Quite a title. Men don’t know what to do that now with themselves now that women have more economic and social freedom, and it’s unfair, claims Hymowitz. Wilkinson involves De Tocqeuville to make a good point:
“American-style democratic equality creates a pattern of unceasingly stressful striving for relative rank, and all this mobility up and down produces a confusion in manners that can lead to dangerous social frictions and resentments.”
Agreed. Hymowitz’s article is pretty reactionary.
However, to try and defend social conservatism for a moment: There have been a lot of intolerant agents and impulses which have made the equality of women possible, and which seek equality in ways to which the social and fiscal conservative can reasonably object (as a prudent defender of institutions and their moral lights).
So, if we are (and I’ve found few if any valid arguments denying women their freedoms) witnessing the messy, molten lava process of democracy maintaining, perhaps even reinvigorating, itself…how messy can it be and how far can you follow the logic?
I wouldn’t want to follow Hymowitz’s logic too far, incidentally, though I do give her credit for thinking against the tide.
Wilkinson seems pragmatic in what may be his plans for libertarianism: Will Wilkinson And Jonah Goldberg On Bloggingheads: Updating Libertarianism?
Updated: Wilkinson and Hymowitz discuss matters at Bloggingheads.
Conservatives shouldn’t entirely fret the depth of Martha Nussbaum, as she is a feminist but perhaps classically liberal: From The Harvard Educational Review-A Review Of Martha Nussbaum’s ‘Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education.’