While our society is still male-dominated in the political world, despite the much heralded arrival of our first female Prime Minister, women are increasingly ascending the corporate and other worlds. Although in the minds of some feminists this may not seem to be a bad thing what is really worrying, to me and many others who have observed the phenomenon, is the gradual skewing of performances by the sexes in the past two decades, both academically and in the working world.

The facts are there and speak for themselves. In the SEA exam results we first see it. Girls outperform boys and this is clearly evidenced in who are the top performers. The situation continues at CXC and shows itself in the CAPE results after Sixth Form.

It is one thing to say that girls mature quicker than boys which may account for their performance even up to their teenage years. But when do the boys mature? When do they catch up? If one looks at the persons filling the jobs in the working world nowadays it is hard to imagine there can ever be a balancing of scales or a recovery from the skewing in favour of women.

Take the law school. Last Saturday, of the 123 students to graduate from the Hugh Wooding Law School 94 were women and 29 men. This means that more than three-quarters of the graduates were female as compared to about eight years ago when only two-thirds were female. While some of the graduates are from other southern Caribbean countries as well, the majority are from T&T and the ratio remains the same.

What is responsible for this dramatic shift in performance by the sexes?

It has been suggested to me that to begin with there are simply more females than males. This is simply not true. The last census done in T&T was 10 years ago [we are due for another one]. At that time the total population was 1.26 million and there were 633,000 men, nearly 4,000 more than the total number of women. In the age group 5-9 [now 15-19] there was a total of 52,913 boys to 51,594 girls. The age group 10-14 [now 20-24] showed 65,367 boys to 64,037 girls while for ages 15-19 [now 25-29] there were 69,774 to 68,703. It is only from the age of 65 and over that women outnumber men. Furthermore there are about 17,000 children being born every year with slightly more males than females. It is clearly untrue to say then that there are more females than males in the general population.

Another myth is that the disparity results from the fact that the men are either being killed off or are in prison. As at September 28 this year the prison population comprised some 3,755 prisoners of whom 3,651 were male. The largest age group was 18-25 [an eight-year span] with 1,130 prisoners while the second largest was 26-35 [another eight-year span] which comprises 1,112 prisoners. Since the differences between the number of males and females in a five-year span in the general population is often more than 1,000 anyway, the number of men in prison does not affect the proportion of available men.

As for men dying it is only in the last four years or so that roughly 400 men between the ages of 18-30 have been killed annually. While this contributes to a reduction in number of the males in those age groups it still does not result in there being more females than males in the key population between the ages of 15-30.

The fact remains that with effectively the same number of young men and women in our society the number of eligible men is dwindling. Soon they will become an endangered specie at the tertiary level, in the professions and in the job market. This kind of imbalance cannot be good for any society. It was not good when women were doormats and denied equal treatment in opportunities for education and acquiring professional competencies. It is not good now that for some reason the majority of males seem unable to keep up with their female counterparts in these areas.

Before we can offer solutions we need to address the causes. We have seen the symptoms and will continue to see them for sometime to come but healthy societies cannot afford this unevenness and not simply out of concern as to who the women will marry. It matters because we might find ourselves with a whole gender sidelined and we are not yet desirous of a world ruled by Amazons [mentally or physically].

Psychologists must tell us: why are boys and young men not as focused on education or performance [other than on the football field]? Are they more easily distracted? If that is so what remedial measures should we put in place in primary or pre-schools to correct this? Is it a question of self-image in that more demands are made of males at an early age? Or is it that men are less aggressive when it comes to academics because they historically had all the advantages handed to them on a silver platter while women in the last 100 years had to fight for opportunities that were considered the sole prerogative of the male?

All of these issues need to be addressed—and addressed speedily. Consideration must be at least given to whether some form of affirmative action might not be appropriate at the tertiary level with a goal to admitting a higher percentage of males in that system.

The question for determination at the end of the day is not so much where are the men—but why are the men becoming dropouts in society.

Dana S Seetahal is a former Independent Senator