Boys to men: Why guys aren't growing up

After reading this piece does anyone besides me get the feeling that Kimmel was the kid that never got invited to the party?

Michael Kimmel ascribes far too much of my generation's lack of enthusiasm for traditional male roles on the "guy" culture. Admittedly, I fit the guy mold as a 22 year old college student, fraternity member, videogame player, and frequent bar reveler; but I feel as though other societal forces beyond that of a guy culture inform and are ultimately reflected in our choices. Maybe guys in my generation don't want to follow through with marriage and commitment in long-term serious relationships because we see how well that whole thing worked out with our parents. With 50% of all marriages ending in divorce, a large number of us place no faith in the ideal of marriage. As far as I can tell, most of my peers have a drive to succeed, a work ethic, and at least some sense of direction; but they want to make sure they have chosen the right direction for their lives without being locked into a dead end job, a mortgage or more responsibility than they can handle. This article appears to have inferred causation with correlation, we form these lasting guy relationships because we are "directionless, with a liberal arts BA that qualifies them for nothing more than a dead-end job making lattes or folding jeans" not the other way around.

In my experience, most crazy party guys who slack to the fullest effect, are products of overbearing "conservative" parents. Typically, super conservative parents were the ones growing up that thought we were little angels and that we could do no wrong. This mentality provides a plethora of things for kids to get into, and sometimes things that are life altering. It's naivity in the most basic sense of the word. Look at Plano, TX in the 90's till now. Heroin, alcohol, meth and anabolic steroids have jacked that town up. Mind you, it's the epitome of suburbia complete with soccer moms, community churches and high dollar homes. Jason, when kids get jacked on whatever they find, it has nothing to do with the political definitions of liberal or conservative. It really doesn't have a political standing. Liberal Democrats had nothing to do with these people choosing this path and neither did Conservative Republicans for that matter. It's a failure of the parents to provide a strong foundation for these slacker jackasses who squander everything to remain in limbo between adolescence and manhood. A failure of establishing and sticking to priorities in life. Dude, I thought you were going to slam slackers everywhere with your article for what they were, not for who you think is responsible for their current set of circumstances. I was looking for more wisdom from the leader of this discussion. But hey, it's your post...

Why guyland? Simple, men in the U.S. have become second class citizens and they know it. Laws are passed that directly impact men's status, livelihoods and reputations but require none of the normal due processes that criminal laws demand. Society has also done a bang-up job of infantilizing our young men and women; keeping them "underage" long after nature has made them capable of sexual activity and reproduction, and devaluing marriage to the point it becomes financial suicide for any male. Have a kid, welcome to letting the State into your home, and pray your girlfriend or spouse never so much as accuses you of abuse or wrongdoing, that's all it takes to be a criminal and suffer real consequences, evidence not required. Get married? Hope you don't mind being a second fiddle to your spouse, and welcome to a place where the State dictates you a criminal if your divorced and broke, unable to support your family, but you're not if you stay married. The Hippie, Yuppie generation is still around, soaking up all the resources and keeping us out of higher end jobs as if they have some eternal rights to do so. What a useless bunch of trash all of them are. What they've told us all our lives is to work for nothing and pay the way for everyone else, F*** Y** All.

Maybe these young slackers that this article talks about aren't really lazy or directionless, maybe they're just ahead of the curve. Maybe there is a reason they don't want a career or the typical nuclear family. Yes, men in America have become second class citizens, the laws and society are stacked against them now. It's funny how the author of the article talks about pornography being splashed across dorm rooms and workplace computers. My former supervisor was nearly fired because he had a photo of a girl in a bikini on the beach as the wallpaper on his computer. No nudity, no sexual situation, but a female co-worker found it "offensive". A different female co-worker lifted up her sweater and exposed her breasts at a company party with no punishment given. Today men only find true peace when they hang out with other men that they know are like them. I will be 42 next month and I have never been married. Not because I didn't want to get married, but because I didn't want to go through the hell of divorce I watched my parents endure. I have never had any kids, not because I didn't want a family but because I didn't want to be broke for the rest of my life. I never had a real "career" because I have only recently decided what I wanted to do for the rest of my life and because I wouldn't bow to pressure from my family or teachers. I say hats off to these young men. Yes, girls are trying to be more like them in order to spend time with them. That's called payback from a man's point of view. As far as these young men hating real Women, why should they "grow up" in order to have a relationship with someone that's just going to boss them around, divorce them and ruin their lives?

Yay! Just when I thought the myth of adolescense was bad enough to ruin whole generations of human beings, they've come up with something new to warp the world.

Nurture respect, expect adults to act like adults, value dependability/mature behavior, rebuke idiocy as idiocy, and you know what you'll get? Adults. Do the opposite; get jerks--garaunteed!

Sixteen year olds are ready to be adults--if they are properly groomed in late childhood. Think of past generations (they didn't even live long enough to blow "real life" off until their 40's!) Our society worships eternal youth, it despises any reminder that we must one day grow up and eventually DIE.

Yes, I said it. We're all going to die. No one gets out of that deal. But, that isn't a bad thing. Death gives way to new life, and new life brings new hope and new possibilities. Few want to accept it, though. Too many want to live forever, want to forget about responsibility, family, Moral Law, God, and the things that matter most about being alive.

Society is conspiring to hold back time, to perpetuate myths like guyland and adolescence at a time when the whole damn world desperately needs real grown-ups. Sad.

I would just like to post a response to Jason Sanders 68. I would definitely consider myself a liberal rather than a conservative, and the fact that you are a conservative is just fine with me. This great country we live in enables you that freedom of choice, for now anyway. And I'm not going to lie to you Jason, I could be ALOT less lazy than I am. As far as your beliefs in hard work, family, and religion are concerned, I give you, in the parlance of this so-called "Guyland", props. The fact that you were able to be a homeowner at age 18 is truly astounding, and I do admire that to an extent.

But I disagree with you on a couple things. I don't want to get nasty about it. I would just like to present my opposing viewpoint. You discussed how the conservatives would buy expensive houses and cars and enjoy life, if they can afford it. Well, if material objects are what it takes for you to truly enjoy life, then I feel sorry for you my friend. As far as your 22 years of full-time experience at your job, don't get too comfortable. The man who is known as the President of the United States, (a conservative, yeah?), has dramatically increased the amount of jobs being shipped overseas, and years put in mean absolutely nothing when it comes to companies saving money. My mother had 37 years put in at Chrysler, and not only was her job out-sourced to a cheaper, more unqualified company, but she was expected to be happy about it. Too many people are very lazy and don't work hard, this is true. But, then again, too many people work too hard, placing their loyalty to a company that would drop them like a bad habit if they could save fifteen cents.

Also, since you broke the cardinal rule, please allow me to retort that point as well sir. It is true, Mr. Obama does not have executive experience. But, I know someone else who had no business managing the country, and he's been doing just that for eight years, (if that's what you want to call it). I myself live in Michigan, and I don't think I need to tell you the kind of proverbial s**t storm we're seeing here. Our beloved President, (ha!), has proved his management skills in several businesses, and almost all of them, including the U.S.A., have suffered as a result of his inexperienced "leadership". If you ask me, I think Mr. Bush would be a better representative of "Guyland" than Mr. Obama. He was born into money, strong sense of privilege, graduated from Yale, partied way too much, and couldn't find a complete sentence with two hands and a flashlight. So on that note, Mr. Obama couldn't do much worse. Personally, I think a severely impaired llama could do a better job, but that's just me being bitter. I guess I still have some growing up to do!

I appreciate that you want to be responsible for your successes and your failures. Congratulations, it's called being a man. But if I die a pauper and my integrity is intact, then everything will be just fine in my eyes. I know that you see it differently, but, once again, that is your right. Oh, and just for the record, I am 27, living in a one bedroom apartment, working full time at a law firm, and I am also the owner of a clean conscience. I'm not trying to say that your conscience is unclean. But from my experience with conservatives as a whole, money and possessions come first, people are a far second, and the very fiber of my being would never allow me to think that way. After all, we can see what that sort of attitude has done for the country in the last eight years. Ah, conservatives; all that money isn't going to repair that hole in your soul, (not you personally Jason, you're a stand up guy in my book, sir).

And I want to mention: I've got nothing against getting your party on, but how about a little moderation? Playtime is a reward for solid, meaningful worktime. You CAN be a grown up and enjoy life. The only thing is, you have to realize 1) when to work 2) when to party 3) what's NEVER okay to do 4) how to put the toys away when you're finished.

The constant desire to play is NOT healthy. It never HAS been, it never WILL be.

Oh, and, by the way, read Humanae Vitae sometime. I mean, REALLY read it. Then, you tell me how wrong the Church was about people.

Seems like they had everyone dead to rights. Seriously, people like to laugh at religion. Religion isn't the problem--not by a long shot. Self-help over wisdom, instant/constant/endless fun over everything else...it's like the island of the freaking Donkey Boys out there sometimes...and everyone's running around making asses out of themselves, but no one seems to care.

its time to re-introduce military conscription at 18.

guyland never ends

I have to say this seems like the latest "our youth are going to hell in a hand basket" story someone dreamed up to sell books. This old canard has been around forever. When our parents were kids the generation before them said the same thing. The WW2 generation surely thought that the baby boomer generation was going to ruin the country after the excesses of the 60s. But amazingly enough we seem to be doing just fine. There are problems with every generation but we get through them.

I have to question why the author feels like someone should be married with kids and know exactly what they want out of life by 26 years old. Just my opinion, but most of us probably don't want to be married and aren't ready for a family at 26. I bet our parents weren't either as evidenced by the ridiculous divorce rate across all demographics. I didn't get married until I was 30 and didn't have my first child until 31. A big part of the reason that I didn't get married and have kids at 26 was that not only did I not feel that I hadn't found the right person, but I also didn't feel that I could provide financially until I was a little older and making a little more money. Just my two cents, but this story seems to be a classic molehill made into a mountain.

As a women who is nearing ANTI-Feminism, I really believe that young men have no direction because they haven't been given any. Men are simple. They need to feel validated. They need to know that what they do makes a real impact. There is no lady to stand up for, there is no family to protect. The women can do it all on there own now. And we see that in our single mother culture. Women are running even more rampant than ever, trying to do it and discovering when we are 40 that we can't.The idea that women did not need a man has left our young men with totally undefined roles. Even if we want to move from the rigidness of earlier times, we still need to define what we want and need from these young men.

Young girls are out there kickin it with the boys, but the toll is different. STD's, unplanned pregnancy and abortions have real emotional tolls. These girls act like boys but when the emotions kick in, they can't handle them. These girls find out how unfair it all is in the hardest way. They are truly on their own. I hardly even hear people ask young moms where the father is anymore!

Men will never narturally have babies or breasts with milk. They will always be men. If society doesn't define them, they will become the wondering men with no commitment. Women may be able to vote, we may even vote topless, but what have we learned from the movement except more responsibility? Our men have been demasculated. We spend a lot of time talking about womens needs, but we should spend time talking about our men and how important they are too us.

The military is a group that is specifically called out by this Sociologist. I happen to be in the military and within the age bracket defined. I understand what he is saying about the boys' club, but I think his idea was completely stolen from the book/movie Fight Club. The difference is that his agenda seems to be another attempt to villify men in this society. In typical sociologist fashion, he made a broad generalization about a group of people after hearing what he wanted to hear instead of analyzing what is really going on.

Men are losing a sense of purpose in their lives. I went to combat and even after serving in Iraq and finishing college, I am not buying into what this country is currently selling. I hold a job and have had a meaningful relationship, but commercialism/materialism, broken television promises, and women who barely respect us are all that we have to look forward to. Why wouldn't men find comfort among each other? They are chastized for acting too much like men by the Dr. Phils and Super-feminists of the world. After all, it's not strong women we fear, it is overbearing women. The ones on the shows where Fathers are portrayed as schmucks or doormats by the current media only sufficient enough to provide comic relief as the butt of the joke. Why would a man want this for himself? It is a public neutering that we are witnessing.

Listen, I understand the need for men to be knocked down a peg by a society seeking more equality among its citizens, but we are currently seeing the unintended consequences of a disillusioned group of people who are searching for a purpose in a country that does not have one for them--apart from buying more junk and dying in combat, that is. This may be a sign that we are going about this the wrong way and that we need to re-evaluate our methods of attaining equality. Let's face it people, there are two sexes for a reason. It is a symbiotic relationship...the destruction of one means the end of the other.

I know quite a few guys that live like everyday is a party, but most of my friends (including myself) work hard and have done so all our lives. Most of us haven't stopped working since 14 or 16, currently we work full time jobs and attend school at night. Those of us that have served in the military have completed at least 3 tours in Iraq or Afghanistan and have been honorably discharged.The "guys" described by the author are the ones constantly coddled by their parents, detest any kind of hard work, usually middle or upper class and have no idea how to survive on their own. Society seems to silently applaud this behavior with their pointless TV shows(ie. reality TV, The Hills, The OC and assorted movies).

I'd be so embarrassed if my parents took out loans for me or borrowed against their home just to go to school and party, Or if I still lived at home past the age of 24. I really think the author didn't select a diverse pool of young men in his research. After all, anyone trying to do something worth while will not be found in bars, frat houses,living with their parents or spending most of their days in a drunken stupor.

I am 30, and I was never the popular kid on the block in school or in the University. I never really liked smoking or drinking alcohol. I struggled studying medicine and passing all the exams to come to the US to continue working in a specialized area. I always felt pushed away and unloved by society for thinking quite differently.
I think media is accountable for the way our society functions now.
In this realm, the person who reads or who is responsible is regarded as "geek" or "homosexual" and this is disintegrating society.
I think it would be good to think things over and put things back on track.

Bravo James. After reading these posts where, even here, some have tried to turn this into a red vs blue thing, somebody who hits it right on the mark.
This is a problem, I don't think it's just the latest generational issue of the kids going to "h*ll in a handbasket". We have to stop listening to the idiots in the media, and I mean all of them, and start thinking for ourselves and each other. Otherwise I truly do think we are seeing the decline of our civilization. And if you think of the base of that word "civil", you will see that everything "guyland" stands for is that antithesis of it.

This is really sad, but maybe the problem goes back to the parents. We need to teach our boys to be responsible citizens and to respect themselves and women. If we pay for a college education for a boy who parties all the time, gets poor grades, has no career goals, and totally disrespects women, then who's fault is that?
The first time the kid comes home from college with poor grades, he should be warned - shape up, start studying, or you'll be coming home and going to a community college and getting a part-time job. It's fine to have some fun, but contrary to some people's thinking, going to college at a parent's expense is a PRIVILEDGE, and one not to be abused.
I refuse to believe that the IDIOTS we see depicted in tv sitcoms are the norm, and if they are, we'd better start changing things if America wants to keep up with other cultures.

I have to agree with Charlie. And this problem doesn't just affect guys. I teach at a major university in Arizona and I see it everyday in girls and women. There could just as easily be an entire book about "girlland". I have a cohort who may never grow up. At 40 she is stuck in a grad school mentality. She acts like a 27yo., doesn't take responsibility for herself, is lonely because she goes through friend after friend who actually does leave and grow up eventually, and can't seem to stop sucking off the proverbial "family teet". She has no drive, is too busy looking at science fiction garbage on the internet to get anything done at work, no ability to settle down with anyone and is a royal pain in the bum because she micro-manages everyone around her instead of herself. These are the days of children never growing up because they are not forced to taked ahold of their lives. Life is too easy and mommy and daddy will bail them out. It's not a political ideology that has caused this. It's too much affluence in a society that has decided that it can sit back on its haunches and relax. The rest of the world is still having to work hard to produce and our kids seem to think they just don't have to. If you want to blame anything, it's having too much too quickly, and the entitlement that starts at the age of 4 when Christmas comes around and kids want everything they see and begin to get it with regularity.

I would not go so far as to say that men are the new "inferior sex", but I do agree that the emphasis on "grrl power" has become a monster gone out of control. There has to be balance, and more respect between the genders. You can't have an even playing field when one gender is continually de-valued, be it men or women!

Also another thing: It's ironic that this sociologist is defining College in America as Guyland, when the vast majority of major universities are (according to the USDOE) 58% female in enrollment!

Guys, you had better grow a pair and accept the fact there are radicals on the campuses who will teach, preach, and advocate positions that define males as the villains. Get tough, and have the strength to rebut it all, but as gentlemen, and not as woman-hating animals! Get in there, get your education, and remember that part of growing up to be a man means STANDING UP TO WOMEN when they are misinformed about men or flat out wrong! And -- if you try -- you can do it without calling them bitches (which is what many of them hope you call them because it solidifies and validates their misguided and only half-true conclusions about men in general).

I love women, by the way, even when they are dead wrong. I recently celebrated 21 years of marriage.

My day job is doing child suppport orders which should be renamed the you messed up or out
of luck event. If a dude wants to hang out a little longer today before settling down or putting
his nose to the grindstone I say do it. CS today is 25% of your gross...Your GROSS...that
is just the basic calculation. Divorce split up percent: 40-50. Odds are you going to be paying
paying paying. And guess what she cuts off the sex after the kidz come. To talk about this
after the spectacle of Ellen Degeneres "marriage" highlighted here on this site and all the rest of the garbage in the USA one is subjected to. F it. We are living older. We wil have 2.1 kidz. My advise
is check out those apples and it is ok to be very hard nose before considering settling down
for your sanity and wallet. Delay is not a bad idea when your next stop is Niagara falls in a
rubber raft or a rubber suit if you survive. And please no sanctimonious comments I pick up
debris every day. And it's sad.
One client I know in NJ put a rope around his kneck because he didn't want to go back to jail.
He couldn't pay his $1200 a month cs order. Nice quiet fellow. Obviously depressed.
Whoever remembers him?
The kids today are to be commended for keeping it together. Don't let these idiots take you
off center. When it's time you'll know it. Keep your own counsel and be strong.

As a single woman over 40, I think the description of Guyland should extend to single men in a much older age range. I had a great marriage for 18 years that ended with the ugly death of my husband due to cancer. (My husband was not the norm for men his age.) During his 16 mo. illness, he could not care for himself, and I wiped his butt, fed & bathed him, gave him his medication, changed his clothing, sheets, and his Depends while trying not to lose my job. Fast forward two years, and I would like to date a good man, but I find men my age and older are self-absorbed. They don't want a long-term relationship. Instead, they want a sexy exciting materialistic woman, not one who is responsible and genuine. I am financially solvent, easy-going, have a sense of humor, am not overweight or ugly, but no one is interested. The men I meet want to show me how physically fit they are, that they ride a Harley, or they take a photo of themselves with their truck.--Most are completely empty when it comes to being a real human being with any depth. Those who have depth are married.

I would term the young men you describe as evolution in action. They will never achieve anything of worth to them or society. Such losers have no place in our society since they contribute nothing. Fortunately they are in the minority. Most of the young men that I know are hard working, sober and have a sense of purpose. I have four grandsons, three are real winners and one is as described, drinks all night, sleeps till noon and wonders why he is failing in college. He has no place in my company or will.

You know what's especially maddening about these "Guyland" grads? It's that they've never shown any kind of work ethic; sense of responsibility; worldview beyond their own satyr-like days; or particular intelligence, but they've got that college degree, and they will be the ones getting the good job offers down the road, even though they spent four years primarily partying and refusing to grow up.

Because they're not only often living with Mommy and Daddy, or having their tuition paid by them, but because they have no "real life" expenses, they get offered internships that lead to fast-track jobs in less than a year, while working people with better qualifications but who need to earn a salary are left behind.

It used to be that a college degree was evidence of maturity, intelligence, and problem-solving capability. All it is now is a private password into the speakeasy of job interviews.

This comment is for Michael Kimmel and Kathleen Parker, the authors.

Girls in Guyland — Babes in Boyland: Thoughts from the fifties.

"Girls can even be guys — if they know something about sports..."
So if a girl likes sports she must be trying to be a guy? No, I don't think so.

"Some of the girls have mastered the slouching look, the indifferent affect, the contemptuous attitude, the swaggering posture, the foul language, and the aggressive behaviors of guys."
There would've been females acting like that years ago if we wouldn't have been ridiculed for it.

"Since Guyland is often the only game in town, who can blame them if they indulge in a little — or a lot — of what I call "guyification?"
It's not 'guyification', that's just how some females are. Those are their manners and that's what makes them comfortable. If anything, it's a completely sexist thing to say that just because guys attitudes have changed throughout the generations that females have only changed to better associate with males. Stop trying to categorize people by their reproductive organs instead of their character and individuality.

"Observe a group of college-age women. It's likely they're wearing jeans, T-shirts, oversized sweatshirts, running shoes or sandals — guy wear."
God forbid females leave the house without our poodle skirts and Mary Jane's.

"If not, they'll be wearing thong underwear, skimpy mini T-shirts that leave their midriffs bare, and super tight pants, leggings, or miniskirts."
Maybe if you weren't so blind to a females way of thinking you would find out that chances are, a woman dressing like that is thinking she looks good. She's not thinking "This will get a lot of guys to notice me. Yay!"

"A few think that they can achieve equality by imitating guys' behaviors — by running circles around them on the athletic field or matching them drink for drink or sexual hookup for hookup."
So, basically, we should go back to how females were acting in the late forties and early fifties because apparently women's liberation only caused us to mimic men. I mean, it's not like we actually like to do things like track & field, go to bars or have hookups. We're obviously just trying to earn men's respect.

"And sexual equality is hardly achieved when she is willing to perform oral sex on his entire group of friends."
No @!$%#, Sherlock. There's always going to be promiscuous people throughout life. Hey guess what though? We're not all the same person so you really shouldn't categorize us that way. It's funny, too, that if a guy did that he would be viewed the same as if he didn't do it.

"And most girls also know the motto "Bros Before Hos."
A motto that we also have for our fellow sisters.

"Girls live in Guyland, but they do not define it. They contend with it and make their peace with it, each in their own way."
I can barely contain my contempt with how old-school thinking this comment is. Grow up and accept the fact that it is not us contending with 'guyland', it's simply us with the rights and the acceptance to act the way we want, whether it be watching a football game or wearing a short skirt. Do us girls a favor and stick to the boys for your book.

I'm not trying to criticize the book, it's just completely misguided when it comes to this section.