Rhetorical Analysis: “Where Have the Good Men Gone?” By Kay Hymowitz

Total Word Count: 796
   Send article as PDF   

<p style=”margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; line-height:200%”>The article by Kay Hymowitz, &lsquo;Where Have the Good Men Gone?&rsquo; outlines the issues surrounding the inadequacies of men when it comes to different issues and roles in the society.&nbsp; The article was published in Wallstreet Journal and caught attentions of many readers given the exaggerated view of the conservative writer. Hymowitz defines pre-adulthood as a mix of puerility and autonomy that men in their 20s often experience hence inhibiting their development into self-sustaining adults at a rapid pace (Hymowitz 1). The writer argues men continue to fall in societal progression while also analyzing the gender roles, maturity, progress and the role of millennials. It also explains the existing perceived differences between pre-adults and adolescents. Accordingly, this paper gives a rhetorical analysis of the article while giving my assessment about the author&rsquo;s work. Notably, the article has a support of a particular audience who appreciate the analysis of the author.</p>
<p style=”margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-indent: .5in;line-height:200%”>The writer uses cultural references and stereotypical representation of young men, which shows her rhetoric when it comes to matters of gender in the contemporary world. As such, &ldquo;Today&#39;s pre-adult male is like an actor in a drama in which he only knows what he shouldn&#39;t say &ldquo;(Hymowitz 5). Besides, Hymowitz&#39;s use of hyperbole was to emphasize further her point, that men are immature and as such, the desperation of the author to highlight her points make many readers rely less on her work. Additionally, Hymowitz blatantly argues that men have impaired judgments hence in a state of confusion, undergoing regression back to a &#39;pre-adulthood, engaging in behaviors or activities that people of their age should not do, are becoming increasingly useless and some are less financially independent than women. As such, Hymowitz&#39;s stereotypical portrayal of men as immature encompasses her rhetoric to drive her points to the readers.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>
<p style=”margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-indent:.5in;line-height:200%”>Another aspect of rhetorical strategy of Hymowitz is her tone. While her conservative audience may adopt to a highly analytical as well as a frank tone, the young and progressive thinkers who are both male and female may perceive her tone as sarcastic, unsympathetic as well as hypercritical.&nbsp; For instance, she concludes that women may put up with the mean for a while but then may decide to give up on the goal of having a husband and children and rather choose to go a sperm bank and get a DNA. The writer blames such decisions and the inability of men to grow up and concludes that no one needs them. The rhetorical perspective of this idea is that of implicitly blaming women for qualifying men&rsquo;s immaturity with their autonomy. Besides, it generalizes, dehumanizes as well as trivializes the role of men and exemplifies the problematic tone that writer maintains throughout her article. As such, she says, &ldquo;Unlike adolescents, however, pre-adults don&#39;t know what is supposed to come next&rdquo; &ldquo;(Hymowitz 4).</p>
<p style=”margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-indent:.5in;line-height:200%”>Hymowitz&rsquo;s viewpoint about men corresponds with the views of, non-millennial conservative audience. As such, the author should have assumed the strategy of using anecdotal, historical, statistical, systematic, and satirical tone would be persuasive to them.&nbsp; She could have also taken advantage of including male and female millennial positions to adopt to an impartial, levelheaded tone (Hymowitz 7). Nevertheless, the inability to employ such strategies rendered the piece less thoughtless and intellectually irresponsible. It rather employed logical/rhetorical gaps characterized by value judgments. The author explains societal problems from a sociological perspective hence a rhetorical exploration.</p>
<p style=”margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:200%”>&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;In conclusion, Hymowitz&rsquo;s claims may have different viewpoints depending on the analysis of the context of the writing. It is true that the society has changed as she claims. It is also true that her statistical analysis of men may appeal to a larger audience. However, her analysis is marred with series of rhetorical strategies, which may be intentional, or not. Most importantly, people should not engage in sexualized ideals of women, damaging labels and tribulations of millennials, generalized views of gender roles as well as how to be adults in the digitalized and dynamic world.</p>

Scroll to Top