Richard Reeves: Suicide rate is four times higher in men

Reeves cites research showing men who die by suicide often describe themselves as “useless” and “worthless,” and argues the “most fatal place” for a human is to feel unneeded. Historically, men’s identity and worth were tied to clear roles—breadwinner, protector, father. As those scripts have eroded, many men no longer see where they matter: they may lack a partner, children, a workplace that relies on them, or a community role. Action: At personal and community levels, deliberately communicate specific ways men are needed—whether as fathers, mentors, colleagues, volunteers—and build structures (clubs, schools, charities, faith groups) that give men visible, regular responsibility.

Reeves celebrates women’s economic rise as “the greatest economic liberation in human history,” turning marriage from necessity to choice. But the old male story—“you must provide for a family”—was removed without a replacement. For women, the script shifted quickly to “stand on your own two feet”; for men, Reeves argues we mainly created a long list of “don’ts” (don’t be toxic, don’t dominate) without a matching set of “do’s.” Action: Parents, educators, and leaders should articulate and model a positive male script: be responsible, generative (producing more than you consume), protective without being controlling, emotionally present, and committed to service in family and community.

Reeves explains he wrote his book because mainstream, data‑driven institutions avoided the topic of boys and men, leaving a vacuum filled by polarizing online figures. He warns that men hear two unattractive options: from the right, “be like your grandfather” (rigid traditionalism); from the left, “be more like your sister” (pathologizing masculinity itself). Action: Researchers, policymakers, and moderate voices should engage openly on male issues—education gaps, suicide, worklessness—so young men hear that they can support gender equality without being shamed for being male, and without retreating into reactionary movements.

Using the idea of “overlapping distributions,” Reeves notes that men are, on average, taller, more risk‑taking, more thing‑oriented, and somewhat less emotionally expressive, while emphasizing the large overlap between sexes. He argues these differences underpin the value of gender diversity in leadership (e.g., female‑led firms may take fewer catastrophic risks but also be slightly less profitable). Action: Design workplaces, education, and relationship expectations that respect average tendencies (e.g., shoulder‑to‑shoulder communication for men, recognition that some roles may attract more men or women) without stereotyping individuals or using averages to limit opportunity.

Reeves and Bartlett discuss how online dating concentrates female attention on a small top tier of men, mirroring historical patterns of polygamy: roughly half of men historically left no descendants. Today, many young men date and have sex later or not at all, while childlessness among men rises. This extends the period where men may feel no partner or family relies on them. Action: When advising young men, emphasize building character, competence, and real‑world social skills over pure status signals—and encourage offline contexts (school, work, hobbies, community) where broader bands of men can form relationships.