The decline of males /

Males have declined into bewildered, lonely creatures since "new and effective contraceptive technology, controlled by women" and the "anti-male" discourse of feminism have led to a pervasive social shift away from "male-centered production to female-centered reproduction." With the advent of the Pill, men have become from the "means of reproduction" and the demand for abortion has risen. The ancient mammalian unit of mother and child has morphed into a "bureaugamy," as single mothers find government assistance a more satisfying partner than a confused male. Or so says anthropologist Tiger (Men in Groups, etc.), who claims that only Darwinian biology can satisfactorily explain these changes and pities anyone foolish enough to believe the "Christian Science about human behavior" known as gender studies and sociology. This "psychosexual weather report" will delight those who find sociobiology convincing, but may vex readers who want more than newspaper articles offered as science (118 references to the New York Times alone). It may also be news to many women that they are "on the way to winning" the war between the sexes and will soon dominate the world economic system. Somewhat paradoxically, Tiger celebrates single mothers as the heroic vanguard of a new social order in the "human zoo," yet proclaims that it is men who have been "liberated" by the women's movement. Although provocative, his arguments won't withstand much serious scrutiny from points of view outside biology that may not see humans as analogous to bats and tadpoles. Agent, Amanda Urban of ICM. (Apr.) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved

Stressing the framework of evolution, Rutgers University anthropologist Tiger (Men in Groups, LJ 8/69) explores the recent dramatic changes in human reproduction and behavior owing essentially to female-controlled methods of contraception throughout the industrial world. He documents a major shift in confidence and power from men to women, giving special attention to the profound social consequences. Tiger argues that males are now withdrawing from family life and feeling obsolete. A new family pattern, or "bureaugamy," is emerging: the mother-child unit (a return to the primary primate social bond) financially supported, in part, by a government agency. More and more alienated from the process of reproduction, independent males seek behavioral expression and emotional satisfaction in drugs, sports, pornography, and the military. Tiger also emphasizes the unspoken but important relationship between love and money. This provocative book raises questions about the awesome influences of nanotechnology and genetic engineering on the future of human sexuality and social structure. Highly recommended.ÄH. James Birx, Canisius Coll., Buffalo, NY (c) Copyright 2010. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.

The mad social scientist of biological reductionism is up to his old tricks again. Tiger, the anthropologist who 30 years ago brought us the notion of ``male bonding'' (in Men in Groups, 1969) returns once again to a biological argument to explain the ``declining'' influence of men in modern society. Tiger's theoretical premise is egregiously essentialist to those with a background in cultural theory (he likens these social scientists to Christian Scientists in relation to medicine)'we must ``understand basic human nature'' before we can talk about economic, political, psychiatric, or feminist theories. In this particular instance, he wishes to relate the declining role of men in society to the advent of birth control, which puts reproductive power in the hands of women. His argument is stringently antifeminist'he calls feminism ``female-ism'' and implies that we are caught up in the midst of a shift from male production to female reproduction. The basic implication is that if women stayed home and had babies, they would maintain the support and comfort of their husbands, they would continue to vote in the same manner as their husbands, and men and women would be less at polar extremes in the productive marketplace. Men are seen as cut out of the reproductive agreement due to the rise of hidden contraception, and thus they are rendered redundant and out of control. Tiger actually praises ``welfare queens,'' whom he sees as rising up and revolting by staying home and out of the economy'to raise their children (conveniently ignoring the messy social, historical, and economic ramifications involved). One of the more annoying aspects of Tiger's style is that he constantly employs cultural examples in an attempt to support his biological arguments'he goes as far as employing the religious story of Jesus' birth to explain the biological ``foundations of human emotionality.'' If you didn't buy the notion that male patterns of behavior are imprinted on a genetic level, then you probably won't buy this one either.