Document Type


Publication Date





This article argues that much of what has been described as “the end of men” is in fact the recreation of class. Greater inequality among men and among women has resurrected class differences and changed the way men and women relate to each other and channel resources to their children. While women have in fact gained ground in the workplace and acquired greater ability to live, work, play and raise children without men, a mere relative move towards sex equality only masks the more fundamental changes occurring in American society and the continuing existence of patriarchy. First, the improved freedom women enjoy does not translate into greater power at the top. Greater societal inequality has instead offset these changes by increasing elite male dominance, marginalizing women in the in the executive ranks and the most prestigious professional circles, and ceding political power to a conservative elite that has removed women’s issues from the public agenda. At the height of the era that supposedly marks the “end of men,” the gendered wage gap has been increasing for college graduates even as it declines for everyone else. In a winner-takes-most world, the disproportionate rewards go to the alpha dogs who remain overwhelmingly male. Second, the genuine decline of working class men does not necessarily benefit women. Instead, it means that an increasing number of women in middle American have little choice but to raise families on their own as the men in their lives become less reliable. As society become more unequal, it writes off a greater percentage of men to imprisonment, chronic unemployment, substance abuse and mental instability. The women left with low-paying but stable jobs at Walmart or Burger King have trouble finding partners who can either contribute enough to make the relationship worthwhile or who will assist the new female breadwinner who both brings home the bacon and cooks it. These women have independence but neither power nor help at home. In short, over the past several decades, men have lost ground everywhere but the top, increasing male inequality; and, while women have gained in the middle and the bottom, they are not equal – anywhere – because men retain “structural power” over women. Accordingly, we conclude that for the end of men to be a meaningful concept that describes a more egalitarian society, we must decrease economic inequality: the result would translate greater power for women into a better deal for men and greater investment in all children.

GW Paper Series

GWU Law School Public Law Research Paper No. 2012-148; GWU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-148

Included in

Law Commons