A Philosopher's Blog

The End of Men III

Posted in Business, Law, Philosophy, Politics by Michael LaBossiere on June 30, 2010
The Feminine Mystique
Image via Wikipedia

This blog concludes my discussion of Rosin’s essay “The End of Men.”
Rosin continues by noting that the shift is not just a matter of women dominating 13 of the 15 fastest growing job fields. As she points out, women are starting to dominate the realms of middle management and the professional fields.  Women still lag behind men in engineering and the sciences.
Rosin explains this by indicating that women are better educated, brighter, more conscientious and more stable than men.  These claims are, of course, factual claims. Women are currently dominating higher education, which gives them a clear advantage over men. It might also be true that women are better than men in these areas. If so, this would help explain the current plight of men and the excellent situation of women.
However, it is well worth considering this current situation in the light of the past. When men where dominant, it was often argued by feminists that this dominance was unjust and not a “natural dominance” based on on superior abilities. Crudely put, it was often argued that the patriarchy was unfairly excluding women and using various unfair means to keep men in dominant positions. Of course, men tended to argue that they held their dominant positions because of being superior in relevant ways. In short, the situation seems to have been exactly reversed: now that woman are dominate or expanding, this is explained (mostly by women) in terms of the superiority of women. It will be interesting to see if a movement comparable to feminism will arise in any significant way to argue against this alleged superiority. In any case, one would imagine that such critics will point to affirmative action programs and other means that have provided special support to women in education, sports, and business. As such, it seems that a case could be assembled that women have taken advantage of a system that works quite well in their favor-just as men did before them.
Rosin next presents a common lament: while woman are dominating higher education and moving ahead of men economically, these is still a male bastion that remains: the top of the job pyramid. It is interesting that female dominance in an area is often lauded as a good thing, while male dominance is still cast as a problem that remains to be fixed (presumably by female dominance).
Rosin concludes by considering the changing nature of leadership-or at least the changing perception of leadership. Tied into this is, naturally enough, the nature (or alleged nature) of each sex. Interestingly enough, female leadership is cast in terms that are stereotypically female: empathy, sensitivity, communication and so on. The difference is, of course, that these stereotypical traits are now presented as those that leaders should have. The traditional male qualities and leadership styles are, not surprisingly, generally cast as being negative in character. For example, much has been made of the role of men in the economic collapse.
Rosin does not, of course, explore these matters in depth. However, there are many important issues here that are well worth considering. One is whether men and women do, in fact, have distinct qualities. For example, are women actually more empathetic and better at communication? A second is whether such sex based qualities are better or worse in terms of leadership and job success. Right now, women seem to be doing better than men. But, the cause of this needs to be analyzed more. While some are tempted to attribute this to the qualities of women, it is wise to consider the feminist arguments of the past: greater success need not be the result of better qualities-it might be due to other factors, such as unfair advantages or external circumstances. Looking back, some thinkers wrote with great confidence about the superiority of men over women and saw no injustice in this. However, these views were later subject to criticism. Now, it seems to the turn for women-they get to write with confidence about the superiority of women and see no injustice in the disparity.
Enhanced by Zemanta
About these ads

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. magus71 said, on June 30, 2010 at 8:10 am

    “Rosin explains this by indicating that women are better educated, brighter, more conscientious and more stable than men. These claims are, of course, factual claims.”

    I do believe that women are more conscientious than men. As you may know or at least suspect, Mike, since you work in education, conscientiousness is associated with academic acheivement. However, I believe men catch up in the post-afcademic world, say around 30 years old.

    And they far surpass women in most endeavors after that. I admit though, that sitting still in a classroom, is easier for women than men.

    But, take chess for instance. I could find only one female–Judit Polgar of Hungary–in the top 100 players on the FIDE ratings list. She of course, being female is more famous than most of the men above her. She’s ranked #54 in the world.

    World class pool also. Men and women have to compete in different classes, because men are much better.

    I’m using these examples because they are not associated with muscular advantages.

    And where are the great female inventors of history?

    Look at the suicide rate between men and women; men kill themselves about 4 times more than women. Why do I point this out? Becuase my primary point is that men and women are fundamentally different. Our brains and bodies are different. I suppose that the monumental amount of relationship problems our society now has have been somewhat enable because we don’t think men and women are different, have different priorities and different ways of going about things.

    Feminism is as romantic as it is hateful.

    • Michael LaBossiere said, on June 30, 2010 at 6:01 pm

      Interesting that men are better at chess and pool. Perhaps some of it is social, but this is consistent with the older view that men evolved doing tasks that would make them good at pool and chess.

      Also, don’t forget video games.

  2. freddiek said, on June 30, 2010 at 8:11 am

    “It will be interesting to see if a movement comparable to feminism will arise in any significant way to argue against this alleged superiority.”

    Mascu-Nazis!

  3. Catholic Tide said, on July 4, 2010 at 10:25 am

    Vatican newspaper highlights work of French scholar Hadjadj…

    My blog readers will be interested in your post so added a trackback to it on CatholicTide…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,042 other followers

%d bloggers like this: