Don’t waste your money on the book, read this review instead.
Warren Farrell and John Grey are dated and quintessential out of touch elitist, but their book, The Boy Crisis, promotes some relevant research and helpful ideas. As to the research, they come out of the gate swinging – and their research assistants are not only on point, but they did their mental pushups as they outline the extent of the boy problem:
- 93 percent of inmates are men,
- 85 percent of inmates grew up in fatherless homes,
- young men commit suicide at 5 to 6 times the rate of young women,
- men commit almost all violent crime,
- men constitute only 39% of college students,
- single men in their 20s earn less than single woman in their 20s, and
- over the past 40 years men with just a high school degree have experienced a 26 percent decrease in wages.
The physical toils facing men and boys are equally disturbing: men die earlier than women, obesity is on the rise among men, sperm counts are declining, testosterone levels are down, and boys are much more likely to be diagnosed with behavioral issues than girls.
What Farrell and Grey get correct is sounding the alarm to a group of academics and elitist that have profited for far too long by degrading men. Decades of attacking men has created an existential threat. The double standards and attacks on masculinity, according to the authors, harm women and children too. Their primary point is that boys and men have unique and valuable contributions to make to families and society, so certain segments of society need to stop treating men collectively as the enemy.
Farrell and Grey hammer the drums from the outset as they present their case that many men are suffering mentally, physically, economically, educationally, and socially. As they point out, it’s not just a boy problem, but it’s a girl problem too. Women want men who are intelligent, capable of providing financial and physical comforts. If the men are in bad shape, so are the women. In one particularly interesting section of the book, the authors recall the outcries against the school systems when girls were underperforming in math and science. When the girls were struggling, the schools were to blame, but now that the boys are having trouble, it’s the boy’s problem.
From the introduction to the conclusion, Ferrell and Grey stay true to three crucial conclusions. First, men are suffering a purpose void. Second, dad deprivation is wreaking havoc on society. Lastly, society has incorrectly addressed ADHD and other behavioral problems.
The Purpose Void
Many contemporary men suffer a purpose void, which begins with the way we raise our boys. Past generations had it right: kids should serve, roughhousing is good, and masculinity had a purpose. The purpose of masculinity was to serve as warrior and breadwinner. Now, the authors warn, we don’t need warriors and women are increasingly capable of winning their own bread. Their analysis concludes that boys and men no longer have a sense of purpose.
While their point is well made, that men need purpose to be productive, they too easily concede we don’t need warriors and steady economic earners. If the riots of 2020, the crime wave beginning in 2021, and the war in Ukraine have taught us anything, it’s that we need warriors in our national defense and in our homes. And as inflation has grown, economic conditions have become unstable, it has become apparent that two good jobs is better than one. But as most people know, men are more than mobile ATM machines and home security agents. They are dads, teachers, captains of industry, and they often strengthen their own moral compass by passing along longitudinal bearings to their sons. “The traditional boy’s journey to self-sacrifice incorporated service to others, and required responsibility, loyalty, honor, and accountability. It created his mission. And his mission created his character.”
Dad Deprivation
Dad deprivation is the leading cause of more than 25 psychological, academic, and physical health problems that overwhelm our children, and mostly boys. As the authors observe, “The boy crisis’ primary cause is dad-deprived boys. Dad deprivation stems primarily from the lack of father involvement, and secondarily from devaluing what a father contributes when he is involved. Whether our children become financially rich or poor – or emotionally rich or poor – depends increasingly on whether they grow up dad-rich or dad-poor.”
Perhaps the most shocking observation made by Ferrell and Grey is their discussion of telomeres. And it is here that their academic and clinical backgrounds bear fruit. Here is their description:
“Depriving a child of his or her dad is depriving a child of part of her or his life. That is, findings published in Pediatrics in 2017 concluded that ‘at 9 years of age, children with father loss have significantly shorter telomeres.’ Telomeres in our cells are what keep our genes from being deleted as our cells divide. As the National Academy of Sciences reports, ‘Telomere length in early life predicts lifespan.’
How much damage to life expectancy is created by dad-deprivation? Children with father loss already have by age nine telomeres that are 14 percent shorter. However, when compared to girls, the telomere damage from father lost is ‘40% greater for boys.’
Dads – like moms, air, and water – are essential to our lives. But we’ve tried to live without dads. We haven’t tried to live without moms, air, or water.”
There is not much more to say than there is physical damage on a cellular level being done to our boys because dads have been ripped from the home. To add to the discussion, their scientific findings bare out what most people observe in regular life: Boys who are hurt physically and emotionally, hurt others; boys deprived of dads are more abusive and cause crime; and moms can’t provide the emotional and physical structure boys require. What is more disturbing is that ISIS, Hitler, and other organization have historically targeted boys without dads, and we’ve seen here in the United States a disturbing trend that mass murders are performed by boys without stable father figures. It becomes clear, what we all know, that men need something productive to do or they will find something destructive. The worst part is that nearly a third of children are growing up without dads.
Fortunately, Farrell and Grey have more in their toolbox than just the scare tactics. They have a list of the 70 ways dads benefit boys. They also enumerate what dads do differently: enforce boundaries, explore nature, take risks, roughhouse, teach during play, challenge kids, use clever put downs to help show kids how to take criticism in a loving environment so they will handle it well later in life. Dads in general are “warriors, not worriers,” which is something everyone could use.
Fatherlessness is a huge problem we can solve by reducing the instances of out of wedlock births and divorce. This is a tricky subject, and one the authors were not brave enough to broach. Still, they offer a shrewd analysis of the post-divorce family. As a practicing lawyer, and one who has handled countless divorce cases, I endorse this section of the book and believe it should be known and embraced by law makers, judges, family law practitioners, and everyone seeking a divorce. In it, the authors state clearly that divorce harms children and our society.
If, however, divorce is the option the adults have elected, then four things must happen:
1) Physical custody should be divided equally between the parents,
2) There should be absolutely no bad mouthing of the other parent,
3) The parents should live in close proximity to one another, and the children should stay in their same community (and same house), and
4) The entire family must attend counseling, not just certain segments but collectively to learn how to live with the new normal.
ADHD and The New Neural Crisis
ADHD has been on the rise for many decades. Additionally, mental illness among boys is 35 times higher today than it was 3 decades ago and autism is higher today then in 1980. It’s fair to ask, what’s going on with the brains of teenage boys?
Our authors think part of the problem is modern pollutants, drugs, televisions, video games, YouTube and social media, porn, and various other contributions which have given rise to an ADHD problem among boys – and boys are diagnosed at twice the rate of girls. Others have made similar arguments, but what they add to the discussion is a helpful explanation.
ADHD is the result of improper dopamine balance and boys have been taught to crave high dopamine situations and stimulation. Consequently, boys lack of dopamine balance because they are constantly seeking heightened stimulation and a hit of dopamine, so the brain never recovers. Soft drinks and junk food and video games and drugs contribute to dopamine highs. Too much stimulation inhibits normal brain function, according to Farrell and Grey. What is most fascinating is that the human brain is not fully developed until the age of 25 years, which means all the stimulation could cause permanent damage.
The big kicker is this: ADHD drugs are dangerously overprescribed. Ritalin, Adderall, and other drugs make ADHD worse because they drive the imbalance and over stimulation and potentially cause long term brain injury.
On the other end of the spectrum, when a boy is not high on stimulation, then he’s low on dopamine function, which triggers ADHD, anxiety, and other mental health issues like low self-esteem. A boy sitting in class, feigning for his phone or to play a video game is going to be a behavioral problem. The solution too often is to medicate him and label him with ADHD. According to our authors, that only makes the problem worse.
Farrell and Grey are at their best in this section of the book because they provide a list of 16 contributors to ADHD from sugar and bad food to plastics and mercury, to porn and video games. The message is clear: If you have child with behavioral issues, try to remedy them through natural means and not medication.
The Cowardly Underbelly
The Boy Crisis is a book I wanted to like, but the authors make it hard. For starters, it’s obvious from the introduction these two men have written a book about boys and they did not raise boys – in legal terms, this means their argument is moot and they lack standing. The authors lack of parenting experience, especially with respect to boys, was palpable from the start. Nevertheless, I pushed forward because some of the data was good. The flagrant fouls, however, just kept coming. Here is a sampling of minor annoyances: they promote the stay at home dad narrative, the come off as anti-free market capitalism, at times they espouse the ills of competition, they are anti-gun and second amendment, they are anti-football, anti-hard work, and they don’t see toughness as a virtue. They refer to freebies in the Affordable Care Act as free services, which is bothersome for virtually anyone who works and pays taxes (because its taxpayer funded, not free). More generally, Farrell and Grey are not attuned to human nature, especially not the nature of boys and young men and so their arguments are as flat as the paper on which they are written.
More to the point, they think boys and men should be more emotionally sensitive, which is a decent point, but they take it to a weird extreme. The goal is not to make boys and girls the same. Men were made with innate God given attributes, women were created with innate God-given attribute, and marriage was intended for men and women to come together for a greater purpose. Men and woman fit together like pieces of a puzzle (biologically and emotionally), and we are incomplete without the other. My wife fills in the glaring gaps, which makes me a more complete person. For instance, they talk about developing compassion and emotional intelligence, both great things. But you can be a good man without being overwhelmed by these things if you have a good wife. What’s wrong with taking a more analytical approach and a less emotional one? It seems to me that is a helpful perspective for every home.
The authors know their audience, however, which makes them scared to stay true to the facts. When they discuss the wage gap disparity, they only lightly address the fact that it’s deceptive and patently false. They also back off the human nature arguments – by nature men are competitive, aggressive, and seek danger. These are facts, and unfortunately The Boy Crisis cherry picks which facts to deploy and which ones to leave off.
The Oddity of Their Anti-Circumcision Argument
Time and again the authors demonstrate they lack the type of experiential wisdom that communicates trustworthiness. For example, they present a random anti-circumcision argument, which comes across as almost insane. This particular issue caught my attention because they reference Kenya, a place I once lived, as an example.
Between 2002 and 2004, I lived in a small Kenya village with no running water or electricity. It was a very simple life around very fine people. Here are four problems I have with Farrell and Grey’s anti-circumcision argument:
For starters, Farrell and Grey talk about the Massie tribe in Kenya like they are freaks, and completely ignore that the circumcision ceremonies a rite of passage into manhood. The ceremonies I attended were for the Kalenjin tribe just down the road from the Masai, but as far as I understand they are very similar in tone and purpose. The boys are taught by village elders to hunt, live alone, make a home, and various aspects of what it means to be a man. During this time, the boys are shown their place in society and taught to sacrifice on behalf of their families and culture. The circumcision ceremonies I attended culminated in the boys being circumcised around a camp fire by a village elder. The boys are not permitted to grimace or make a sound. If they do, the boy will have disgraced his entire family. It was an awesome experience to witness, and one with many valuable lessons.
Additionally, the authors ignore the health benefits of circumcision. They likewise ignore the religious element of circumcision, which is academically obtuse because of the significance of the Bible as a religious text, and also culturally. Lastly, why would one person care what another is doing with regard to circumcision, which shows the measure of their devotion collectivism over individualism.
Why am I so concerned about their circumcision position? Because it shows the level of shortsightedness and disinformation Farrell and Grey are willing to propagate in furtherance of their conclusions. If they can mislead on this point, where else have they elected to leave off facts and relevant information. If they will lie on a minor point, it’s reasonable to assume the authors are untrustworthy with regard to their other “research” as well – and with regard to football, guns, human nature, and free markets, they are equally misleading and/ or confused.
Three Takeaways
Frist let’s give men a purpose again. John Eldredge wrote a book called Wild at Heart and in it, he suggests all men need adventure, battles to fight, and a woman to love. Those are purposes. Competing to create, invent, take care responsibilities are good things and those give men purpose. Protecting the home is purposeful – crime, especially in 2022 is higher than it has been in decades. Being an engaged father is purposeful. Which leads to the next point
Second, reducing the dad deprivation requires commitment to fostering an environment for more dad involvement. We need to think about reversing the trends towards more out of wedlock births and high divorce rates. This is the one point that could solve almost all problems. Dads can teach boys how to channel their energy, use their talents for good, not for bad. Competing to drink the most or sleep with the most woman is bad for society. Teaching boys to compete in sports and then later in science, will help invent and create and fight for their families
Finally, the ADHD medical complex should be dismantled and replaced by loving, caring parents and teachers.
Concluding Thoughts
This is not a book I would recommend to most of my friends, which is why I labored through it to pull away the valuable sections for this review. While there are a few friends who would like it, most of the people I know would not make it far. If you do read it, skip to the dad deprivation and ADHD sections and feel free to skim the rest. I suggest Boys Adrift by Dr. Sax and The War on Boys by Christina Hoff Sommers over this book. Those books are much better at combining scientific research and analyses with experiential wisdom.
