brookings, richard reeves written a very good book on the precarious state of boys. a lot of the same information i had that mortenson had way back the eighties. and now he's setting up a center for the study of men and boys. what? i don't have much time. but just to say what the forces against us. why is one prepared to listen? one thing i think the schools of education are a big problem. they are carried away with an agenda that does not include, you know, specialties in how to save boys. there's an article by lyle asher, a scholar in the chronicle of higher education in 2008, called how schools of education became a menace. and they so carried away with with what? well, i once heard on a french radio show, that blue pc, kazaa are two more. more politically correct than that you die more politically correct than our schools of education. and boys are not politically correct. schools education are not addressing the problem they are not teaching teachers how to be engaged the male mind. our schools do a much better job educate girls than boys, but that is not seen a

scott but others would push back on me with this old fashioned notion, including richard reeves, this old fashioned that men have to be breadwinners. yeah, right. yes. that you will not hear me. push back. okay. however, will push back on what other economists are probably anticipating. i think make a strong point at some point in the book that the gains to marriage for women depend kind of on the outside option. and so since women can, you know, are in more occupations that are higher paying these days, are able to support more, are able to support themselves on their own and that affects kind of how the decision to marry or not marry looks. another thing has changed over time is that the safety net has gotten quite a bit more generous. not so much with cash, welfare benefits as you talk about in the book, but with everything else, there's there's been a big expansion over 40, 50 years. you sort of are dismissive of the idea that that the generosity of the state could have played a role in some of these declines in marriage over time what you say to to to those those arguments. i thi

scott but others would push back on me with this old fashioned notion, including richard reeves, this old fashioned that men have to be breadwinners. yeah, right. yes. that you will not hear me. push back. okay. however, will push back on what other economists are probably anticipating. i think make a strong point at some point in the book that the gains to marriage for women depend kind of on the outside option. and so since women can, you know, are in more occupations that are higher paying these days, are able to support more, are able to support themselves on their own and that affects kind of how the decision to marry or not marry looks. another thing has changed over time is that the safety net has gotten quite a bit more generous. not so much with cash, welfare benefits as you talk about in the book, but with everything else, there's there's been a big expansion over 40, 50 years. you sort of are dismissive of the idea that that the generosity of the state could have played a role in some of these declines in marriage over time what you say to to to those those arguments. i thi

a book by richard reeves who we both no and are friends with cold poison men where he chronicles way that boys and men are falling behind in girls and women interestingly, he skirted over that it is a possibility that single parenthood could affect boys differently then girls. but you tackle that in a chapter of your book. say more about the differential impact of growing up with a single mother for boys and girls. >> let me say, i love richard's book and i think he has done a really important thing here by highlighting the struggles of boys. and he does this in a very, definitely making sure to not lament the wonderful advances that women and girls have made. and so he is right to say, we have done all of this. women are doing better and are going to college at higher rates and this is great. but hold on and let's look at what is happening to boys. they are getting in trouble more at school. they are less likely to go to college than young women are graduating high school. they are all sorts of ways that boys are falling behind. you are exactly right. i actually link this very expli

years radio silence, nothing except in the think tanks for the think tanks are doing at brookings richard reeves written a very good book on the precarious state of boys. a lot of the same information that i had that mortensen had back in the 80s and now he is setting up a center for the study of men and boys. i don't have much time but just to save what are the forces against us? why is no one prepared to listen? >> what they think the schools of education or bigat problem. they are carried away with an agenda does not include specialties and how to save boys. there is an article by lyle ash is scholar in the chronicle of higher education cult how schools of education became a menace. they are so carried away that i want hurt on a french radio show weren't politically correct and that you y die. employees are not politically correct route schools of education are not addressing the problem they are not teaching teachers how to be engaged in the mail mind mail mind our school so much better job educating girls than boys. that is not seen a problem worthy ofur addressing i'm not even sure they re

know you didn't push backn this direction scott but others would push back with me including richard reeves old fashion notion that men have sob breadwinners. >>>> yeah. right. you mean not hear me pushback. however, i will push back on those anticipating i think you make a strong point at some point had the book that the game to marriage for women depend kind of on the outside option and so -- says women can, you know, are in more occupations and hire paying these days -- they are able to support themselves on their own that affects kind of how decision to marry or not marry looks and another decision over time is that the safety net has gotten quite a bit more generous not so much with cash welfare benefits as you talk about in the book. everything else -- there's beenel a big expansion over 40, 50 years. you sort of are dismissive of the idea that the generosity of the safety net could have played a role in some of these declines in marriage over time. what would you say to those arguments i think -- well i'lll just -- >> yeah. yeah. so just -- for any viewers steeped in this as you ands