The conversation about boys and men has undergone a dramatic shift. What was once considered controversial territory - discussing male struggles without diminishing women’s issues - has become increasingly mainstream. Richard Reeves, President of the American Institute for Boys and Men and author of “Of Boys and Men,” argues that we’ve moved past the “either/or” framing to embrace an “and” approach: we can address men’s challenges while continuing to support women empowerment.

This evolution matters because the data reveals troubling trends that demand attention. Men account for 70% of suicides and 70% of drug overdose deaths in the United States. Since 2001, deaths from drug poisoning among men have increased sixfold - a loss of 400,000 additional men, equivalent to American World War II casualties. Meanwhile, in education, girls now comprise two-thirds of the top 10% of high school students by GPA, while boys make up two-thirds of the bottom 10%.

The Permission Space Opens

The shift in discourse reflects what Reeves calls the expansion of “permission space” - the cultural room to discuss male struggles without being accused of undermining feminism. This change hasn’t happened overnight. For years, even mentioning boys’ educational lag or men’s mental health crisis risked being dismissed as misogynistic backlash.

“Once you get past the ‘or’ - it’s women or men - and you get into the ‘and,’ that we have to rise together, then that’s a big unlock,” Reeves explains. “Once you make that move, everybody wants to talk about it. Everybody has sons they’re worried about, husbands they’re worried about, brothers they’re interested in.”

The permission space has expanded partly because the problems have become undeniable. When two-thirds of psychologists and social workers are women - down from roughly gender parity just decades ago - and when male teachers have dropped to just 23% in K-12 education, the trends speak for themselves.

Understanding Overlapping Distributions

A major barrier to productive conversation has been the inability to discuss gender differences without triggering accusations of stereotyping. Reeves uses height as an analogy: saying “men are taller than women” doesn’t mean all men are taller than all women, but rather describes overlapping distributions with meaningful differences in averages.

This concept proves crucial when discussing everything from risk-taking behavior to educational approaches. Men’s higher risk tolerance, for instance, can lead to both heroic acts of service and destructive gambling addiction. The trait itself isn’t inherently good or bad - context determines whether it serves society positively.

“We are too quick to just point to something like video games and say that’s the cause of the detachment of men,” Reeves notes. “I’m more inclined to think that it’s the consequence of the detachment of men.” Young men aren’t choosing digital escape routes because they’re lazy or irresponsible - it is because they lack clear pathways to purpose and connection in the real world.

The Class Dimension

The crisis affects different groups of men unequally. For men without college degrees, wages have remained stagnant since 1979 - nearly half a century of economic treading water. Among working-class men in their thirties and forties, only about half live with children, representing a significant decline in family connection.

“The sharp edge of the issues facing boys and men is absolutely being felt by the men with the least economic power,” Reeves observes. While college-educated men continue seeing wage growth and career advancement, working-class men face a perfect storm of economic displacement, family disconnection, and social isolation.

This class dynamic explains why the conversation feels different depending on the audience. In affluent, educated circles, male struggles can seem abstract or overstated. In working-class communities, the problems are viscerally obvious. The opioid crisis, the rise in male homelessness (men comprise 70% of the unsheltered homeless population), and the epidemic of “deaths of despair” all disproportionately affect men with fewer economic resources.

The Representation Gap

One of the most concerning trends is the feminization of crucial helping professions. The share of male psychologists has dropped from 56% in 1971 to just 20% today. Male social workers have declined similarly, creating a system where boys and men seeking mental health support encounter primarily female providers.

“It matters because, for many men, boys, depending on the nature of their issue, they may well find it easier to talk to a male therapist or a male psychologist,” Reeves explains. This isn’t about the superiority of either gender in these roles, but about providing options that work for different people.

The teaching profession shows similar patterns. Male teachers now comprise minorities in virtually every subject, including traditionally male-dominated areas like career and technical education. This sends implicit messages about who belongs in educational spaces and can deprive boys of same-gender role models during crucial developmental years.

The Dating and Relationship Challenge

Economic and social changes have fundamentally altered dating dynamics, creating new pressures for young men. Women’s socioeconomic independence - a positive development - has changed what partners seek from each other. The old breadwinner model has collapsed, but no clear replacement has emerged.

“What women are looking for, by and large, isn’t a trad husband so that they can be a trad wife,” Reeves notes. “What they are looking for is someone who has agency, who has skill, and who has commitment.” Young women want partners who demonstrate competence and engagement, whether as stay-at-home fathers, community leaders, or career professionals.

The challenge is that many young men struggle to develop these qualities in an economy and culture that no longer provides clear pathways to adult responsibility. Traditional male roles have been disrupted faster than new ones have emerged, leaving many young men navigating contradictory cultural messages about appropriate masculinity.

The Online Influence Problem

The internet has created new challenges and opportunities for young men seeking identity and purpose. Figures like Andrew Tate gain followings by offering simple answers to complex problems, often promoting misogynistic views alongside legitimate concerns about male struggles.

The solution, Reeves argues, isn’t to create “progressive Andrew Tates” or ban problematic content, but to strengthen real-world relationships. “The way to beat the online world is offline, is in real life,” he explains. “You can beat an Andrew Tate video with a classroom exercise or a hike up a mountain with your scout group any day of the week.”

This approach requires having men present in boys’ lives - as teachers, coaches, mentors, and family members. When boys have positive male role models in real life, they’re less susceptible to toxic online influences. The absence of such figures creates a vacuum that internet personalities can fill.

The Value of Single-Sex Spaces

Contrary to assumptions, well-designed single-sex spaces don’t amplify gender stereotypes - they help balance them out. Girl Scouts emphasizes leadership and STEM engagement, while Boy Scouts traditionally focused on teamwork, service, and emotional development.

“Boys’ spaces, whether it’s teams or scouts, actually help boys learn to love, learn to care, learn to be of service, think about other people,” Reeves explains. These environments allow boys to develop nurturing skills without the performance pressures present in co-ed settings.

The communication patterns matter too. Men typically communicate more comfortably shoulder-to-shoulder rather than face-to-face. Activities like sports, hiking, or building projects create natural opportunities for meaningful conversation without the threatening dynamic of confrontation.

Positive Masculinity Without Hierarchy

The challenge of discussing positive masculine traits lies in avoiding the implication that they’re superior to feminine characteristics. Men’s higher risk tolerance can produce both heroes and reckless endangerment. Women’s risk aversion can produce both careful decision-making and missed opportunities. Society benefits from both approaches.

“We won’t get to equality through androgyny,” Reeves argues. “The differences will, at some level, remain. They’ll become less important, but we can’t airbrush the differences away.” The goal isn’t to make men and women identical, but to ensure both can contribute their strengths while developing areas of growth.

Fathers, for example, appear to have particular strengths in helping children develop independence and risk assessment skills. They get the same oxytocin boost as mothers when bonding with children, but often through different activities - throwing kids in the air rather than cuddling. Neither approach is superior; both contribute to healthy child development.

Solutions and Policy Responses

Addressing these challenges requires systemic responses, not just individual responsibility. Several governors have begun implementing targeted policies: increasing male representation in mental health workforces, expanding suicide prevention programs for young men, and recruiting more male teachers.

Educational reforms might include better vocational training (which tends to attract more men), later school start times (which could help boys’ different developmental timeline), and teaching methods that accommodate different learning styles. Healthcare expansion should prioritize fields where men are underrepresented but jobs are growing.

“We’ve got to find ways to make the jobs we stereotypically now see as female in areas like healthcare and education, and opening them up to men is a win-win-win,” Reeves argues. These professions need workers, patients, and students to benefit from diverse providers, and men need access to growing job markets.

The Political Dimension

The 2024 election results highlighted these issues’ political relevance, with young men shifting notably toward Republican candidates. This trend reflects not just policy preferences but cultural alienation. Many young men feel caught between progressive messages that seem to blame them for societal problems and conservative appeals to return to traditional gender roles.

Neither response adequately addresses modern realities. “The solution to the problems of men is not to go back,” Reeves emphasizes. “We have to go forward.” This requires creating new models of masculine contribution that work within, rather than against, gender equality.

Moving Forward Together

The ultimate goal isn’t men’s liberation versus women’s liberation, but human flourishing that recognizes both shared humanity and meaningful differences. Families, communities, and workplaces function best when both men and women can contribute their full range of capabilities.

“It should be blindingly obvious that if men are struggling, that will be bad for the women in their lives,” Reeves concludes. “And if women are held back, if women’s opportunities are constrained, that is bad for their sons and their daughters and their husbands.”

This integrated approach offers hope for moving beyond zero-sum gender politics toward collaborative solutions. By acknowledging men’s struggles without undermining women’s advancement, society can work toward the equality both movements ultimately seek - one where everyone can contribute their best selves to the common good.

The conversation has evolved from asking whether men’s issues matter to figuring out how to address them effectively. That represents genuine progress, even as the implementation has only just begun.