The future is very female according to Hanna Rosin. And so is the present too, more than is generally appreciated. She claims to be neither feminist (for trumpeting women over men) not anti-feminist (for suggesting the struggle for equality is over), but her choice of title will ensure that she is labelled as both, in spades. Probably that is OK for the bottom line.
Many of this book's observations are not revelations. Women's dominance on university campuses in most countries of the world is well documented. Similarly with secondary education. This manifests in more PhDs, masters, bachelors in law and medicine, and not quite but trending that way in science, engineering and business . . . going to girls.
Many professions are more female than male. And these are not just low compensation service ones, but jobs that are "on the right side of history"--not amenable to automation nor offshoring, where a degree is always required, physical ability is not, and tech doesn't make it obsolete but allows the worker to "shake hands and smile" (deploy/develop social capital). Pharmacy is a signal exemplar but it is far from the only one, and it is dominated by women, as are others. Your reviewer, for example, cannot remember the last time she visited an ophthalmologist who wasn't a lady. Apparently females dominate 20 of the 30 jobs most likely to grow in numbers looking forward. Some of them are vastly expanded labour markets in things women have historically done for free (but relinquished as they moved into employment), but other women still fill those created vacancies. Jobs where size and strength have a premium have been disappearing, others in health and education have swelled, but the gender balance is reversed, and the dislocation is non-random and permanent. The corner office is still a male preserve (and it is still unusual if this reviewer hears a female captain welcoming her on board a plane), but Ms Rosin rather matter of factly concludes that this is "the last artifact of a vanishing age", rather than a barricade to be charged.
The author's recurring thesis is one of women responding to changed incentives, and men largely failing to adapt to the same ones. Thus while several professions, disciplines and roles in life have become much more feminised, none have gone the other way. Nurturing professions fail to attract men even though there is no reason why they could not. Mass access to more education, and opportunities to upgrade or re-tool one's skills are grabbed with both hands by gals and left on the table by guys. And women have not relinquished what they did before either (perhaps because of little competition). This points to a caricature of "every woman as a slowly expanding [ . . . ] colonial empire, refusing to cede old territories as she conquers new ones". Whereas her male counterpart is "haunted by the spectre of a coming gender apocalypse". For children with a stay at home dad, this is a net benefit--they get added parenting time because mum doesn't reduce hers. But at the same time, marriage is increasingly de-selected by the woman who sees less and less in it for her if she gets the degree, earns the money, and he still plays video games. Korea gets a chapter as somewhere that has seen a wide transition from housewife to manic superwoman in one generation. And the country has the lowest world birth rate and a cratering marriage rate. Nimbleness and flexibility are the attributes that now confer privilege. And females manifest these qualities more. In some private American colleges, not bound by anti-discrimination laws, there is evidence of affirmative admissions action to prevent them becoming too girlie.
A more female world would not be likely be a utopia of less competitiveness, aggression, or violence--the indication being that these traits are acquired by circumstance and not innate. Researchers found that gender stereotypes of aggression can be chased away quite easily by encouraging gender-anonymity. As elsewhere, male sense of assertiveness appears to not have changed much, while its female equivalent has adapted to fill open space. In some rather extreme arenas (suicide bombing), female attackers can do more damage thanks to the less suspicious bias of societal norms.
Some glass ceilings remain. In a chapter that feels slightly misplaced by the time the reader reaches it, she learns that women still don't ask for big breaks as much as men do, and that when they do they are furthermore judged more negatively than men who pursue the same tack. The formula for success in this regard requires tightrope specificity in respect of polite firmness, or firm politeness. This reviewer is highly aware in her own profession of a requirement for behavioural adaptability and character-acting to walk the right line that balances feminine with aggressive. But she would testify that it can work. She (reviewer) has not had to navigate motherhood in this mix though.
As for whether there remain bright prospects for the male of the species, that isn't Ms Rosin's core concern in this volume. But she concludes that the ability of plastic-woman (her term) to adapt and conquer, an advantage she currently seems to have over cardboard-man, is perhaps temporary, if not borne of centuries of underdog legacy. In any case the term "male privilege" would seem to be absent from Ms Rosin's vocabulary. That ought to mark her out from other writers in her line, at least a little.
Many of this book's observations are not revelations. Women's dominance on university campuses in most countries of the world is well documented. Similarly with secondary education. This manifests in more PhDs, masters, bachelors in law and medicine, and not quite but trending that way in science, engineering and business . . . going to girls.
Many professions are more female than male. And these are not just low compensation service ones, but jobs that are "on the right side of history"--not amenable to automation nor offshoring, where a degree is always required, physical ability is not, and tech doesn't make it obsolete but allows the worker to "shake hands and smile" (deploy/develop social capital). Pharmacy is a signal exemplar but it is far from the only one, and it is dominated by women, as are others. Your reviewer, for example, cannot remember the last time she visited an ophthalmologist who wasn't a lady. Apparently females dominate 20 of the 30 jobs most likely to grow in numbers looking forward. Some of them are vastly expanded labour markets in things women have historically done for free (but relinquished as they moved into employment), but other women still fill those created vacancies. Jobs where size and strength have a premium have been disappearing, others in health and education have swelled, but the gender balance is reversed, and the dislocation is non-random and permanent. The corner office is still a male preserve (and it is still unusual if this reviewer hears a female captain welcoming her on board a plane), but Ms Rosin rather matter of factly concludes that this is "the last artifact of a vanishing age", rather than a barricade to be charged.
The author's recurring thesis is one of women responding to changed incentives, and men largely failing to adapt to the same ones. Thus while several professions, disciplines and roles in life have become much more feminised, none have gone the other way. Nurturing professions fail to attract men even though there is no reason why they could not. Mass access to more education, and opportunities to upgrade or re-tool one's skills are grabbed with both hands by gals and left on the table by guys. And women have not relinquished what they did before either (perhaps because of little competition). This points to a caricature of "every woman as a slowly expanding [ . . . ] colonial empire, refusing to cede old territories as she conquers new ones". Whereas her male counterpart is "haunted by the spectre of a coming gender apocalypse". For children with a stay at home dad, this is a net benefit--they get added parenting time because mum doesn't reduce hers. But at the same time, marriage is increasingly de-selected by the woman who sees less and less in it for her if she gets the degree, earns the money, and he still plays video games. Korea gets a chapter as somewhere that has seen a wide transition from housewife to manic superwoman in one generation. And the country has the lowest world birth rate and a cratering marriage rate. Nimbleness and flexibility are the attributes that now confer privilege. And females manifest these qualities more. In some private American colleges, not bound by anti-discrimination laws, there is evidence of affirmative admissions action to prevent them becoming too girlie.
A more female world would not be likely be a utopia of less competitiveness, aggression, or violence--the indication being that these traits are acquired by circumstance and not innate. Researchers found that gender stereotypes of aggression can be chased away quite easily by encouraging gender-anonymity. As elsewhere, male sense of assertiveness appears to not have changed much, while its female equivalent has adapted to fill open space. In some rather extreme arenas (suicide bombing), female attackers can do more damage thanks to the less suspicious bias of societal norms.
Some glass ceilings remain. In a chapter that feels slightly misplaced by the time the reader reaches it, she learns that women still don't ask for big breaks as much as men do, and that when they do they are furthermore judged more negatively than men who pursue the same tack. The formula for success in this regard requires tightrope specificity in respect of polite firmness, or firm politeness. This reviewer is highly aware in her own profession of a requirement for behavioural adaptability and character-acting to walk the right line that balances feminine with aggressive. But she would testify that it can work. She (reviewer) has not had to navigate motherhood in this mix though.
As for whether there remain bright prospects for the male of the species, that isn't Ms Rosin's core concern in this volume. But she concludes that the ability of plastic-woman (her term) to adapt and conquer, an advantage she currently seems to have over cardboard-man, is perhaps temporary, if not borne of centuries of underdog legacy. In any case the term "male privilege" would seem to be absent from Ms Rosin's vocabulary. That ought to mark her out from other writers in her line, at least a little.