May 9, 2019: Borough President James S. Oddo and Dr. Warren Farrell, co-author of The Boy Crisis announce the creation of the Staten Island Council on Boys and Men.
For Immediate Release
May 8, 2019
Contact: Alexey Chandler
Phone: (718) 816-2198
Staten Island Borough President and Award-Winning Author Warren Farrell, Ph.D., will discuss the revelations in his new book, ‘The Boy Crisis’; Will Announce the Creation of a Borough Hall Council on Boys and Men; Call on the Federal Government to Create a White House Council on Boys and Men
STATEN ISLAND, NY –Staten Island Borough President James S. Oddo will join with Dr. Warren Farrell, co-author of The Boy Crisis, to discuss the Boy Crisis in America and the need for a Borough Hall Council on Boys and Men. Staten Island will become the first government agency attending to the ways we can prevent the boy crisis, with the ultimate goal of creating a White House Council on Boys and Men.
Dr. Farrell is a former board member of the National Organization for Women, and who in 2009 was invited by President Barack Obama to be a leading adviser of what was planned to be a White House Council on Girls and Women. According to Dr. Farrell, “the boy crisis resides where dads do not reside,” and that it was dad-deprived boys behind the vast majority of mass shootings, crimes, and ISIS recruits.
There are 70 different metrics which demonstrate the undeniable truth that a boy crisis exists in America:
- Between the ages of 10 and 14, boys commit suicide at almost twice the rate as girls.
- Between the ages of 15 and 19, boys commit suicide at four times the rate of girls.
- Between the ages of 22 and 24, male suicide is five and six times that of females.
- More black boys between the ages of 10 and 20 are killed by homicide than by the next nine leading causes of death combined.
- While the rate of obesity amongst adolescent girls has stabilized, the rate for boys is increasing.
- Young men have gone from 61 percent obtaining a college degree to a projected 39 percent.
- Our sons are twice as likely as our daughters to be killed by accident.
- We are less likely to read to our sons.
- Women constitute 75 percent of those who seek professional help to prevent suicide; men constitute 75 percent of those who actually do commit suicide.
- Worldwide, boys are 50 percent less likely than girls to meet basic proficiency in reading, math, and science.
- A third of boys are raised in father-absent homes.
- In 1920, American males lived on average only one year less than females; today it is five years less.
WHO: Borough President James S. Oddo, Dr. Warren Farrell, co-author of The Boy Crisis, and community stakeholders
WHAT: Announcement of Staten Island Council on Men and Boys and Call on the Federal Government to create a White House Council on Boys and Men
WHEN: Thursday, May 9th at 11:30am
WHERE: Staten Island Borough Hall, 10 Richmond Terrace, Room 125
To arrange an interview with Dr. Farrell, please contact Kevin McVicker at Shirley & Banister Public Affairs at (703) 739-5920 or email@example.com.
In a USA Today column and video:
“Solutions to the boy crisis must be addressed simultaneously in the family, in schools and by policymakers. To name a few: Parents need communication training to prevent the divorces that breed the boy crisis. Schools need male teachers, vocational education and recess. Presidential candidates need to identify the boy crisis as a signature issue. And President Trump, with an executive order, can create a White House Council on Boys and Men to make the boy crisis a national priority, so millions of parents and sons do not feel isolated and ashamed — but supported to address a solution toward stronger families, more boy-friendly schools, and a more economically and psychologically secure America.” – Warren Farrell, PhD
In a rare interview, Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Jerome Powell, sounded an alarm about the crisis facing young men in the U.S. The solution to this crisis lies in the President’s creation of a White House Council For Boys and Men. In his 60 Minutes interview, Powell tied the crisis facing our young men to several factors. The proposed council could address these factors in a comprehensive and results-oriented fashion. From the transcript:
PELLEY: You mentioned the opioid crisis. It’s that big a problem in the labor force?
POWELL: Yes, it is. The opioid crisis is millions of people. They tend to be young males. And it’s a very significant problem. And it’s part of a larger picture of low labor force participation, particularly by young males. …
PELLEY: What is the biggest threat to American prosperity that no one is talking about?
POWELL: That no one is talking about? … I would point to our longer-run challenges. And I would like to see a stronger national focus on, for example, labor force participation. There are plenty of prime-aged people who are not in the labor force and who would be better off in the labor force. And I’d like to see us find policies that can support and reward work, provide training and education, and generally try to raise U.S. labor force participation so that we’re no longer at the bottom of the league table among advanced economies.
Fed Chair Powell has identified the crisis of young American males as one of the biggest threats to America’s economic future.
Who and What: A multi-partisan Coalition of 35 nationally-known scholars and practitioners request that President Trump create a White House Council on Boys and Men.
Why: Our nation is suffering a crisis of boys and men. The Coalition identifies five components:
Education: Nationwide, boys are 50 percent less likely than girls to meet basic proficiency in reading, math and science. Yet male teachers, and vocational education—both associated with better outcomes for boys—receive inadequate support.
Jobs: Cut-backs in vocational education leave boys who are not academically inclined unemployed. Japan’s vocational programs result in 99.6% employment. More than 90% of mass shooters, ISIS recruits, and male criminals were dad-deprived boys.
Fatherlessness: A third of boys are raised in father-absent homes; yet boys and girls with significant father involvement do better in more than 70 areas.
Physical health: In 1920, American males lived only one year less than females; today, five years less. Yet we have no federal office to deal with the public health crisis of boys and men.
Emotional health: Between ages 13 and 20, the suicide rate is five times greater among boys than girls.
Each of the five crisis components is potentially handled by a different department of the government; therefore, the crisis is not prioritized and proposed remedies are nonexistent or inadequate, most importantly, no coordinated effort exists. Short-Term Investment/ Long-TermSavings: Financial benefits: about a trillion dollars per year. Society benefits: dramatically reducing boys’ and men’s vulnerability to joining terrorist groups, committing mass shootings, and becoming criminals. Quality-of-Life Benefits: Priceless.
Chair: Warren Farrell, PhD firstname.lastname@example.org
Steering Committee Treasurer: Philip W. Cook thewhitehousecouncil@gmail
Watch Coalition Leader Warren Farrell interview, and note that he explains succinctly how the President could quickly create the White House Council for Boys and Men: https://youtu.be/_Enlr4sCb6w
UPDATE: We continue to look for funds to support our Young Voices TV reporters and camera crew to interview presidential candidates in New Hampshire and Iowa. We’re planning to be in New Hampshire in early May. And we have a coordinator now in Iowa for the same effort. Why we support Young Voices TV reporters meeting the presidential candidates here.
Keeping the Education Campaign Nurtured: You can view the “Coalition’s Education Proposal” on our website here.
Thank you for the continued support and we look forward to keeping you informed. If you become a patron supporter you can now get nearly daily news briefs, videos and articles of interest.
From Jonathan Wai in Psychology Today:
Over 90 years ago, Lewis Terman attempted to identify the brightest kids in California. There were two young boys who took Terman’s test but who did not make the cutoff to be included in this study for geniuses. These boys were William Shockley and Luis Alvarez, who both went on to study physics, earn PhDs, and win the Nobel Prize. Why did they miss the cut? One explanation is that the Stanford-Binet, the test Terman used, simply did not include a spatial test.
The whole article is here.
From Karen Woodall in Huffington Post:
With absolutely no statutory help available for dads in this position, those who find themselves outside of the family unit are, without the help of family and friends, destined for a life of sofa surfing, hostels or other even less suitable places to live. I have heard of dads in this position living in garages and the garden shed. From here it is incredibly difficult for them to continue to maintain relationships with their children, for who would want their children to know that they are in that position? Housing for dads after separation is a critical issue and one which leads to despair for too many.
I was excited therefore, when I received news of a project in London which is specialising in helping dads in these circumstances. DadsHouse is a charity founded by Billy McGranaghan, himself once a lone parent who found it hard when he was alone and wanted to help other dads in his shoes. DadsHouse runs many projects but the most recent is particularly special because it helps dads who are homeless with temporary accommodation, which in turn gives them a chance to build relationships with their children.
Full article is here.
From “Boy Is Beautiful” in Psychology Today by Mark Sherman, Ph. D.
What was the picture? Was it a gun? A bomb? The scene of an explosion? No. It was an anatomically correct stick figure of a man. Yes, it was a man with a penis.
My son was very upset – not with my grandson, but with the school, for forcing my son to leave work in the middle of the day to pick up my grandson for what my son felt was an absurd reason. And my daughter-in-law also thought it was ridiculous, as did my wife, and my son’s in-laws, who are far more conservative than we are.
I think my son handled it beautifully. My grandson was upset to be sent home, and felt like there was something wrong with him. And that is how kids feel; you have to be pretty grown up to feel that maybe it’s not you; that perhaps there is something wrong with “the system.”
The whole article is here.
On the gender gap in occupational fatalities by Mark Perry at the American Enterprise Institute:
Every year the National Committee on Pay Equity (NCPE) publicizes its “Equal Pay Day” to bring public attention to the gender pay gap. According to the NCPE, “Equal Pay Day” will fall this year on April 12, and allegedly represents how far into 2017 the average woman will have to continue working to earn the same income that the average man will earn this year. Inspired by Equal Pay Day, I introduced “Equal Occupational Fatality Day” in 2010 to bring public attention to the huge gender disparity in work-related deaths every year in the United States. “Equal Occupational Fatality Day” tells us how many years into the future women will be able to continue to work before they would experience the same number of occupational fatalities that occurred for men in the previous year….
Based on the BLS data for 2014, the next “Equal Occupational Fatality Day” will occur about 11 years from now – on January 12, 2027. That date symbolizes how far into the future women will be able to continue working before they experience the same loss of life that men experienced in 2014 from work-related deaths. Because women tend to work in safer occupations than men on average, they have the advantage of being able to work for more than a decade longer than men before they experience the same number of male occupational fatalities in a single year.
The full article is here.
It was not one of the five fatherhood programs supported by the US Department of Health and Human Services. As reported by John Hult:
The Sioux Falls-based non-profit had applied for a grant from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to continue the program earlier this year, but it was not among the five fatherhood programs nationwide selected, according to Rebecca Kiesow-Knudson of LSS.
The new grant would have offered $1.3 million to $1.5 million per year for five years. LSS was informed that its application “scored very high,” Kiesow-Knudson said, but that there wasn’t enough to pay for all the programs that needed funding.
Fatherhood and Families offered training on family re-integration for inmates within six months of release from prison, and was available at five adult DOC facilities. The voluntary program was open to anyone without a domestic violence or stalking record who would return to a family role upon release.
Whole story here.
|The Gender Role & The Gender Brain in Education by Sean Kullman (This article first appeared in the commission newsletter, The Proposal.)|
|The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) does important work on civil rights, and the single-sex school debate continues to be an important social issue for them. More often, the ACLU believes single sex schools encourage gender stereotypes that only alienate girls and boys and lead to discrimination and a violation of Title IX. The ACLU has filed lawsuits against districts to prevent single-sex school options. “The adoption of single-sex education programs based on sex stereotypes has become widespread across the state of Florida, and should not be permitted to continue,’ said Galen Sherwin, senior staff attorney with the ACLU Women’s Rights Project.’” Referring to some of the gender science as “junk science,” the ACLU sees the single-sex classroom as a potentially discriminatory place.
Other nations have run public single-sex schools for decades, while single-sex public education in the United States is a recent phenomenon. New Zealand provides co-educational as well as single-sex options for low and medium income families unable to afford private single-sex schools. New Zealand’s system may provide some of the pros and cons of co-educational and single-sex education because of the sheer number of students and accessibility to data.
Experts cite that boys are struggling in our modern educational institutions and attending and graduating college at significantly lower rates. (Today 57% of college attendees are women and 43% are male). Other experts worry girls are not getting into science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) at comparable rates as boys. Federal data supports these concerns in math, technology, and engineering.
Dr. Joseph Cox, former Director of the International Boys School Coalition and father of a daughter who is an engineer, argues that “women who are the product of single-sex education are significantly more likely to study math and science, and in all-boys schools, young men tend to be less self-conscious about studying music, art or acting, and they are more open to sharing their feelings.”
Parents and educators are looking for solutions and new approaches. Gender and learning has its promoters and detractors, but the research around single-sex education has gathered promising data for new ways to educate, helping boys and girls succeed. The ACLU worries this data could be misused and lead to discriminatory practices.
Sean Kullman is an educator and writer. He sits on the steering committee for the Coalition for a White House Council on Boys and Men
To subscribe to the commission newsletter, email WHC@whitehouseboysmen.org.
|The Single Sex Classrooms Debate by Michael Gurian (This article first appeared in the commission newsletter, The Proposal.)|
|When I began to develop nature-based theory more than 25 years ago, I did not know it would be used in all of the ways it has been. I am proud of its application in our nation’s schools. Our teachers are our heroes and they need all the tools they can get, especially to help struggling students.
Among my initial findings were the struggles both boys and girls experienced in schools and communities because the staff and parents were only learning about gender roles (which is indeed a very important topic) but not gender. Gender, not gender roles, impacts every student’s learning curve. My nature-based gender theory starts with gender brain science (the nature part of the human equation), then moves to nurture and culture; it gives teachers, parents and others a holistic way to create healthy social systems for both boys and girls.
Of course not everyone agrees with the gender lens. The ACLU’s attack on single gender classrooms and schools is an example. Utilizing “research” from a very small cadre of social thinkers that do not represent the ideas of most people in the field, they argue that differences between males and females are minimal, (i.e. the gender lens is unnecessary), and that allowing schools and parents to choose educational options is dangerous. These folks make their points by attacking schools, misquoting and misconstruing my work and the work of others in the field, and saying that they represent the gender science and the families of our era.
In an interesting twist to this ongoing debate, a recent New York Times story on single gender education included a number of schools the Gurian Institute has worked with. However, the paper chose not to report any of the information from the scientists I asked them to talk with, nor print any of the responses I and others gave them to the superficial and cherry-picked theory in ACLU lawsuits. They basically published the few people and superficial ideas that fit the ACLU ideology.
In order to understand this debate fully, I hope you’ll go deeper. Please study the schools that are innovating with a gender lens, whether they are coed, single gender, Montessori, or other, and raise your voices in support of them.
We will leave a legacy of choice and educational excellence for all students no matter their zip code if we come together in support of options in education.
Michael Gurian is an internationally recognized author, family therapist, and child advocate. gurianinstitute.com
To subscribe to the commission bi-monthly newsletter, email WHC@whitehouseboysmen.org
“Young Voices” is a new program on TV/radio in which young men tell their stories of living through the boy crisis. They also attend events live in the field to listen and offer their voices. A few representatives attended the Democratic Brown and Black Forum in Iowa. Here are the three short videos from that event.
Live From The Field: Introduction
Bernie Sanders Campaign Representative Interview
Martin O’Malley Campaign Representatives Interview
Follow our YouTube channel for more content coming soon.
A new survey report from Pew Research Centers:
While mothers and fathers offer somewhat different views of the division of labor in their household, there is general agreement about who in their family is more job- or career-focused. For example, in two-parent households where the mother and father work full time, 62% say both are equally focused on work, while about one-in-five (22%) say the father is more focused and 15% say the mother is. Differences in the responses to this question between mothers and fathers in this type of household are modest.
The full news report is here.
From Jim Ellis interviewing Dianna Thompson in The Legacy:
Many in society are aware of the prevalence of divorce and have a general idea of the impact on children. The landscape of fatherless homes is harsh, as shown by the statistics.
The non-profit National Father Initiative reported on a U.S. Census Bureau finding that 24 million children in America – one out of every three – live in biological father-absent homes. Nine in ten American parents agree this is a “crisis.”
- According to research conducted by Joan Berlin Kelly, author of “Surviving the Break-up,” 50 percent of mothers “see no value in the father’s continued contact with his children after a divorce.”
- The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry report “Frequency of Visitation by Divorced Fathers,” claimed that “40 percent of mothers reported that they had interfered with the noncustodial father’s visitation on at least one occasion, to punish their ex-spouse.”…
Thompson believes she knows where the fathers – the supposed deadbeat dads of the world – have gone. “I really think the fathers are right where the courts put them – locked out of their children’s lives.”
The whole article is here.
From Christina Hoff Sommers in the New York Times:
Rather than try to change the basic nature of boys, why not work with who they are? Consider the all-too-typical case of Justin, a Southern California boy who loved science fiction, pirates and battles. An alarmed teacher summoned his parents to school to discuss a picture the 8-year-old had drawn of a sword fight — which included several decapitated heads. Justin was a well-behaved, normal little boy, but the teacher expressed grave concern about Justin’s values. The boy’s father was astonished, not by his son’s drawing — typical boy stuff — but by the teachers lack of sympathy for his son’s imagination. If boys are constantly subject to disapproval for their interests and enthusiasms they are likely to become disengaged and lag further behind.
Full article is here.
From Michael Kress in the Washington Post:
I know what you’re thinking. Many dads still have not earned the “involved” adjective. Perhaps they’re emotionally distant, focused on the traditional breadwinner role. Or worse, far too many are absent entirely, leaving their children without a father and the mothers to fend for themselves as sole parent and provider. (Of course, women who’ve chosen to raise their children without a male partner or spouse are a different story!)
So what’s the problem with the phrase “involved dad?”
For one thing, it lets the uninvolved off the hook, as if those of us who are present in our kids’ lives are the exceptions, or exceptional, doing something different, unusual, special. No, we’re not; we’re just dads. Let the rest of them be labeled “uninvolved dads,” with the assumption being that a father by definition is one who does more than inseminate a woman.
The whole article is here.
Recently the oafish dad characterization has changed. After the complaints to a Lowes paint commercial in 2014, advertising agencies changed how they potrayed dads, and the public encouraged it. This is an ongoing collection of positive dad commercials.
#RealStrength Dove Men+Care January 2015
“Dave” Vicks Nyquil January 2015
#HowToDad Cheerios December 2014
“To Be A Dad” Toyota January 2015
“Life Lesson’s” Uncle Ben’s August 2014
“The Value of Room to Run” True Value Hardware
#SwifferEffect Swiffer January 2015
“Dad & Andy” Whirlpool May 2015
From Mark Sherman in Psychology Today:
What is someone like me to do? While I had a mother I loved and respected, and I have a wife I adore, my children and grandchildren – for whom, like every parent and grandparent, I want the best – all happen to be males, all seven of them: three grown sons and four young grandsons. What do I tell my sons? That they should encourage their sons to support the aspirations of girls, girls who are already surpassing them in school at all levels, and going on to graduate schools in larger numbers(link is external)?
Also, if there is any truth at all to evolutionary psychology, which tells us that women prefer mates who are achievers, what will it mean to Grant’s daughters and the daughters of others, when their pool of eligible men diminishes due to this still not well-known gender gap?
I cannot think of any time when a group that was stagnating in their achievements was being asked to support the aspirations of a group that is outdoing them.
Full article is here.