Richard Reeves has researched the status of men and boys for 30 years, and recently issued a book, Of Boys and Men, from his chair at the Brookings Institution. In it he shares shocking statistics about the decline of well-being among males since 1979, not just in the U.S. but worldwide. When I say decline in well-being, I mean more than simply giving up power; rather, launching themselves well into the realm of the disadvantaged in terms of education, class, and physical/mental health.

Yes, that even means white men, as well as the racially marginalized who have it worse. The decline is not true for males in the top 20% of income and class; rather, the lower 80%, which is a whole lot of guys. Today, already (note the past tense) we have created among working-age men an underclass who are demotivated, lonely, and they are earning less than their counterparts in 1979. When they are working that is, because two of three with only a high school diploma are not working, leaving some 10 million males between 25 and 55 out of the labor force. Men are now frequently struggling to support themselves.

Reeves assigns the determining factors of decline to trends in three basic areas:

• Biological characteristics of the male gender

• Education, or lack thereof

• Erosion of male roles in in the work force and family structures

I'll break those areas down with statistics from the book in posts to come.

In addition to the folks outside of the labor market, the symptoms of the disease are fewer educational certifications and degrees, increased divorce rates and single motherhood, absent fathers, and increased rates of addiction and "deaths of despair". The next generation is missing out on many positive male role models, making these trends self-perpetuating, and our social institutions are already overtaxed in trying to address the symptoms. We all suffer when one slice of our society suffers; surely we've learned that from our recent anti-racism studies.

My brother Pete graduated high school in 1978, so he and his peers would have lived through much of this change in terms of previous male roles in society and the work force. They experienced it in real time. Some of it may have been apparent to them in the moment, but likely more of it was experienced in a subconscious way. Pete struggled to financially support himself much of his life. Despite college degrees, he never found solid footing in the labor market, primarily working skilled labor contract positions when they were available (restaurants, movie sets). Clearly, in a way at some point I hope to define, addiction played a role in this. For that matter, his financial instability may have contributed to a mental state leading to addiction.

Before my feminist friends get upset, I will note that Reeves also emphasized two things: one, that the push for female equality is not over and needs to continue; and two, there is a need to address the growing male underclass. We need to hold both thoughts at the same time. Although not appropriate behavior, we are seeing obvious pushback from marginalized men in the forms of violence, populism, and bigotry. I see these are cries for help, and there are also those from whom we are not hearing. Reeves called the successes in the drive for female equality one of the most rapid social change movements in human history, and if that is true, it is understandable that we are caught by surprise with these new issues to be addressed. Despite the poor behaviors, we can see through Reeves' and other studies that the modern male’s plight is real, and we can have the compassion to address their needs. For the good of all of us.