The Decline of Males

Paperback: 336 pages;
Publisher: Golden Books 1999, St. Martins 2000
ISBN: 0312263112

Buy this book at Amazon.com

From the Back Cover
"This provocative book raises questions about the awesome influences of nanotechnology and genetic engineering on the future of human sexuality and social structure. Highly recommended." (Library Journal)

"Lionel Tiger, a pioneer of biological anthropology and developer of the concept of male bonding, here delivers a very well-researched and well-written brief for masculinism, which if successful, may gain parity with feminism and eventually transform women's studies within academia into what they should have always been, namely, gender studies." (Edward O. Wilson, author of Consilience and Pellegrino University Research Professor, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University)

"This book, written without the ideological blinkers that obscure most contemporary discussions of gender, is full of incredible nuance and insight that will reward careful reading." (Francis Fukuyama, author of Trust and The End of History and the Last Man, and Hirst Professor of Public Policy, George Mason University)

"In an utterly persuasive book that must change the discourse on sexual politics, Lionel Tiger offers his startling perspective on humanity's future. By giving women unprecedented control of human reproduction, the new technologies of conception and contraception have already put men well on the way to becoming tomorrow's 'second sex'-with no reversal in sight." (Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism? and W.H. Brady Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research)

"The Decline of Males is an extremely well and clearly written and powerfully argued account of the changing relations between men and women. The distinguished anthropologist, claims that the male faces obsolescence... I hope that the book is unduly alarmist, but I fear that it may not be." (Richard A. Posner, author of Sex and Reason and chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit)

"The Decline of Males will perhaps be tarred with the brush of 'backlash,' but it is no such thing. Lionel Tiger's vivid, readable account will help us all move forward to a time when equality between the sexes does not have to be achieved at the expense of men, children, and families." (Melvin Konner, author of Becoming a Doctor and The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit, and professor of anthropology, Emory University)

Amazon.com
Biological anthropologist Lionel Tiger, best known for developing the concept of male bonding in Men in Groups, offers what he calls "a chronicle of the decline of men and the ascendancy of women." If there were a male counterpart to feminism--masculinism?--this is where it would be found. Profound social changes over the last several decades are rooted in reproductive technology, which "has given enormous general power to women that has been translated beyond the family sphere," says Tiger. This is not an unequivocally positive development, he believes, and it has led to a slew of problems that include general family breakdown. The book is occasionally alarmist, yet there is also a freshness to its argument.

The Decline of Males is a nonsexist brief on behalf of men, and it includes a number of interesting observations. As women play a larger role in public life, men are looking for new ways to be male. "Perhaps the apparent explosion of interest in sports and pornography means that men are trying to find new outlets to express their inherent maleness, which they may feel otherwise obligated to repress," writes Tiger. Several of his proposals are politically naive, but intriguing in how they blend conservative and liberal ideas. Tiger, for example, thinks men should earn higher pay for the children they have during a first marriage, and that unmarried women with children should receive welfare without having to work. The Decline of Males will fascinate some readers and exasperate others, yet all will agree it makes a unique intellectual contribution to the ongoing sex wars. --John J. Miller

From Scientific American
"The news overall is that women are taking firmer control of their destinies," Tiger declares. The result he sees is that men are losing their ancient position of dominance. How has this shift come about? Tiger, a professor of anthropology at Rutgers University, says the fundamental reason is that "through effective contraception--for the first time in history--one sex can control the reproductive process." And so "more women are having children without men, and therefore more men are without the love of families. Women as a group are working more and earning more. Men are working less and earning less." Moreover, women are now graduating from college at higher rates than men (a trend that will affect the future of employment) and have begun to vote in patterns distinctly different from the voting tendencies of men (a trend that will affect government and public dialogue). As for men, "what is under way is so imprecise but so general and atmospheric they do not realize what is happening to them."

From Kirkus Reviews
The mad social scientist of biological reductionism is up to his old tricks again. Tiger, the anthropologist who 30 years ago brought us the notion of ``male bonding'' (in Men in Groups, 1969) returns once again to a biological argument to explain the ``declining'' influence of men in modern society. Tiger's theoretical premise is egregiously essentialist to those with a background in cultural theory (he likens these social scientists to Christian Scientists in relation to medicine)we must ``understand basic human nature'' before we can talk about economic, political, psychiatric, or feminist theories. In this particular instance, he wishes to relate the declining role of men in society to the advent of birth control, which puts reproductive power in the hands of women. His argument is stringently antifeministhe calls feminism ``female-ism'' and implies that we are caught up in the midst of a shift from male production to female reproduction. The basic implication is that if women stayed home and had babies, they would maintain the support and comfort of their husbands, they would continue to vote in the same manner as their husbands, and men and women would be less at polar extremes in the productive marketplace. Men are seen as cut out of the reproductive agreement due to the rise of hidden contraception, and thus they are rendered redundant and out of control. Tiger actually praises ``welfare queens,'' whom he sees as rising up and revolting by staying home and out of the economyto raise their children (conveniently ignoring the messy social, historical, and economic ramifications involved). One of the more annoying aspects of Tiger's style is that he constantly employs cultural examples in an attempt to support his biological argumentshe goes as far as employing the religious story of Jesus birth to explain the biological ``foundations of human emotionality.'' If you didn't buy the notion that male patterns of behavior are imprinted on a genetic level, then you probably won't buy this one either. -- Copyright ©1999, Kirkus Associates, LP. All rights reserved.