In the article, which appeared as the cover story in The Atlantic’s January/February issue, Ms. Orenstein argues that we’re teaching young men a toxic, outdated ideal of masculinity, hearkening back to the 1950s, that emphasizes aggression, conquest, and emotional detachment. Here’s my blurb for the piece when it appeared in The Highlighter #224:
“Today many parents are unsure of how to raise a boy, what sort of masculinity to encourage in their sons,” writes Peggy Orenstein, author of the forthcoming Boys & Sex. Meanwhile, boys are growing up largely on their own, learning to “man up,” rejecting their emotions, emasculating their friends, glorifying sexual violence, and finding misogyny “hilarious.” As 16-year-old Nate said, “If you hook up with a girl below your status, it’s an ‘L.’ ” And the point, of course, is to win.
The essay is deserving of our deep read and discussion — particularly if you teach adolescent boys or are a parent of one. I look forward to re-reading it and talking about it with you. Are you in? Hope so!
If you’re in, here’s what’s next:
Announce that you’re in. To do so: Click on the title above or the play button, which will lead you to an online version of this post. Then head down to the comments. In the comments, say hi, who you are, and why you’re interested in this article. Feel free to banter. Then write, “I’m in!”
Then read the article — if possible, by next Sunday. (It’ll take 25-35 minutes.) Go ahead and annotate it, too, if you like. Many of you have said that the group annotation is your favorite part of Article Club.
Get your questions and first impressions ready for next Sunday. That’s when we’ll share our first thoughts about the article.
Next Sunday, 4/12: We share our first thoughts, impressions, and questions
Sunday, 4/19: Ms. Orenstein answers our questions in a podcast episode
Sunday, 4/26: We discuss the article via Zoom (two choices: 2-3 pm & 4-5 pm PT). Please feel free to sign up for a discussion now!
Article Club is a new experiment in community reading. We read and discuss one outstanding article a month, both online and in person. We invite the author to join our conversation, too. Article Club is part of The Highlighter, a weekly newsletter featuring the best articles on race, education, and culture.
Hi there! Two weeks ago, we read (and annotated) CJ Hauser’s “The Crane Wife.” Last week, we shared our questions and first impressions. This week, I got to talk with Ms. Hauser (all the way from Oaxaca!), and in today’s podcast episode, she generously answers our questions and speaks about some of the themes we’ve been exploring (plus some details about Hunca Munca). Thank you, Ms. Hauser!
Next Saturday, March 21, we’ll gather together to discuss the article. There are two choices: 1:00 – 2:30 PT, without Ms. Hauser; 4-5 PT, with Ms. Hauser. Click the button!
Note: The in-person meeting at 1 pm might move to online. I’ll keep you updated.
I encourage you to take a listen and share your thoughts! Does listening to Ms. Hauser clarify any of your questions? Get you thinking in a different way, or strengthen your views?
All right, let’s discuss more in the comments! To do so, click on the play button or the title, which will let you listen to the podcast episode and write your comments on the bottom of the post. If you get stuck, hit reply, and we’ll get things sorted out.
Thank you for participating in this week’s conversation. And if you’re free and interested, sign up for next Saturday’s Article Club discussion below. See you soon!
Article Club is a new experiment in community reading. We read and discuss one outstanding article or book chapter a month, both online and in person. We invite the author to join our conversation, too. If you’re interested, sign up and check us out! Article Club is part of The Highlighter, a weekly newsletter featuring the best articles on race, education, and culture.
If you are looking for outstanding articles on race, education, and culture, try The Highlighter, my weekly newsletter that comes out every Thursday morning. Subscribe here.
Over the years, friends (and sometimes strangers) have asked me where they should send their kids to school. I’m not sure why they ask me. Maybe it’s because I work in education? It’s an awkward question. My tendency is not to offer direct advice, even though my opinions are strong on this topic. After all, they already know where I stand. Plus, I don’t have kids. And besides, we need to make our own decisions and be prepared to stand by them. Nevertheless, that doesn’t stop me from recommending excellent articles on the topic, like this week’s lead piece, which I urge you to read.
+ I can’t tell you what happened at Pop-Up Article Club last Saturday (including who was there and what we read) because the event remains anonymous and mysterious. But I can reveal that it was great, as usual, and that you should sign up for a chance to attend the next one on Saturday, Sept. 28, 2-4 pm.
+ Possible new feature: Who says it’s a good idea for me to highlight and annotate an article from a physical newspaper or magazine? (I do. Maybe you, too?) Here’s this week’s close read.
Keith Gessen is a successful writer who lives in Brooklyn with his wife and 4-year-old son, Raffi. Like many white liberals, Mr. Gessen has read Nikole Hannah-Jones and therefore wants to send Raffi to a racially diverse kindergarten. But when theory becomes reality, he finds out that choosing a school is not easy. He writes:
If you chose a “good school,” wood blocks, an active and well-resourced PTA, you neglected society, and what sort of parent would want to make society any shittier than it already was? But if you chose society, justice, equality, you chose, a little bit, against your kid—no wood blocks, no after-school enrichment. And, man, you had to have a lot of confidence in the enriching nature of your own parenting to believe it didn’t matter where your kid went to school.
Mr. Gessen’s dilemma is common for many white parents with privilege. I understand there’s no perfect answer. But I question his assumptions and disagree with his either-or thinking. Do you have empathy for Mr. Gessen? Do you think he made the right decision? Please let me know! (18 min)
+ Read more great articles on this topic here, here, here and here.
Born with a genetic disorder that left him disabled, Fredrick Brennan battled loneliness for most of his childhood, especially after his parents divorced and he entered foster care. As a teenager, he discovered anonymous online message boards, found his voice, and founded 8chan, the horrific site responsible for Pizzagate and the Christchurch shootings. Now Mr. Brennan has grown up and wants to repent. Too bad there’s no way to erase what he’s created. (16 min)
Almost all rapes — 98 percent of the 125,000 reported each year — do not result in conviction. That’s because police officers discourage victims from filing reports, and because rape kits go untested, and because detectives don’t get assigned to cases, and arrests aren’t made, and charges aren’t brought, and because juries acquit the defendants. As long as most rape survivors are women, and as long as most law enforcement officers are men, argues Barbara Bradley Hagerty, rape will remain the easiest violent crime to get away with, over and over again. (37 min)
Quite a dramatic headline, don’t you think? I know, articles on climate change, with their doomsday conclusions, are sometimes so gloomy that they’re no fun to read. But read this one, please, especially if you live in California, and you’ll learn about how cities like San Francisco, Pacifica, and Imperial Beach are erecting seawalls, importing sand, and encouraging homeowners to retreat inland. So far, most people are ignoring the problem. (30 min)
+ Reader Annotations: Loyal reader Beth read all four articles this week and wrote, “It was great to see Tony’s face. Glad I had read the article about incels earlier this summer to understand the reference in the Paris Review article. The NYT article on busing was incredibly detailed and important. Thanks for reading a 336-page book; I don’t have time for that right now. And the racism in Maryland: I can barely fathom.” Go ahead: Be like Beth, read all four articles this week, and let me know what you think!
I felt like I was reading the plot of a Black Mirror episode about artificial intelligence — how it is being used to both make predictions about human video-watching habits as well as to shift people’s views on topics. This sounds dangerous to me! Is anyone else worried about it this as much as I am?
Thank you, Beth and Nicki, for giving back to The Highlighter reading community and getting your ideas out there. Let’s keep the conversation going!
How did that happen? Somehow you’ve reached the end of this week’s issue of The Highlighter. Use the thumbs below to tell me what you thought. Or hit reply and type me a quick message.
If you like The Highlighter, please help it grow and get better. I appreciate your support. Here are a few ways you can help:
Challenge yourself to forward this issue to 5 friends,
See if you can convince someone great to subscribe this week,
Help me think about the logistics of a referral program,
On the other hand, if you’re finding that the articles aren’t a great match for your sensibilities, please unsubscribe. See you next Thursday at 9:10 am!
