Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity [Hardcover]

Gary Cross (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 16, 2008

This phenomenon of chronically immature males refusing to grow up is the subject of professor Gary Cross's extremely readable, informative and unsettling Boys to Men: The Making of Modern Immaturity

(9/14/08)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Cross, a professor of history at Penn State University, seeks the contemporary social puzzle of why men are refusing to grow up and commit to marriage and family. With declining marriage statistics, Cross (The Cute and the Cool) explains that these American boy-men reject the traditional notions of mature masculinity, while opting for vanity and narcissism with a new motto: manhood is play and it never ends. He cites the example of Hugh Hefner's popular concept of childish male wish fulfillment, an empire built on sexually available women, carnal fantasies and eternal playtime. Feminism, extended adolescence and an aggressive media culture promoting conflicting signals about maleness and fatherhood only add to this immaturity trend. Not only does Cross outline the dilemma, but he cites a cure: We must recognize that as adults, and equally as men, we have responsibilities to our partners, families, and communities beyond our own need for experience and pleasure. In this perceptive, eloquent book, Cross concludes that growing-up has never been more difficult in this complicated time. (Sept.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

From School Library Journal

Gender studies have for so long focused almost exclusively on women that the term is sometimes taken to mean women's studies, a focus that has left a major gap in gender studies courses and texts. These four books represent the most recent attempts to understand men and their role in society.Cross (history, Pennsylvania State Univ.; The Cute and the Cool) posits that men are not acting like adults, but like big kids, pointing out that many men, even into their thirties, play video games, enjoy radio programs such as Howard Stern's, and still live at home with their parents. He uses the term boy-men to describe these males who refuse to grow up and act their age. Although many people in the social sciences will recognize Cross's primary point, his term boy-men seems prone to possible misinterpretation. Nonetheless, Cross provides an interesting take on the history and development of boy-men, which he argues began in the 1950s. He points out that popular TV shows watched by boys in the 1950s and 1960s were child-friendly versions of the Old West, e.g., Gunsmoke, and other examples of watered-down masculinity, e.g., The Courtship of Eddie's Father. He cites Hugh Hefner's playboy, hedonistic, pleasure-seeking persona as the envy of many men who wished simply to live a carefree life and be surrounded by beautiful women. Cross argues that the boy-men of today are basically a product of several generations wherein men were coddled as boys and not expected to take on the responsibilities traditionally associated with adult males.Journalist Garcia (The New Mainstream) argues that men's role in society has become compromised as women continue to make huge strides in many social spheres, including employment and education. With their traditional role as breadwinner taken away from them, men are less sure about their place. As a result, Garcia argues, young men have formed and embraced a "Jackass culture" that keeps men in a perpetual spring-break mode.Kimmel (sociology, SUNY, Stony Brook; Manhood in America) puts forth the argument, similar to Cross's, that guys are not growing up and instead are listening to Howard Stern and playing video games, both of which behaviors contribute to the stunting of their maturity. Kimmel's "Guyland" is both a stage of life and the places where men gather to be guys. Kimmel spends time on the "Guy Code," which emphasizes the ways in which men are identified as men, including being emotionless, displaying masculinity whenever possible (e.g., never wearing pink), and remaining loyal to one's male friends.The only woman among these authors, syndicated columnist Parker argues in her antifeminist book that there is a smear campaign against men, especially white men. She believes men are blamed for everything and that if they even look at a woman in a certain way they face harassment charges. She highlights the declining role of men in society by pointing out the gradual eradication of fathers from children's lives (30 to 40 percent of children sleep in a home without their father present), the crisis in educating boys, the need for male elementary teachers, discrimination against men in child custody suits, the gradual feminizing of men in culture, the cultural acceptance of The Vagina Monologues but the denial of the male counterpart, The Penis Monologues, and the "girling" down of the military.The underlying themes of all four books involve the idea that parents have become enablers of their kids' (especially boys') refusal to mature and take on adult responsibilities. Further, as men have confronted the changing role of women, the corresponding concern over what it means to be a man has been lambasted by many in the mainstream. The material found in these books thus goes against politically correct flags. For some, this may be a welcome relief. These accessible books are highly recommended for all libraries because they provoke discussion and keep the conversation on gender alive.—Tim Delaney, SUNY at Oswego
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 328 pages
• Publisher: Columbia University Press; First Edition edition (September 16, 2008)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 023114430X
• ISBN-13: 978-0231144308
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.3 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #662,540 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

33 of 37 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Put not away childish things, October 27, 2008

By 

Andrew S. Rogers (Stamford, Connecticut) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity (Hardcover)

This book is both more and less than I was expecting. "Less," in that I was hoping for a stronger critique -- not to say denunciation -- of today's "boy-men," as author Gary Cross calls them. The arrested-development adults-but-not-grown-ups like the suit-wearing, video game-playing guy in the cover art or, even more appropriate, the men in their forties, or older, who still run around in the same oversized T-shirts, baggy shorts, and huge sneakers as their 12-year-old sons. I was, as I say, hoping to see them called on the carpet somewhat more than they were. That probably says more about me than about Cross.

The area in which "Men to Boys" was more than I expected was in the author's thorough analysis of the archetypes of male adulthood over three generations -- the so-called Greatest Generation, the Baby Boomers (the author's own cohort), and my Generation X -- and how "being a man" has evolved since the 1920s and '30s. Cross relies heavily on media portrayals of boys and men, in popular movies and TV shows as well as commercials, but also introduces when appropriate the influence of video games and why they are so powerfully attractive even for adult men.

Indeed, the power of the video game becomes an important signifier, if not explanation, for the "men to boys" phenomenon. As Cross writes, "modern toys have gradually lost their 'expiration dates,' the markers that designate the time that children are expected to abandon them after reaching a new developmental stage. ... their manufacturers design them to blur, even deny this historically essential transition from boyhood to manhood." "As a result," he continues, "male players seem to equate personal progress with increased sensual and emotional intensity." In other words, whereas Saint Paul put away childish things when he became a man, modern maturity, so to speak, means the cultivation of ever more powerful (and expensive) emotional and adrenaline rushes. "To be blunt," Cross concludes, "adult men obsessed with video games are in a state of arrested development because they can't see the difference between a toy and an adult pleasure" (p. 223-4). That's the closest Cross comes to a criticism, I think, but even he has to admit that for today's boy-men, there IS no difference between a "toy" and an "adult pleasure."

I would have liked if Cross had extended his analysis more broadly, including expanding some of his points about evolving musical tastes (the impact of, as Tom Lehrer described it in the late 1950s, "rock-and-roll and other children's records"), clothing styles, and other cultural expressions. But I cannot criticize the depth of analysis or good insight he brought to the areas he did focus on. While Susan Faludi and her commentary showed up more toward the end of this book than I was expecting, Gary Cross has tackled what I think is an important cultural topic and brought some very good ideas and conclusions to the table. Any reader interested in the question of what it means to be a man in this decade and beyond will find a lot in here worth considering.

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars not an easy read and a little dense of history, July 1, 2010

By 

photondn (Florida, USA) - See all my reviews

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity (Paperback)

Gary Cross' Men To Boys shows how men have changed in behavior and thinking over generations starting from the mid-1850's to present.

Even though the title is Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity, I am not sure if the book had a distinct answer as to why men are acting like boys. It is like pointing the answer to a body of history and saying that the answer is over there in that direction.

The book is quite dense of media history. I had a difficult time appreciating some of the references to 1940's movies because it was before my time. I had to ask people of older generations to get some ideas.

However, there was one observation I had from the book. It seems that men are becoming more directionless over the generations. In the early generations, men were self-driven to marry and have a family. Now, getting married is not really a necessity.

Another observation from reading this book I had was that gaining experiences are getting cheaper over the generations. In the early generations, men had to work hard because life was hard. Gaining experiences were not easy. Now, the current generations play games to get their thrills with little physical effort. Whatever camaraderie men had in the early generations to either establish social norms or to help each other in hard times are pretty much not observed in the current generation.

These observations were my own. I don't think the book made these observations.

This was not an easy read. It is quite dense of history and not really a page-turner. If someone is interested in this book, I would recommend watching the movie Gran Torino, read the book, and then watch Gran Torino again. I actually did that. When I watch Gran Torino again, then I finally appreciated this book and better understood the movie.

22 of 56 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars A narrow definition of adulthood, July 8, 2009

By 

Ajax the Great (State College, PA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity (Hardcover)

This book is one of many these days that bemoans the fact that todays young people aren't "growing up" the same way their elders did. Which is not necessarily bad, by the way. Actually, the perennial idea that the younger generation is worse than previous generations has occurred since the days of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.

According to the author, beginning several decades ago, a trend has emerged. What used to be viewed as benchmarks of adulthood 50 years ago (marriage, parenting, careers) are now being delayed well into the twenties and even thirties. Many young men still live with their parents as well. More recently, adults (especially men) like to play video games, and the age of the average gamer is 35 and rising. This is evidence of "immaturity" according to the author, but this is nothing but a subjective value judgment.

Contrary to the author, it is entirely possible to be a mature, responsible adult without being married and having kids. Millions of people, men and women, choose this path and still remain productive members of society. Or, more often, they delay such benchmarks until their late twenties or thirties to concentrate on education, establish their careers, or even get the partying out of one's system (for men it used to be called "sowing one's wild oats"). Likewise, it is also possible to get married and/or have kids at a very early age before one is emotionally and financially ready to do so, and that does not prove maturity. Quite the opposite, in fact, as evidenced by the fact that those who marry early are more likely to get divorced.

As for young adults still living with their parents, this is a phenomenon that occurs in numerous countries including the United States. The shift to a two-tier service economy, spearheaded by outsourcing and automation of manufacturing jobs and exacerbated by out of control immigration, has led to a need for more and more education, and more time to establish a career. That is, unless you're content working at Burger King the rest of your life. It used to be that an average high school graduate could get a job right out of high school that paid a decent living wage, even a family wage. But those days are long gone, and even a college degree is no guarantee anymore. Yes, there are some genuine leeches, moochers, and losers that live in their parents' basement well into their thirties and beyond, and refuse to work or better themselves through education. But to conflate this minority with the rest of them is not very accurate.

And what's with the author's hatred of video games? How is that a mark of immaturity, when millions of highly productive adults (yes, even those who raise families) are able to play them at least occasionally with no ill effects? Just look at Shaq and his X-box.

Child-like qualities, even in adults, are not always a negative. Same goes for thrill and adventure-seeking. Without those, there would be no Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and numerous other geniuses the world has greatly benefitted from.

With today's long life expectancies, economic constraints and uncertainty, it is unfair to apply the standards of 50+ years ago to the youth of today. More objective criteria are needed to determine maturity than the ones he uses. While the Baby Boomers did (and still do) display objectively negative trends, today's young people are reversing them--they are LESS likely to commit crimes, drink, smoke, do hard drugs, die of overdoses, get in car crashes, get pregnant as teens, and so on. And knowing what today's precarious economy requires, they are enrolling in college in record numbers. So Millennials appear to be on the right track for the most part.

As for why today's 20-somethings like to party hard, it could have something to do with the fact that the drinking age was raised to 21. Perhaps they would party less if they were allowed to legally do so at 18 (like it was back in the day) and get it out of one's system.

I do, however, give him credit for skewering his own generation, the Baby Boomers, and even daring to criticize the Greatest Generation. Too many older adults refuse to look in the mirror when they criticize young people. So rare these days I'm afraid. That alone earns him a full two stars instead of one.

Think about it. Suppose he's right and today's young (and not-so-young) men really are as hopelessly stunted and immature as he claims, is it really such a bad thing that they are less likely to reproduce themselves? If they are really as selfish, hedonistic, and irresponsible as he claims, they should be the last people to have kids. And natural selection will thus weed these "overgrown boys" out of the species in a few generations, and be left with a more mature, more altruistic, less selfish society.

Oh and by the way, he blames feminism as well. A movement that brought unprecedented freedom to women would certainly be expected to have a spillover effect on men as the rigid gender roles of the past have become more fluid. But how is that objectively bad? If anything, the spillover effect was too small--men (and boys) are still held to unrealistic and archaic standards of masculinity, while women are increasingly allowed to take on more of men's traditional roles. The unfinished business of feminism needs to be completed, as it is only half-finished as yet.