Many different journalist of better writing ability have responded in similar dismay to Hymowitz' article on the child-men problem.Mighty Bargain Hunter, has a short piece basically saying that ideas of what it means to grow up are not as uniform as some my think it to be. I especially like the bit at the end.
If you grow up earlier than you should, life is “thrust upon you” and you’ll feel cheated. If you grow up later than you should, you’ll know it, and others will tell you once they get tired enough of your behavior. If you grow up at the right speed, you know what you’re leaving behind, and you know that where you’re going has a good chance of being better. After nearly six years of marriage I hardly remember what it was like not to be married, and when I think about what it was like, I don’t miss it that much. But I was ready to “grow up” and get married. There’s more responsibility being a grown-up, but it’s also more rewarding and more fulfilling. That’s where the payoff is, but it’s a payoff that you have to want.
I've found after teaching in Japan, that your average Japanese 20something is rather immature compared to your average 20something in America. Being that I taught elementary and junior high school kids, I have a personal theory. The Japanese kids are raised to uphold an unreasonable amount of responsibility. Although it's always good to teach responsibility at a young age, there is a point in which it becomes harmful. After growing up with it, the reason for having responsibility becomes meaningless and a mental rejection of adulthood occurs. In many ways forcing a child to act grown up, stunts their ability to actually grow up. I've found that growing up requires learning first hand those mistakes of youth, saying ouch, and then moving on.
Another article by Amanda Marcotte writes extensively tearing down the argument that because of "feminism" men have fallen behind in becoming adults. She writes sarcastically
of course women are to blame for men who are unwilling to take responsibility. Specifically the secret, all-powerful cadre called The Feminists. We all know the argument—men aren’t motivated to grow up and do icky girl stuff like get married and have children and hold down a full-time job on their own. No, they have to be bribed into it. You ladies have to sweeten the deal by offering dependence and submission. But never fear, men are like vending machines. You put submission and dependence in, ladies, and you’ll get devotion and responsibility back. So really, it’s all on you to “make” men be responsible.
Where the Xbox is concerned, is that men are spending their time and money on childish things like video games instead of growing up and appreciating how independent and career driven their wives are. Marcotte wrote that not only is this inaccurate, it implies that most women are now independent and career driven and wouldn't touch a video game controller for fear of getting cooties.
The idea that men are always playing around with women and games is an old story that predates both the Xbox and yuppies. (see: Guys and Dolls "I'm playing craps", Pride and Prejudice "You tricked me with your womanly ways", The Odyssey "So, heres the reason it took me so long to get home.")
3 comments:
I think history is very clear that, at this point in time, a number of factors have made it easier for men (and women) to put off "settling down" for an extended period of time. From ubiquitous college loans to easy credit to birth control, there is a way for even the lower-middle class to delay creating a nuclear or any sort of semipermanent family structure for an extended period of time.
And, honestly, I think it's a pretty sad thing that only proponents of gay marriage and conservatives of various stripes are the ones protesting the failure of modern people to solidify their relationships. Society appears better off when people have stronger kinship bonds than being roommates, and the fact that men our age would rather stay free agents than settle down is probably a net negative to the long term survival of what we consider the good parts of our society (as in, if we internally collapse from a demographic bomb leaving only religious fanatics and poor people).
Now, frankly, if you want social structure like that, you'll need social mores that make people have to shun or judge the actions of others. And you'll have to accept a society that frowns on Xbox before life partner formation.
I also think you're way off base using professional blogger Amanda Marcotte to score snark points against published professional intellectuals like Kay Hymowitz and Dr. Christina Hoff Summers. I read lots of blogs, and honestly, I can't stand random unlettered people from the left or the right snarking down credentialed academics. There has to be a point where you have to say, "well, that does look like an emotionally satisfying fisk of Dr. Paul Krugman, MIT PhD of economics, writer of one of the most widely used economics textbooks around, and one time White House economics advisor, but isn't there a better than small chance that this guy does know something more about economic policy than a twenty-something whose primary expertise, if I read his blog correctly, is Halo?"
I don't say this to diminish your education - which is significant in the social field - but to comment that, in this Wikipedia age, there should be some respect that credentialed academics should have the benefit of the doubt that their judgments are a little bit less refutable than by quoting an AP feed or someone's snark take on their writings.
As always you are my best critic. It is quite fair that using bloggers to back up my stance is rather poor judgement. It is true, much like how dog breeders shouldn't compare to veterinarians in knowledge about dogs. Social researchers and bloggers are on different scales of measurement.
However as it says in her bio, Hymowitz has a Masters of Philosophy from Columbia University in something that may or may not be in social research, but otherwise has a background in English literature. I wouldn't demean the study of English literature, but how does it support her further career in writing about marriage and family?
Also Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers has a PhD in Philosophy. I can disregard the various criticisms of her work by other people with degrees, but I can't disregard her attacks against social science using poor research methods. (Books like Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women and The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men. of which I've read myself are not excellent examples of stable and creditable research.
I agree that opinionated bloggers have little ground to make snarky comments on the work of social researchers. I also don't mean to downplay the integrity of a degree in English or Philosophy. However, sociologist are overlooked all too often in favor of these other folks with degrees because they have either unintentionally or intentionally skewed their research bias to tell a story that people want to hear.
The various factors in our modern age which point to instability in "strong kinship bonds" are often addressed in many of the latest research in marriage and family. I've read quite a few of this research myself even some of the more controversial articles which have been published in the last year. (Ask me sometime and I'll lend you one that I read recently.) However, what we can't really determine is whether these factors have always been present or if they are increasing in numbers in recent years. I haven't come across a good longitudinal study which was able to really determine this. We see them now quite often because we are looking for them now quite often. Unfortunately this gives the impression that these factors are a product of modernity.
Well, not to defend Ms. Hymowitz too much, but the piece you criticized is, as far as I can tell, pretty much a piece of literary criticism. She's mostly referring to individual pieces of artistic works, and making comments about culture as the progenitors of such work.
There's a lot of bleed these days between anthropology, literature, and cultural studies, and I think, to the extent that sociology relies on the same sort of case study tools that someone making judgments about the "Role of Women in Fin-de-Siecle English Literature" might, the tools are there.
Post a Comment