The Decline in Male Achievement
May 17, 2010
THE PAST 40 years have seen a significant decline in male achievement in America. Men still earn more as a group, but this fact belies the real story. There is a remarkable lag in male success, as reflected in educational attainment, employment rates and wages. Looking at these figures, some of which are assembled in tables below, one is tempted to speak of the progressive economic destruction of manhood.
Larger economic forces, the cultural redefinition of sex roles and the subsequent diminishing of male initiative all appear to play a role. The downward spiral of the American family is not simply a reflection of the sexual revolution, at least not a direct reflection of it. The increase in out-of-wedlock births parallels the drop in male success with lockstep predictability. However, the sexual revolution did remove one major incentive for men to achieve.
The ratio of men graduating from college compared to women has fallen by 50 percent in the last 40 years, according to U.S. Census Bureau figures. This figure more than any other speaks of a decline in male initiative. The male employment rate dropped by three percent from 1980 to 2008 while the female rate grew by more than 12 percent. Median wages for men, in the 25 to 54 age group, remained flat from 1973 to 2007 while hourly wages for women increased by 30 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute. This is a stunning statistic. For 34 years, the middle income man saw no progress, a possibly unprecedented period of stagnation since the advent of modern capitalism. These figures do not include the latest recession, widely reported to have been especially damaging to men.
Below is an interesting chart. It shows Census Bureau figures for college graduation rates of whites (including Hispanics), ages 25-29. A declining male to female ratio first appears in 1975.
Men Women Male to Female ratio
1966 17.9% 11.8% 1.52
1970 21.3% 13.3% 1.60
1975 26.3% 19.4% 1.36
1980 25.5% 22.0% 1.16
1985 24.2% 22.2% 1.09
1990 24.2% 24.3% 1.00
1995 25.4% 26.6% 0.95
2000 27.8% 31.3% 0.89
2005 25.3% 32.7% 0.77
2009 27.0% 36.0% 0.75
As of 1990, more women than men were college graduates in the 25 to 29 year old age category and in every year succeeding more women than men were college graduates. The male to female ratio of college graduates went from 1.60 in 1970 to 0.75 in 2009, a remarkable loss of more than 50 percent in the ratio of male college graduates in 40 years. Analysing these figures, one sees that if there had been no change in comparative effort since 1970, the number of men with college degrees, in the 25 to 29 year old age group, in 2009, would have been about 39 percent and for women it would have been 24 percent, assuming equal numbers of men and women in the 25 to 29 year old age group.
Since 1973 the college graduation rate of the entire adult population 25 and over increased for both men and women, but women saw a significantly greater rise, and they even achieved a greater increase in absolute terms. From 1973 to 2009 the male college graduation rate for those 25 and over went from 16 percent to 30 percent, an increase of 14.1 percentage points and a growth of 88 percent in proportion. This increase in male college graduation did not lead to any rise in male median wages, although it may have prevented further decline. For women the college graduation rate rose from 9.6 percent to 29.1 percent during the 1973 to 2009 period, a jump of 19.5 percentage points in absolute terms and 203 percent, a tripling, in proportion. This obviously helped women’ to increase their median wages by 29 percent from 1973 to 2007. The male to female proportion of college graduates in the 25 and over population went from 1.67 to1 in 1973 to 1.03 to 1 in 2009.
Here is a chart of employment figures provided by the Economic Policy Institute:
Employment Rate by Gender, ages 25-54 (Quarter 1)
1980 Male 90.5% Female 60.3%
1985 Male 88.6% Female 66.0%
1990 Male 89.8% Female 70.8%
1995 Male 88.0% Female 72.0%
2000 Male 89.4% Female 74.5%
2005 Male 86.6% Female 71.8%
2008 Male 87.1% Female 72.6%
Here are earnings by education level (in constant 2007 dollars):
Men 1973 2007
Less than High School $15.72 $12.32
High School Degree $18.64 $16.68
Some College $19.05 $18.95
College Degree $25.71 $30.36
Advanced Degree $28.56 $38.10
Women 1973 2007
Less than High School $9.48 $9.72
High School Degree $11.73 $13.00
Some College $12.68 $15.09
College Degree $17.56 $22.72
Advanced Degree $23.26 $28.93
In 1973, the out-of-wedlock birth rate was 13 percent, as compared to more than 40 percent today. Journalists frequently cite the fact that women earn 79 cents for every dollar men earn, but given the amount of time women take for childbirth and child care and their preference for lower paying and less dangerous fields in the first place, this figure is remarkably high.
The above figures were tabulated by Jesse Powell using the sources mentioned.
Jesse Powell writes:
The subject of men’s educational achievement or lack thereof, of the “man-child” who never grows up, of how schools treat boys and how boys react to the educational environment today is a big topic that a lot of people are talking about. A lot of people do recognize that women graduating from college 30% more than men do is a bad thing and implies that men are not performing as well as they should. “Disconnected Youth” is a subject a lot of research has been conducted on. But these figures are still an eye opener for me.
Why haven’t I heard this information before from the media?
Jesse adds:
Here is an article about girls significantly out-competing boys in grades 7 to 12 in Canada, in science! A particularly amazing quote from the article, “In Quebec, where girls made up 68 per cent of students at this year’s provincial Science Fair . . .”
Jill writes:
I always look at such statistics with a grain of salt. Generations of people now equate achievement with a college education or a high salary level. My grandmother’s generation (early 1900’s) did not expect the majority of men to achieve a college education. They also did not always equate achievement with income level. A man who worked hard and did his duty to his country and his family was considered successful. This was a generation where women stayed home even if their husband earned very little. They did their part by stretching what they had and rearing children who knew hard work and were grateful for being alive..
I knew quite a number of Harvard Ph.D’s who lived like slobs in hippie caravan wagons in the 1970’s. Did their education level equal achievement? Did their work ethic cause them to be successful? Statistics tell only part of a story. Statistics don’t show the high debt level of the average college graduate or how few college graduates end up using their degree in their field of work (in the U.S. supposedly as many as 75percent of college graduates do not use their degree after college).
I don’t know…maybe I’m being a bit simplistic here wouldn’t a better indicator of success take into account how long a man has been married, if he is the sole provider for the family and if he is involved in community and church work? These are all marks of real men.
As a woman who has stayed at home to raise eight children during many years of living on little, I have seen my husband overcome an emasculated upbringing ( he was taught by his mother that he could only achieve affluence if he married a woman with a good career) and grow into a man with a strong work ethic. He learned to be satisfied in knowing that whatever his family had, he, personally, had worked hard to give it to us. He grew in character by providing for us and I developed character by living on what he earned and trusting God to provide for our large family.
My husband now earns a high salary. His financial success came with maturity and by embracing his God-given role as provider. The success he enjoys from watching his kind, intelligent, well-behaved children comes from knowing that his sacrifice allowed me to do my part and that is, by and large, to raise the children and make a home for my husband to enjoy. “Success” came at a price for both of us. It came as we matured. It came as we BOTH did our duty to our family and our God.
We women are horrified at the statistical evidence that men are not pursuing excellence and being the world-changers they were made to be. We forget that it often starts with us. We want our men to be instantly financially successful because we want our house with the white picket fence when we are newlyweds. We are embarrassed to be a one vehicle family when the whole world seems to have several cars and all of them brand-new! We want to “provide” the best for our children and so we leave our domain to “help”our husbands give us what we think our family deserves. Our husbands may even thank us for the extra paycheck but we have castrated them and they don’t even know it.
Laura writes:
The college statistics are one facet of a general picture. To say that men are exerting less effort to enter and complete college is not to say that a college degree is the only means to success. That is obviously untrue. As I have pointed out before, the quality of education at many colleges today is lacking, and the atmosphere is so poor that it is better off that many young people, especially women, look for alternatives. However, in an economy in which the opportunities for those with only a high school education have dwindled, the diminished ambition of men to complete college is very significant. Men are not lazy or stupid, or not any more so than in the past, a significant number of them have lost motivation to push ahead, and it seems much of that has to do with the loss of status accorded traditional masculinity. It would be one thing if these college figures were the same and there was an increase in wages and employment rates for those without college degrees. But the opposite is true. Employment rates for men have actually decreased and wages were stagnant for almost four decades despite periods of economic growth.
“Statistics don’t show the high debt level of the average college graduate or how few college graduates end up using their degree in their field of work (in the U.S. supposedly as many as 75% of college graduates do not use their degree after college).”
Again, the picture is not much brighter, as the figures above indicate, for those without college degrees. Many men flourish without going to college, by setting up businesses, working in the trades, and joining the military. But, despite their success in these areas, and increases in earnings for men with college and advanced degrees, men as a group are lagging.
“We women are horrified at the statistical evidence that men are not pursuing excellence and being the world-changers they were made to be. We forget that it often starts with us.”
You seem to be contradicting your earlier point that these statistics should be taken lightly, but I absolutely agree with you, as I have tried to indicate in hundreds of entries here, that it often starts with us. Why should men work hard and pursue unpleasant tasks? The decline of men reflects the decline of women. If I had to say which came first, I would say the latter, but the two are so intertwined it’s pointless to speak that way. The strange thing about a highly materialistic culture, which despises intangibles, is that it eventually produces a lack of ambition. It’s not just comfort that causes people to work less, it’s the loss of any guiding ideals, any metaphysical dream that might make it all worthwhile.
“We want our men to be instantly financially successful because we want our house with the white picket fence when we are newlyweds.
The point of reciting these statistics is not to complain that men aren’t making enough money to afford luxuries. Many are unable to support families at all and have lost interest in being married, as the high illegitmacy rate attests.
Jesse writes:
Clearly there have been cultural changes in defining how men and boys should express their masculinity, if masculinity is something that should be expressed at all.
The whole idea that men should “provide for and protect” women is not widely promoted or accepted in the culture. If I stood up in a room and said, “I think that men should take on the role of providing for and protecting women,” there might be gasps emanating from the audience and uncomfortable squiggling in chairs. It sounds very sexist you know, maybe I am belittling women, maybe some foolish and misplaced sense of gallantry, maybe I haven’t heard the news that women can fend for themselves now.
As I hide my head in shame for making such a foolish comment will I feel like striving to succeed in school, will I feel like working extra hard to win that promotion at work, will I feel proud and manly about my decision to pursue a higher education? The pursuit of money and status in the working world means a hell of a lot more if it is tied into love and romance and a good family life you can be proud you have created. If your only reward for making money as a man is that you can buy more cool stuff that isn’t much of a reward at all.
This is really such an obvious point it seems crazy that society doesn’t seem to “get it”, that society doesn’t seem to recognize the harmful effects of telling men that it is wrong to seek to earn more money than a woman.
Of all the crazy ideas in the culture, the idea that men and women should earn the same amount of money and have equal duties to chase after the all mighty buck has to be the craziest and perhaps most destructive idea of all.
