Opinion | Both Parties Are Getting Men Wrong

With the election just a few weeks away, the contest for the votes of men is heating up. Young women’s support is effectively locked up for the Democrats, but young men still seem up for grabs and the Trump-Vance ticket is making inroads, with some polls showing a double-digit advantage.

Ironically, an election that was supposed to be about women because of the issue of abortion rights may in the end be decided by the votes of young men.

The Republicans have been aggressively competing for the male vote from the get-go. Donald Trump was introduced to the RNC convention by Dana White, head of the UFC. Hulk Hogan tore off his shirt. The GOP messaging wasn’t subtle: We like the stuff most men like, and we like men. Trump and JD Vance have appeared on multiple podcasts popular among young men. A Republican voter turnout effort aimed at young men is being promoted at college football games.

The Democrats are now playing catch-up. Kamala Harris has launched an “opportunity agenda” for Black men, promising action to support entrepreneurs, regulate crypto and recruit more male teachers. She is reported to be considering an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast, which has an enormous audience of mostly men. Democratic strategists seem to have realized belatedly that it will be hard to win without male votes. The question is whether this is too little, too late.

There is, though, a policy paradox here that Democrats could take advantage of. The Republicans are signaling a pro-male stance, but without any policy substance. The Democrats have existing initiatives that are a good starting point for a strong pro-male policy platform. But they have been reluctant to package them as such and could do much more.

There is a real political opportunity right now for a party to craft an agenda that speaks to men — and addresses their real problems.

Contrary to progressive belief, young men are not turning into a generation of misogynists. Support for gender equality continues to rise , including among men under 30. The problem seems more to be that many men simply don’t see much recognition of their issues, or even of their identity, on the political left.

If the Democrats are the “women’s party,” as one party strategist claimed , it might not be surprising that men are looking in another direction. The official party platform lists the groups it is proud to serve; women are listed but men are not. There is a new Gender Policy Council in the White House, but it has not addressed a single issue facing boys or men.

The failure to engage with men’s issues is proving to be a costly mistake, particularly in our politics and culture. The challenges facing many men, especially working-class men and men of color, are not the confections of the online “manosphere.” They are real. But they have not been sufficiently addressed, or sometimes even acknowledged. This has left a vacuum, which has been filled, in many cases, by more reactionary voices from the manosphere.

When problems are neglected, they metastasize into grievances. And grievances can be weaponized in service of reactionary goals. The solution, then, is almost comically simple: Don’t neglect the problems.

The mistake being made on both sides is to see gender equality as a zero-sum game; that to do more for boys and men means doing less on behalf of girls and women. There is so much more to do for girls and women, and not just on the health care front: investing in the care economy to help working mothers especially; increasing the share of women in critical occupations, not least the worlds of tech and politics; modernizing career ladders to reduce the “parenting penalty”; reducing barriers to accessing capital for women entrepreneurs and much more.

But working on behalf of women doesn’t require politicians to turn their backs on men. In the real world, the interests of men and women are not pitted against each other, however much our culture warriors tell us otherwise. There are plenty of progressive young women out there worried about their brother’s mental health, plenty of working-class women concerned about their husband’s job prospects. It is hard to create a society of flourishing women if men are floundering.

It is not too late to set out an explicit policy agenda for boys and men, in the key areas of health, education and family life. Whoever did so would send a powerful signal to male voters: We see you. We acknowledge your challenges, and we have positive ideas about how to help.

As Harris said recently, she has to earn every vote , including from men. Better rhetoric and broader outreach are good. But some policy substance would be even better.

Here’s where to start.

Education

Boys and men are falling behind in education. In the average school district, boys are almost a grade level behind in literacy . (There’s no gap in math.) The most common high school grade for girls is now an A; for boys, it is a B. College enrollment rates from high school for men have not risen since 1984 . Men are outnumbered three to two on college campuses. Boys and men from lower-income families, as well as Black boys and men , face the sharpest educational challenges.

There is much that can and should be done to create a more male-friendly education system. In 2024, no education policy agenda is complete without some gender-sensitive elements, including:

• Recruit More Male Teachers: The share of K-12 teachers who are male has fallen from 33 percent when Ronald Reagan was president to 23 percent today . There are now fewer men in teaching than women in STEM; fewer men in elementary schools than women flying for the Air Force. Male teachers provide important male models for boys, and seem to lift their academic outcomes . The Harris campaign just promised to do more to increase the share of Black male teachers, which is necessary but not sufficient. Just as women are offered scholarships and other incentives to enter STEM fields, men should be offered similar inducements to get into teaching, including as second or even third careers.
  
• Flexible School Starting Ages: Offer parents the option to “redshirt” their sons by enrolling them in an additional year of pre-kindergarten or delaying kindergarten entry. This flexibility could help close the developmental gap between male and female students that eventually turns into an achievement gap.
  
• Expand Career and Technical Education: Increase investment in vocational schools and CTE programs that provide hands-on learning and practical skills. Studies show that boys who attend technical high schools can see earnings up to a third higher . These programs prepare students for high-demand careers in trades like electrical work, plumbing and carpentry.
  
• Promote Apprenticeships: The U.S. is at the bottom of the international league table of advanced economies for apprenticeships. It’s vital to increase investment here, combining on-the-job training with classroom instruction and offering a pathway to stable, well-paying jobs without the need for a four-year college degree.
  
• Support Community Colleges: For men especially, two-year colleges can provide a solid foundation for a career, offering a better return on investment in many cases than a bachelor’s degree. Stronger investments in these institutions, tied to performance as in recent reforms in Texas and elsewhere, would boost male outcomes especially.

Health

Life expectancy between men and women has widened from five to six years. Men have a higher mortality rate than women in 13 of the 15 leading causes of death. The largest gaps are found in the two most common causes of death: heart disease and cancer.

The mental health crisis is also impacting boys and men differently from women and girls. Suicide rates among men under 30 have risen by more than a third since 2010 and are now higher than among middle-aged men. The annual death toll from suicide among men has reached 40,000, four times the number among women.

Rates of substance use disorder and deaths from accidental drug overdoses are much higher among men and have risen significantly in recent years. But men’s health is badly neglected in policymaking. The federal government has 29 public health goals for women and 18 for LGBTQ+ people. There are 4 for men.

There is plenty that could be done here. Imagine a speech from one of the candidates promising to:

• Establish a Male Suicide Prevention Task Force: There needs to be a national recognition of the male suicide crisis. (Right now, CDC does not even acknowledge the gender gap ). A first step could be a dedicated White House task force to research and implement strategies aimed at reducing suicide rates among men. This could involve public awareness campaigns, mental health screenings and targeted support services.
  
• Create an Office of Men’s Health: There is a Democrat-sponsored bill already in Congress which would create a specific agency within the Department of Health and Human Services focused on men’s health issues, mirroring the existing Office on Women’s Health. This office would coordinate research, policy development and programs to address health disparities affecting men.
  
• Cover Male Contraception: For all the discussion of reproductive rights, there has been no discussion of the fact that male contraception is not covered by the Affordable Care Act. This creates unbalanced incentives for a couple to choose female sterilization over the much safer and more effective male vasectomy. It also sends a regressive message that contraception is only women’s concern. If the ACA cannot be amended, a future administration could work with states and private insurers to widen coverage.
  
• Set Public Health Targets for Men: Include specific objectives for improving men’s health outcomes in national public health agendas, such as reducing rates of heart disease, cancer and mental health issues among men.
  
• Increase the Share of Male Mental Health Professionals: The share of men in mental health fields has plummeted, halving among social workers and psychologists for example. Representation matters because many male patients want the option of working with a male therapist . Policymakers should encourage men to consider mental health careers by offering scholarships, loan forgiveness and awareness campaigns.

Family

Many men are struggling to retain a strong connection to family life. Again, the challenges are especially acute for working class and Black men. The share of men without a college degree with children at home has dropped from 67 percent in 1980 to 51 percent in 2022 , making them the least likely group to live with children. In part this is because one in four have never been married by the time they turn 40. Among women without a college degree, most children are now born outside marriage.

As former president Barack Obama has said : “Too many fathers are missing from too many lives and too many homes, and the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.” But it is no good simply pointing the finger at men or shaming them as “deadbeat dads.” There is an urgent need for “pro-dad” public policies including:

• Equal, Independent Paid Parental Leave: The case for a federal paid leave policy is strong. But it is important that both mothers and fathers have access to their own leave, on an equal basis. This “use it or lose it” approach to leave for fathers has a significant impact on take-up rates, and ongoing engagement between fathers and children . It also sends a strong signal: Dads are as important as Moms.
  
• Reform Family Law for Unmarried Fathers: Family courts are mostly doing a good job of creating what legal scholars call “postdivorce” families , supported shared custody arrangements and ongoing relationships between both parents and their children. Not so for unmarried fathers, who in most states face a complex and difficult legal terrain in terms of ensuring custody rights. Research by scholars like Kathryn Edin shows that many unmarried fathers want to be involved but face legal and systemic barriers. Reforms could include simplifying paternity establishment and ensuring fair access to custody and visitation.

• Introduce a Nonresident Parent Tax Credit: Tax credits to help lower-income parents are a good idea. But they should include nonresident parents too, most of whom are fathers, as proposed by scholars like Ronald Mincy. This would incentivize responsible, engaged fatherhood and support the economic well-being of children.

The overall point is that fathers matter whether or not they are married to or living with the mother. It is time for family policy to catch up with the reality of modern family life, and especially the changing shape of fatherhood.

Many of these policies will take time to enact. But simply setting them out would end the zero-sum stalemate on gender issues.

Can either party show that it cares equally about the flourishing of men and women, girls and boys? There is still time.