Before the 1970s, role models for young men abounded. His attributes were well described and positive. There were examples of successful men who showed themselves in many situations: head of the family, business and political leader, athletes, doctors, lawyers, assembly line workers, minors, airline pilots, explorers, the military, etc. There were plans for self-improvement and higher education, as well as manual skills development programs and technical education schools, all built primarily around what a man would need to support a family. The role of men and women in American society was virtually established. The types of driving/construction/creation/management vocations were mostly occupied by men.

Women appeared mainly in support roles for men and rarely in leadership and/or decision-making positions. This representation of the role of women in society was largely due to the fact that most of them were housewives and mothers, and although the role that women played as housewives and mothers also implied, in many cases, the managing family finances, that was not considered a skill set. Women worked, among others, in: nursing, medical technologist, secretarial, waitress, organization, teaching in primary and secondary schools.

Were these types of vocations populated by women by their free choice, or was it due to social pressures?

The reasons for these job choices can be debated, although there is objective demonstration that, early in life, most women lag behind men in innate spatial and logical awareness.

The need to be in control of her situation and to be competitive was not recognized outside of the family situation. Their physical strength, being only forty percent of the men, caused them to be considered less capable for vocations that required physical strength. Did all this lead to women looking for work in disciplines other than technical?

Women were seen as the supplicant gender in sex. Men were seen as aggressors, leading some to fail to realize that, except in cases of rape, women are the gender that controls when and if sex occurs. She was also expected to live up to sexual expectations of her, which also led to the misconception that the male was dominant.

The reasons for the choices back then are important to this article just to draw the context to look at how things have changed since those days and access the impact these changes can have on men.

Minority groups within society began to receive more attention while gaining a larger role in social decision making as women gained prominence. Several minority groups have been identified: Women, people by place of origin [Latinos, Asians, and the like]black, disabled, LGBT people and a few others.

Recently there have been very bad actions by young men that have resulted in the death of innocent people and I wonder if the social changes in the last five decades have played a role in those actions.

I believe that the primal drives within men are still strong and a motor for their actions. They still strive to be leaders among the men and show it by doing almost every competitive activity. They still feel that they play the role of protectors of ‘their’ female, if they are modified. That ‘his’ woman of hers should admire and respect them. They think that they should be the decision makers in their relationship while conceding women’s things, such as decorating the house and control of household affairs, to ‘their’ wife and that they should be the last to discipline in the family . The image, as they see it, continues to be that of being the head of the relationship with ‘his’ wife of hers. They turn to sports to reinforce this. They still believe that they voluntarily concede leadership to ‘his’ wife of hers and that society as a whole supports that belief.

Weakness in a man is a very bad attribute. Her own reason for achievement diminishes and he suffers from his feeling of self-worth.

Men have always dealt with women rejecting their advances, but they still had the role models of strong leaders in the media to look up to and be impressed with. This is not the case.

Television is the main source of entry into society. The participation of women, LGBT people and minorities in the world of advertising has replaced that of heterosexual men. The decision-making process in marketing and advertising is heavily influenced by women and LGBT groups and raises the question: has the bottom line grown to the point that straight alpha males are being ridiculed or suppressed? It seems that may be the case.

The representation of the sexes on television impresses society with what genders should be. An example is the female complaint of the desirable woman: slim, fit, shapely, and beautiful.

As for the young man: no more strong role models; the clear-thinking, decision-making heroes he imagines his role to be. He does not have a female free activity area. There is no place where men can be men without the effect of female disapproval of their priorities and value system. In almost every advertisement, and most TV sitcoms, the man is portrayed as a bumbling jerk, unable to exist without a woman to make decisions, protect him, and defend him. Even in the world of sports, news and talk programming is no longer the province of men. Although the sport is contested by men, women, some who don’t even play, now lead panel discussions and news reports, replacing the men who once did. The young need role models, not anti-alpha male role models and not just men who excel in a game.

With only impressions of inadequate men and women’s leadership on television, and in some cases, his mother at the head of the family, the young man has nowhere to turn to legitimize his need to be a competitor. Does this diminish his achievements; his sense of self worth? Is academic performance an alternative? How do you deal with frustration? What role in society do you see for yourself? How would he act in this situation? What effect could that have on the already difficult need to earn the respect of men and attract a woman?