I'm interested to know what people think of this article. www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/may/09/philip-zimbardo-boys-are-a-mess
I don't disagree that men and boys are in trouble, though I would situate it in more of a political analysis - I think people are in trouble, largely because of the lack of meaningful, properly paid work. And I agree that porn must be hugely damaging to men (as well as to women). But I was shocked and appalled by many of the assertions made, which seem to be nothing more than lazy gender stereotyping (fathers do not love unconditionally and mothers do, women are interested in sex only when linked with romance, men do and act while women think and feel - I mean, bollocks to that, women are bloody doing things constantly, but it's often things that noone notices or attaches importance to). The article also notes that Zimbardo has no interest in gay men and boys - so he's certainly subscribing to a narrow view of gender in one key regard.
But the man is emeritus professor at Stanford and surely his views are based on experience and research. Am I wrong, do these stereotypes hold more than I would like to admit? Perhaps as a psychologist, he is reflecting the world as he finds it - and I do believe that children are raised in a heavily gendered way, which might produce these differences. Or am I right to think that it's offensive, and naive to think that elite universities are somehow free of the gendered ideas that the rest of the world holds?
His suggestions for change, incidentally, are things that I would support.