Is the "demise of guys" a harbinger for the demise of human development?
Renowned researcher Philip Zimbardo crystallizes an unintended consequence of digital economy. It appears male social, educational and sexual capacities are undermined by the ubiquity of consumer resources online.
The lynch-pin that has been removed? Real-life experience. The result? A stunting of relational learning.
Without in-person experience, social skills regress. Without social skills, education is truncated. Only so much learning goes on without ongoing human interaction.
As example: Boy’s sexual development is now predominantly accessed via computer. Without trial and error in real relationships, boys can’t learn the complex give-and-take co-responsiveness required for successful, sustained partnerships at home, in school and work. Needless to say, females lose out too without males to learn with.
All conspire in a viscous cycle that leaves significant gaps in human development. Researchers and others have sounded this alert for some time, to little avail. Some I've written of:
Author Jon Scieszka -- http://sparkaction.org/node/443
College football players – http://bit.ly/rgE6m8
Psychologist Michael Thompson PhD -- http://bit.ly/oWs0Ar
Now a quickening effect is underway. Its impacts don’t bode well for either gender.
An example: US researchers now find it difficult to find male subjects who haven't bought sex, in part, due to online marketing. Which, in turn, scaffolds regressive social norms that further undermine healthy relationships.
Compounding these are trends in other countries where infanticide and abortion insure greater numbers of boys, ostensibly for economic production. It is expected there will be 50 million more men than women populating India and China in 2021.
Imbalances like these lead to increased violence and crime, including sex trafficking. Which, in turn, strap resources needed for building education and family systems.
Can we derail this demise of guys—and, can doing so save our societies?