times I and there it yeah yes so it’s so and that’s another one of those like absolutely what you know and so may yes I do think it gets attention and I think what Kate’s question is why is that so what’s what what’s the pool and also why does that get the click or how do we get the click for other things that we might wish to focus that energy and attention on one one one thing about Stephanie’s point about the real pain I guess you could ask the question why uh why this particular groups pain at this particular time right if lots of people you know if we look at the end of men and in the in the black community you know on these same measures 30 or 40 years ago what you know why wasn’t that a national crisis in terms of pain instead of natural crisis in terms of crime control and and and Brenda and and and you know cultural values and so on so part of that maybe speaks to again not to deny that people actually experienced this as pain and losing their jobs and so on but I maybe there’s an iconographic sort of status of the white working-class man is an American thing and maybe part of what the middle class or upper middle-class readers of The New York Times in the Wall Street Journal who are reading this are sort of sitting back and thinking boy my how things have changed are our symbolic man is losing his his place and it’s you know it has a strong symbolic value that received for example in elections all the time yeah and I would say also to Stephanie’s point you know these are people who are lamenting the loss of things that they weren’t entitled to and I understand that it’s real pain but they got the GI bill right etc they got affirmative action for whites for a long time and so I i want to have sympathy but I’m having a hard time having sympathy with that because i think really what’s happened is that they’ve been flipped and made to vote their sort of cultural anxiety rather than that something really has been taken from them doesn’t mean they don’t feel the pain i agree with that and i think that Rick got to another piece and that is the anxiety and middle-class families but I would again like to really push this issue I never when I’m talking to a white working-class audience talk about white male privilege I talk about white male leverage leverage you know this word white working-class guys who’ve been losing you know who’ve been working their butts off and who are really at the bottom of the hierarchy except for being wonderful of steps above black men I don’t you know you they’re not going to look up wake up in the morning and look in the mirror and say gee I think I’ll exercise my privilege today but if you acknowledge the real oppression that does occur to them despite some of the extra advantages they’ve had they can actually hear you when you explain that whiteness has given them extra leverage to get ahead of fellow workers in the hierarchy so again I would urge you just to think about that as we reach out to these people whom we want to win over not not alienate Marion will down to the very specific from the very general but I had a question for Phillip whose paper I loved and you may not know these statistics off the top of your head but I understand quite well the difference between a tipping point and a benchmark our milestone but i wonder if you know what the evidence indicates is the tipping point into a pink collar ghetto into what you might call the poverty of feminization not the feminization of poverty so there are these professions I you know elementary school teachers secretary you know we can name them and they differ from culture to culture that used to be all male high status masculine and privileged became over time predominantly campaign Colorado’s predominantly female feminized in terms

of what the job description look like in engendered terms and lower pain what what is the tipping point where if there’s a certain it might be fifty percent I don’t know but what is it I’m the truth is actually it doesn’t happen very often so you named most of them most of the most of the occupations that are gender segregated now have been gender segregated sort of from there it’s it’s mostly an origin story rather than a change story as far as with occupations becoming feminized there aren’t very many that that have gone that direction I think it’s interesting one of the interesting things in in the book end of men is about the pharmacist and I think and she draws off Claudia Golden’s research on this and others it is true that women have come have really come to be majority in pharmacy and also in veterinary medicine and and I don’t think she’s crazy about the reasons why it but I don’t think we should think of that as women taking over those occupations are taking over the middle class I actually think that what that represents is a lot of women who have the who would otherwise be surgeons and rocket scientists and so on who given their ability in school and how well they do choose those occupations which which have become niches that are more friendly towards women’s family a family obligations and the kind of lives they want to lead or feel have to lead so I think what actually would happen is not I don’t see that this would be a sort of a march of progress of women taking over those occupations but actually if we opened up or change the norms and rules governing all the other occupations as women would be qualified for we’d see decline in the percent female in pharmacy and veterinary medicine and an increase in brain surgery and oncology and so on but I don’t think it’s not really the it’s not really the case that worse that except for a few exceptions that occupations are really having a flood of incoming women and then tipping in and becoming becoming ghettos if you look at the the big increase in women’s get in women’s at ba degrees it’s mostly been in two majors that they already dominated so you know you see majors going from sixty to seventy percent female or seventy to eighty percent female over the last 30 or 40 years rather than big increases from you know ten to fifty percent or twenty to sixty percent but it just doesn’t happen we don’t have this only one or two examples of that it’s it because not too many not that I know of I’m I could be wrong sauna hopefully I can be coherent with this because I’m trying to put together when Frank was speaking about in 1982 this war on drugs I was also thinking that there was an inauguration of the sort of war on promiscuity and female promiscuity and the beginning of abstinence only education and I was thinking then in response to that question that one thing is there hasn’t been a lot of talk on the attack on sort of reproductive rights reproductive autonomy of women and that that seems to be has increased alongside this sort of war or the end of manhood and that at the same time there’s been this since 82 this multifaceted attack whether it’s on poor women’s access to abortion whether it’s on abortion access generally abstinence only education around controlling containing women’s bodies and women’s sexuality and it’s just was it’s just kind of an interesting in terms of thinking about this also as backlash because there’s also this sort of parallel attack an attempt to sort of I see this as rican trolling women’s sexuality and so I it’s just with i’m not sure what i guess my question is it is does this sort of backlash idea and it seems to have legs to me that in some ways it is there’s also this powerful way of trying to contain women and one of the things that’s very striking is like if you look at same-sex marriage and you do demographic polling that there’s a big age variance but there’s not when it comes to abortion and young people younger generations are have more conservative attitudes so it it’s unlikely same-sex marriage where people in their twenties have much more progressive attitudes and people who are older so sorry that’s a lot of thoughts but but it does seem to me that there’s there’s profound backlash against

women’s autonomy etc and that i can’t figure out then it’s sort seems awfully hard to square with this idea that men are really the ones who are becoming disenfranchised and losing power so I guess that’s a comment a question about returning to this idea of backlash yeah i am i’m actually not surprised by the contradiction at all that weekend we entering an era in the quote-unquote men of end of men meanwhile we have you know the proliferation of attacks on women in women’s bodies and women’s control of their bodies ideology has never had to be coherent right the welfare queen can be both incredibly stupid as well as incredibly savvy right many times we see these marriage of contradictions where it’s impossible to to make sense out of them and so to attempt to make sense out of an era of the end of men as well as an era in which women are being attacked and unable to control them their own bodies I think that you know it might be some sort of there might be a backlash to it but it might just be separate you know forces in society acting simultaneously and you know there’s no way to make sense of it really from a logical perspective at all um so i do want to i want to get two questions in possibly before we in the conference and I have my friend over here and Brandon green hi I’m so earlier today Karen rivers had been talking about masculinity sort of men being anxious when they see women’s gains and then I’m Phil Phillip I’m not sure which you prefer um you were talking about the female stagnation in terms of our achievements which I you know is from your Grassley’s very true and I’m wondering just in general what the entire panel thinks is the next step for women because it seems as if we when we make gains we make men nervous which hurts us because they go back to their boys club however we need to keep making gains were not even close to getting to equal and so what ideas do you guys have to to sort of effectuate that I’ll take a little bit of a stab at a big question I think it’s a really important to note and along with shell Shauna’s question and a couple other people have mentioned over the course of the conference concerns about what it’s also sort of a war on women’s reproductive rights I guess I would tend to sound the alarm along the lines of you know saying that this is a war on women and there has been some rhetoric like that in politics now I don’t claim that that alone will be successful so as Stephanie Coontz was saying you know it may be that we can’t always say this is a war on women and you’re a misogynist even if they are that we have to find some other language as well that’s that’s what I’m thinking off the top of my head I guess I would concur with the people over the course of the conference who have focused on masculinity or masculinities plural as an area that needs substantial focus in terms of how are we going to get closer to equality and this also links back to Stephanie’s comment about I mean to say that we’re not at the end of men is not to say that there aren’t examples of men’s subordination it doesn’t also say that men don’t still have privileged so if we have to be complicated I think and sophisticated about what we’re looking at so that’s number one and I think also I mean for me one of the enduring ways to ask about equality is too far follow mari Matsuda’s ask the other question so I think what’s happened particularly with this panel and a few others is so if we think it’s about gender what else might it be about right and two of the things that have been the loudest answers I think in this conference have been class and race so so we need to attend to that as well I guess that what that means in terms of concrete steps I’m not sure and to be aware that again two things can be true at the same time right so women maybe it certainly have advanced but also they could be losing ground so so we it’s not going to be simple but it and maybe last but not least I would say we we need to i would think we need to focus on the most

subordinated first because that is the minors canary I think Frank is absolutely right about that I don’t want the canary to die you know I argued with you know that the canary don’t have to die we just have to pay attention you know but but that’s not pay attention and then pay attention for the benefit of someone who has our identity characteristics right but to stay focused on the canary and get the canary healthy because that is going to work to the benefit of all of us I think John Williams said yesterday she was tired of policy arguments I haven’t been doing policy arguments hardly at all not a tired of it i just don’t know that much about it but i do think it’s profitable for us to think about how some of these problems are linked that we’re talking about and in particular i think we can draw good connections between problems that we have good awareness of which includes sort of work-family conflict problems the rush day the long day the parenting pressure and this rigid masculinity okay the public is not overly worked up about that but a intergenerational mobility sort of the the opportunity structure and gender inequality and so I think if you if you think about there are a few sort of obvious policy things we can do that with chip away at a bunch of those and they are very difficult to achieve but we may as well make a list i would include shortening the work week which is a way to kind of break the masculine normative thing about overworked so you need some incentives to for employers to not have people work really long hours I would think that Universal childcare and universal health care would be things that would lighten the work family conflict load reduce the constrictions on men that would change their roles or allow them make it more possible to change their roles and families and increase opportunities for intergenerational mobility by equalizing some of the advantages that some families have over others so I would I like to think about it that way and sort of universalistic policies that could tied together problems that we are able to agree are real problems I don’t know if you know that’s what you were asking but one last question my question was whether or not there’s any thoughts about whether the sort of simultaneous either attacks or attempts to debunk various isms is less an attempt to be controversial or alarmist and more to sort of create like a sedative narrative effect so the the rise of President Obama means that no racism doesn’t exist the end of men means that sexism doesn’t exist no excuses means that poverty isn’t a reason why kids aren’t achieving what they should be achieving etc etc because it seems to me that all of these things are sort of happening at the same time and if you take all of those things for how they’re displayed it would mean that America is sort of this place currently of equal opportunity so women can achieve whatever poor people can achieve whatever like people can achieve whatever even though and so we don’t have to work on systems and I was just curious if you guys had any thoughts about if that may be the case so it’s not necessarily an attempt to be controversial alarmist but rather to put things out in space that would paint America is like this beacon of opportunity okay so I was just going to say part of what ties all that together to me is sort of a Horatio Alger myth except applied beyond class right that race can be overcome gender oppression can be overcome that class intergenerational Rises are possible so that’s what comes to my mind I you know I don’t know exactly what the answer to that is but I think that’s part of what we have to attack this idea that you know but for a little luck you’re on the verge of making it if you deserve it um but you know it’s just a little luck and you would make it and if you don’t you must not have deserved it I’d like to know you all are the lawyers and everything is it is it is it harder for african-americans to win racial discrimination cases now that we have a black president you know is it going to be harder for women to win gender discrimination cases if the end of men is in the headlines it’s already hard oh I mean it no I mean I but especially and McKinley can probably answer that question but I think with the trend in employment discrimination cases is it’s gotten harder and harder and harder for over the last 20 years especially individual cases my sudden thing is this

working okay it’s very difficult to win race discrimination cases in front of juries in front of judges I mean the judges are summer judge summary judgment in them out anyway which is a quick process almost it’s gotten to the point where what you win if you win anything is a retaliation claim and what that means is if the purse if you fire them for complaining about race discrimination you can win that claim if they had a good reason to believe that was discrimination even if the jury finds that it wasn’t so that’s retaliation claim that was something that could happen that that doesn’t you don’t have to prove the race element same thing with sex discrimination I think it’s a little easier and some with some jurors to prove sex discrimination than rice but I don’t I don’t know if I can if I can pin it on the fact that Obama I mean I think there’s been for a long time even before Obama but I think now people use the fact that Obama was elected to show that there is no reason racism as someone mentioned but these cases are almost impossible to win okay it’s not not just Obama but affirmative action as soon as you had affirmative action you know racism was over so you don’t need any extra help you’re already getting help so so up just like you were saying like the advent of affirmative action means that racism is over on the advent of the end of man means that sexism is over so everything’s over where the land of equal opportunity I think that makes you know absolute perfect sense to me I’m just going to say and I think the one p sick as I was sitting here trying to think of a good answer to your question I think one of the commonalities is that brings all the isms together for me our rate of child poverty is just absolutely horrific I mean is is it should be at national embarrassment it’s one in five children and that has absolute concrete consequences for those kids so so I guess if I i if i were to start someplace it would be we have to change that statistic we have that that has to change because there’s no opportunity I mean it’s I shouldn’t say beak Totalus they can say none no way but it’s awfully hard to to pull out of that so you’re it’s just that’s a setup it’s an absolute setup so so that might be a place to bring all those pieces together and to counter the the to say no there isn’t horatiu the RZA know you can pull yourself up and that opportunity is there it’s not there and and we’ve put that there we put it in place on by accident of birth it’s going to affect twenty percent of our children and that’s so stupid for us as a society beyond the fact that it’s a you know a moral outrage and again of course it’s disproportionate by race but it’s is on so I guess that would be my other place to focus i guess i should add that now that gays can get married in New York and Massachusetts homophobia is over as well anyway I want to invite Linda mcclain up to this to the podium to make a couple final remark so first of all let’s have a round of applause for this panel so I’m going to be extremely brief I want to thank our Dean where is she marina roar for sitting through this entire conference and funding this conference and supporting it and I’m so grateful to have a Dean like this and we’re very grateful here at BU for her I want to thank our wonderful speakers the audience on a Saturday afternoon having you here and I just want to say a couple quick things one Kate and and and and Chris and I sat down to think about this conference on Kiara came on board the next semester what we were what we hope to do here is an event an evaluation okay an evaluation of a claim that was getting a lot of attention and break it down various ways and I couldn’t I don’t think I speak for all of us I don’t think we could be happier with the way these last two days have gone this last panel was a kind of perfect capping of that Nancy put it so well saying you know we talking about class which i’m at january time a race Stephanie brought out the importance of you know not minimizing the issue of pain not I mean we have this battle between our people upset because we’re losing their privilege are they really suffering you know because of various forces and and this ER brought up the attention between structural explanations versus personal responsibility explanations a lot of people have talked about why is there not similar empathy or sympathy for a men of color for boys of color who do we care about you know who’s being left out and all of these are wonderful and important questions like the you know so it’s like is what’s going on that was what we were trying to get a handle on what’s going on in these claims why should we care and what should be done about it you know those are the kind of

things we’re looking at and someone said yesterday when work disappears marriage disappears as William Julius Wilson talked about part of what these diagnoses are looking at is what happens to neighborhoods what happens to communities okay and what happens to the society if if there are these various things going on so we can’t really wrap it all neatly in a book with package and a bow right now but I hope that all of us will continue to think about these issues and work on them and let me just say quickly if you’re interested in any of the work that our wonderful speakers have done just walk down to kenmore square at the Barnes & Noble and they have a display table on our conference and you can see Frank and Anne’s book on masculinities you can see all sorts of other books by people and in two weeks or so we should have tapes of these panels on lines that you may not want to watch them again but you may have friends who would like to who weren’t able to be here so spread the word about that and about six months we’re going to have a published symposium issue of the BU law review if you want to read the actual papers that come out of this proceeding and we’re also launching in an online compliment to achieve a buell all remove online version of it that is going to have shorter pieces by some additional voices on this issue and that’s going to be kind of going on for several months there’s a lot more to do on this and I just want to thank everyone so much for making this conference of success and thank all of you from all these different disciplines who came into this law school and help deep and understand them okay thank you so much