PDF Summary:Of Boys and Men, by Richard V. Reeves

For decades, discussions about gender inequality have focused on the disadvantages women face. But in Of Boys and Men, Richard V. Reeves argues that boys and men now face significant structural disadvantages in education and employment. He examines observable trends showing that boys struggle more in school than girls, particularly those from low-income families, and that men are leaving the workforce in increasing numbers. Reeves explores the root causes of these disadvantages, from developmental differences between boys and girls to economic shifts that have eliminated traditionally male jobs.

Reeves proposes solutions to rebalance policy and cultural norms, including education reforms, encouraging men to enter healthcare and teaching professions, and redefining fatherhood for the modern economy. He contends that addressing male disadvantage requires targeted interventions and a cultural shift in how we understand masculinity and men's roles in society.

(continued)...

The Development of the Prefrontal Cortex and Cerebellum

While it’s true that the prefrontal cortex and cerebellum are involved in the skills and characteristics Reeves mentions, the specific ages he cites for the development of these brain regions are not well supported by current research. In a comprehensive review of brain imaging studies, researchers found that there is a wide range of individual variation in brain development, and the differences between boys and girls are relatively small. The researchers note that while there are some average differences in the size and structure of certain brain regions, these differences are not as pronounced as previously thought. For example, the prefrontal cortex continues to develop well into the mid-20s for both sexes, and the cerebellum also shows a prolonged developmental trajectory.

Proposed Solutions: Rebalancing Policy and Cultural Norms

In this section, we will explore proposed solutions to disadvantage for men and boys. We will discuss guiding principles for effective solutions and targeted interventions to support males.

Guiding Principles for Effective Solutions

Reeves suggests investing in initiatives to motivate men to pursue HEAL careers (healthcare, teaching, management, and literacy). He notes that many jobs in HEAL fields don’t require a four-year degree, so it's important to make vocational training accessible to boys and men. Reeves additionally argues that postsecondary institutions should employ more male educators in these fields. He contends that it's challenging to convince men to pursue nursing as a career when 94% of professors in the field are women.

(Shortform note: While encouraging men to pursue HEAL careers and employing more male educators in these fields may help address the gender gap, it could also have unintended consequences. According to the sociologist Christine L. Williams, men employed in female-dominated occupations often benefit from a “glass escalator,” in which workplace structures and gendered expectations combine to fast-track them into more prestigious, better-paid, and supervisory positions, even when they themselves may prefer to remain in front-line care or service roles.)

To disrupt the trend of professions taught primarily by women to women, Reeves proposes favoring male candidates at a ratio of two to one for educational roles in health and education. This is the same prioritization that's presently given to women faculty members on the tenure track in STEM disciplines. Additionally, Reeves calls for providing monetary aid to males in HEAL professions and education. Women studying STEM have access to many scholarships, but opportunities are limited for men, with hardly any to support them entering HEAL fields. Reeves also suggests implementing marketing strategies to make HEAL careers more attractive to males. We should begin encouraging males to consider HEAL careers early. Secondary schools should offer more experiential learning opportunities for boys considering HEAL fields like early childhood education, and programs within schools to increase the visibility of men employed in these professions.

The Potential Stigmatization of Men in HEAL Fields

One potential downside of prioritizing male candidates for HEAL teaching roles and financial aid is that it could lead to the stigmatization of men in these fields. If men are perceived as being hired or admitted primarily to meet gender quotas rather than on merit, they may face skepticism or resentment from colleagues, patients, and students. This could undermine their confidence and effectiveness, potentially creating a self-fulfilling prophecy where they struggle to perform at the expected level. Additionally, such policies might inadvertently reinforce stereotypes that men are less naturally suited to these professions, further entrenching gender biases rather than dismantling them.

In this section, we will explore policy and systemic approaches to reforming education. We will also discuss cultural norms and individual strategies to shape fatherhood and masculine identity.

Policy & Systemic Approaches

Reeves believes we need to reform the education system to better support males. He argues that the way education is structured benefits girls and women, while the labor market is structured in favor of men. Both structures require fixing. Inequities matter, no matter which way they run. As women gain ground in employment, males are lagging in academics. One gap is closing, while the other is growing. According to Reeves, boys' academic struggles, particularly among students from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds and those who are Black, harm their chances of getting jobs and moving up economically. Males find online learning more challenging and experience a greater level of learning loss.

(Shortform note: Sociologists have long argued that gender is not just an identity but a social structure that shapes institutions like schools and workplaces. Barbara J. Risman, a leading gender theorist, argues that gender operates at three levels: individual (how we see ourselves), interactional (how we’re treated and expected to behave), and institutional (how rules and routines are set up). From this perspective, Reeves’s argument that schools now favor girls while the labor market still favors men makes sense. The routines, assessments, and classroom interactions in schools have gradually come to align more closely with girls’ typical socialized behaviors, generating female advantages in grades and credentials. At the same time, workplace institutions—such as promotion tracks, long-hours norms, and occupational segregation—continue to encode male advantage. The fact that boys’ academic problems are concentrated among those from disadvantaged and Black backgrounds also fits with this framework’s emphasis on intersecting structures: gendered expectations in school and at home combine with race and class inequalities to produce especially steep barriers for those boys. When learning moves online, the same theory highlights how institutional expectations (self-paced work, constant connectivity, quiet study space) now depend even more on the interactional and household level, where gendered patterns of supervision, digital use, and space allocation can make it particularly hard for some boys to convert schooling into successful academic outcomes.)

The initial task is to convince policymakers that boys now face a disadvantage in education. Reeves notes that some argue we shouldn't be concerned about gender inequality in education yet because women still earn less than men. However, the education disparity between genders is "astonishing." Over just a few decades, women and girls have overtaken boys and men academically after previously trailing them. In 1972, the U.S. government enacted the pivotal Title IX legislation to advance gender equity in higher education. Back then, men were receiving bachelor's degrees at a rate that was 13 percent higher than that of women.

(Shortform note: Title IX is a civil-rights law that ties education funding to whether schools avoid sex-based discrimination in any of their programs. It was passed in 1972, and it’s been used to address issues like sexual harassment, sexual violence, and gender-based discrimination in sports.)

The gap was closed by 1982. By 2019, the difference in the percentage of men and women earning bachelor's degrees was 15 points, greater than in 1972, but the opposite way. Reeves points out that in 2020 in the U.S., the drop in college enrollment was seven times larger for men than women. In school, men are likelier to take breaks from their education and to discontinue their studies entirely. The differences are significant: Among women entering public four-year colleges, 46% have completed their studies in that timeframe, compared to 35% of men. (The gap decreases slightly in six-year completion rates.) Males are likelier to leave college before completing it than any other demographic, such as those who are impoverished, Black, or born outside the country.

(Shortform note: Sociologists Claudia Buchmann and Thomas A. DiPrete have found that being a man is a stronger predictor of leaving college before completing a bachelor’s degree than other factors, such as poverty, race, or being foreign-born. They tracked students from high school into college and found that, even after accounting for differences in preparation and family background, men were still more likely to leave college without a degree. This suggests that gender itself is a strong independent factor in college completion rates.)

Reeves explains that why males underperform at university remains quite mysterious. Economic incentives fail to account for it. A college education holds the same value for both genders. A largely overlooked aspect in these discussions is the development disparity: men's frontal lobes have trouble keeping pace with women's through the early twenties. Female students have always been better prepared to excel in both college and high school, and this has become evident as traditional views on gender in higher education have faded. Reeves adds that there is a gap in aspirations. Nowadays, many young women are strongly encouraged to understand the importance of education, and most aspire to be financially self-sufficient. Their male classmates have a less clear vision of the future.

(Shortform note: Psychologist Cordelia Fine is a prominent critic of explanations that attribute males’ university underperformance to innate sex differences in frontal-lobe development. In her book Delusions of Gender, Fine argues that many popular claims about “hardwired” differences between male and female brains rest on fragile and selectively reported evidence, ignore the brain’s remarkable plasticity, and overlook how stereotypes, expectations, and gendered experiences can themselves shape both brain structure and performance in ways that then get mistaken for innate biological destiny. Fine’s work has sparked significant debate in neuroscience and psychology, with some researchers supporting her call for more rigorous and nuanced interpretations of sex differences, while others argue that she downplays robust findings of biological variation.)

In 1980, male high school seniors were far more inclined than female students to state they had definite plans to earn a bachelor's degree, but the disparity had completely reversed within 20 years. This could explain why various educational measures, like free college, help women more than men; they simply have a greater desire for success. Females have been forced to battle against misogyny from the outside. Males are currently grappling with an internal battle for motivation.

(Shortform note: In The Rise of Women, Thomas A. DiPrete and Claudia Buchmann argue that the female advantage in educational attainment is best understood as a product of institutional arrangements, shifting economic incentives, and gendered socialization processes that make girls more likely than boys to adopt the study habits, time horizons, and academic orientations that contemporary schools reward, rather than as evidence that girls possess some innate, across-the-board surplus of ambition relative to boys. This perspective suggests that policies like free college may yield greater gains for women because they interact with these gendered educational experiences, not because women have a greater desire for success.)

Reeves points out that the trends have gotten worse, and there hasn't been a reevaluation of educational policy or practice. Policymakers have been distressingly sluggish to adapt. The shift in gender dynamics in academics has been remarkably rapid. Unexpectedly, shifting attention from girls to boys has become the path to achieving gender equality. It's important to recognize the legal difficulties of crafting a policy explicitly centered on gender differences, which should be factored into the design and implementation.

(Shortform note: The legal difficulties Reeves refers to stem from the fact that any policy “explicitly centered on gender differences” is presumed to be discriminatory. This means that education officials must meet a high standard of evidence and justification before they can implement programs specifically designed to support boys. They must demonstrate that the gender gap is significant, that the proposed interventions are necessary to address it, and that there are no less discriminatory alternatives available. This legal framework, while designed to prevent discrimination, can make it challenging to implement targeted support for boys even when the data clearly shows they are falling behind.)

Reeves adds that school and boys are often not a great fit. According to a 2015 OECD survey, globally, boys are two times more likely than girls to express that school is pointless. In the U.S., boys are expelled from school three times more often than girls and suspended at twice the rate. Several changes could make schools more beneficial for boys, such as increasing physical education, starting school later, and offering improved meals. Nutrition, exercise, sleep: ultimately, the education system must improve at acknowledging that students are living, breathing people—not simply minds. Naturally, these changes would be advantageous for girls as well. Reeves argues that one educational change would be the most impactful: having more male teachers.

(Shortform note: In So What’s a Boy?, Wayne Martino and Maria Pallotta-Chiarolli argue that policies that focus on having more male teachers as role models for boys can reinforce narrow ideas about masculinity. They say that these policies often assume that all boys need to be taught by men to learn how to be “real men,” which can make it harder for boys who don’t fit traditional masculine stereotypes. They also point out that focusing too much on male teachers can distract from the need to improve teaching for all students, regardless of gender. Instead, they suggest that schools should focus on creating environments where all teachers can help students challenge stereotypes and learn in ways that work best for them.)

In the U.S., there are few male teachers, and their numbers are decreasing. High schools ought to add more career advisors, who are equipped with the knowledge and abilities to broaden students' perspectives on potential paths. Sometimes the role is titled "Career and College Counselor," though typically, the college aspect receives the most focus. The sole emphasis on the conventional path to college conveys a clear message that certain skills, particularly those that prepare you for higher education, hold more worth than others. I could elaborate here on the classist thinking and "cult of smart" mentality that underpin many policies in this area.

(Shortform note: The “cult of smart” mentality refers to the belief that intelligence is the most important trait a person can have, and that those who are smart deserve more success and respect than those who are not. This belief is often used to justify social and economic inequality, as it suggests that people who are less successful are simply not as smart or hardworking as those who are more successful. In The Tyranny of Merit, Michael J. Sandel argues that this mentality is harmful because it creates a sense of entitlement among the “winners” of society, who believe that they deserve their success because they are smarter or more talented than others.)

Reeves adds that vocational learning has consistently been undervalued as a result. This has caused damage overall, but particularly for males. Generally, male learners appear to perform better with more experiential and practical methods of learning, meaning they benefit the greatest from a vocational approach. However, career and technical education in U.S. schools has rapidly decreased, stemming from a college-focused obsession and a lingering fear of directing certain students away from more academic courses. From 1992 to 2013 (the latest available data), U.S. high school students earned 17% fewer CTE credits. Over the past few decades, federal funding has decreased.

(Shortform note: Reeves’s argument about the value of vocational and experiential learning is part of a long tradition of educational theory. In the early 20th century, progressive educators like John Dewey argued that education should be practical and democratic, preparing students for life in a rapidly changing society. Dewey believed that vocational education should be integrated with academic study, not separated from it. He argued that all students, regardless of background, should have access to both practical and intellectual learning experiences. This approach, Dewey believed, would help create a more equitable and democratic society.)

Reeves argues that high school programs should include more practical, experiential elements. This isn't about having every boy attend shop class for trade skills while the girls refine their college essays. But it does mean integrating more vocational and practical components (e.g., CTE) into the general curriculum, and particularly establishing more separate technical schools. The broader goal is to embrace the concept Joseph Fishkin, a philosopher, terms "opportunity pluralism." Instead of just one narrow road in a "single pathway to opportunity," as he describes it, we need multiple routes to achieve success. Although there isn't a large body of evidence yet, what does exist appears promising. Several well-conducted studies are notable. The first focused on how career academies—compact high schools centered on career-oriented learning—make an impact.

The History of Tracking and Career Academies

The push for “opportunity pluralism” and career academies emerged from decades of debate over “tracking” in American high schools. In the 1970s and 1980s, critics argued that tracking—separating students into college-prep and vocational paths—reinforced class and racial inequalities. Jeannie Oakes’s influential 1985 book Keeping Track argued that vocational programs were used to steer working-class and minority students away from college. In response, many schools de-emphasized vocational education in favor of a “college for all” approach. However, by the 1990s, concerns about high dropout rates and disengaged students led to renewed interest in career-focused programs. Career academies and other technical schools were seen as a way to provide practical skills while still keeping college options open.

Cultural & Individual Strategies

Reeves argues that cultural norms and individual choices shape masculinity and fatherhood. He explains that masculinity is fragile since it is defined by behavior, not biology. It requires ongoing effort and is possible to win or fail. The idea of what makes a "real man" differs among cultures. Human actions are influenced by a mix of nature (biological instincts), nurture (the teachings we receive from the culture around us), and individual agency. The interplay among these three elements leads to much of life's drama. As communities progress, cultural influences and personal agency gain significance.

(Shortform note: Cognitive scientist Steven Pinker, in his book The Blank Slate, argues that many psychological differences between men and women are rooted in biology, not just culture. He suggests that traits like aggression, dominance, and competitiveness are more common in men due to evolutionary pressures. Pinker points out that these differences appear in every human society, suggesting they can't be explained away as mere cultural inventions. He argues that denying these biological influences leads to unrealistic expectations about human behavior and social change.)

Reeves adds that culture has been crucial in guiding men's energy in a positive direction socially, particularly by educating them on how to care for others. However, this behavior is taught and can easily fade in social environments where it's no longer taught effectively. The traditional idea of fatherhood, focused on being a provider, doesn't work in a world striving for gender equality. It must be swapped for a far broader fatherhood role, encompassing significantly greater caring responsibilities and equalizing their standing with maternal figures. Reeves believes that fathers play a unique role in their children's upbringing. Involved fathers have been associated with numerous benefits, including emotional well-being, high school completion, social abilities, and literacy, along with reduced chances of drug abuse, criminal activity, and teen pregnancy. Cognitive development assessments show higher scores among three-year-olds who have involved, supportive fathers.

The Role of Fathers in Child Development

The unique role of fathers in child development is a topic of ongoing debate. While Reeves highlights the benefits of involved fathers, some research suggests that children raised by two mothers can achieve similar outcomes. A 2010 study by Gartrell and Bos examined adolescents raised by lesbian mothers from birth. The researchers found that these teens had similar psychological adjustment and academic performance compared to their peers from heterosexual families. The study followed 78 adolescents, all conceived through donor insemination and raised by lesbian couples, from birth to age 17. The researchers used standardized measures to assess psychological well-being and academic achievement. The results showed no significant differences between the two groups, suggesting that the presence of a father figure may not be as crucial as previously thought, at least in the context of families with two mothers.

Targeted Approaches to Aid Males

Reeves contends that a number of interventions in social policy fail to benefit males. For example, a tuition-free initiative in Kalamazoo, Michigan, had no impact on the male college completion rate, while the percentage of women who did so rose by almost 50%. Examples of programs that help girls and women, but not boys and men, are: a Fort Worth, Texas student mentoring initiative; a school choice plan in Charlotte, North Carolina; and an income increase for low-wage workers in New York City. These interventions often seem successful because their positive effect on girls leads to positive overall results, hiding their ineffectiveness in aiding males.

How to Ensure That Social Programs Benefit Both Sexes Equally

If you’re a policymaker or funder, you can avoid this pitfall by requiring that all programs you support report sex-disaggregated outcomes and undergo gender-specific impact analysis before being deemed successful. This approach, recommended by the World Bank in its World Development Report 2012, ensures that aggregate indicators of progress don’t conceal persisting gender gaps. By making gender differences explicit in your results framework, you can identify and address interventions that may benefit one group while leaving the other behind. This proactive stance not only promotes equity but also enhances the overall effectiveness of your initiatives by ensuring that all beneficiaries are truly served.

In this section, we will explore direct service and program design in addition to policy and structural measures to support male youth and adults.

Direct Service & Program Design

Reeves suggests implementing targeted recruitment and support for men in teaching roles. Men who teach are particularly rare in primary and junior high schools. Men make up just 3% of teachers for pre-K and kindergarten. Currently, men make up 24% of K-12 teachers, compared to 33% in the early 1980s. If children perceive caregiving or teaching as women's roles as they mature, this perpetuates generational gender stereotypes. Reeves explains that substantial evidence shows male teachers improve boys' academic performance, particularly in subjects like English.

(Shortform note: One justification for this claim comes from a study by Thomas S. Dee, who used a quasi-experimental design to examine the impact of teacher gender on student engagement and effort. By tracking the same boys as they moved between male and female teachers, Dee found that changes in teacher gender were associated with systematic shifts in boys’ observed engagement and teacher-rated effort. These behavioral indicators are strong predictors of later academic performance, suggesting that male teachers may have a unique ability to engage boys and foster positive learning behaviors.)

If male educators taught half of English classes for sixth through eighth grades, the reading performance gap between boys and girls would shrink by about one-third before high school. Girls' English performance appeared unaffected by the teacher's gender. When students were taught by men, the GPA difference between genders in grade nine was nearly reduced by half. Reeves adds that when a 40% training course quota increased the percentage of men teaching in Finland's primary schools, both boys' and girls' academic performance improved.

(Shortform note: In Sweden, researchers found that the gender of teachers in sixth through ninth grades had no measurable impact on the reading performance gap between boys and girls or the GPA difference in grade nine. The researchers suggest that the lack of impact may be due to the highly standardized nature of the Swedish education system, which minimizes the influence of individual teachers on student outcomes. This suggests that simply changing the gender mix of teachers may not be a reliable way to address gender disparities in academic performance in all educational contexts.)

The quota was abolished in 1989, and the percentage of men going into primary education was cut in half. The policy was discontinued due to a 1987 law against gender discrimination. Reeves notes that the exact reasons why male educators are important aren't clear. Female educators are likelier than their male counterparts to perceive boys in their classroom as disruptive, whereas male teachers generally view boys and their abilities more positively. There might be an influence from having a role model. Black boys experience the greatest advantage from being taught by Black teachers. Having a teaching staff with gender diversity is probably beneficial to students for reasons similar to those explaining why racial and ethnic diversity in teachers is advantageous.

(Shortform note: Some researchers have argued against the idea that male educators are important for boys. In a series of academic papers, education scholar Christine Skelton argues that the idea that male teachers are important role models for boys is based on stereotypes about masculinity and that it undermines efforts to improve teaching for all students. Skelton argues that the focus on male teachers as role models for boys is based on the assumption that boys need male role models to learn how to be men. She argues that this assumption is based on stereotypes about masculinity and that it ignores the fact that boys can learn from female teachers as well.)

Reeves suggests establishing a goal of having men comprise 30% of K–12 educators. School districts might be encouraged to commit to meeting the target. It's also important to make focused attempts to hire more men for early childhood education roles, especially Black men and male English teachers.

(Shortform note: One way to do this is to create a “grow-your-own” teacher residency program. According to Roneeta Guha, Maria E. Hyler, and Linda Darling-Hammond, these programs are effective at recruiting local community members and paraprofessionals into teaching, increasing the racial and ethnic diversity of the teacher workforce, channeling new teachers into high-need subject areas and schools, and significantly improving both teacher effectiveness and long-term retention compared to traditional preparation routes.)

Policy & Structural Interventions

Reeves advocates implementing policies to foster a new approach to fatherhood. Regardless of their relationship with the children's mother, fathers are important to their kids. The aim is to reinforce the father's position as direct caregivers to their children, regardless of their marital or living situation. There's a need for policy involvement, as well as a major cultural transformation from both genders.

(Shortform note: While Reeves’s argument is that fathers should be more involved in their children’s lives, this may not be the best approach in all cases. In families with a history of coercive control or domestic violence, reinforcing fathers’ positions as direct caregivers can unintentionally extend abusers’ power over children and mothers after separation. This can lead to ongoing manipulation and harm, making it crucial to consider the safety and well-being of all family members when shaping policies around fatherhood.)

Reeves explains that outdated conceptions of being a father, which are rooted in traditional family roles, are largely out of touch with the realities of today's society and economy. Fatherhood is still vital even in a society with economically independent women, though it must take a new shape. On the positive side, fathers could potentially have a more satisfying role and develop much stronger bonds with their children. The downside is that many men in our society are quite far from taking on this new fatherhood role.

The Ethic of Care and Modern Fatherhood

Reeves’s call for a redefinition of fatherhood aligns with the feminist “ethic of care” theory, which argues that caregiving is a fundamental human activity that should be valued and shared by all adults, regardless of gender. This perspective challenges the traditional view that caregiving is primarily a woman’s responsibility and instead frames it as a civic duty essential to the well-being of society. Joan C. Tronto’s Moral Boundaries is a key work in this area, arguing that care should be recognized as a central aspect of citizenship and moral life. This framework supports the idea that fathers can and should be valued as caregivers, not just providers.