There's no doubt that, due to the economic crisis, many people are experiencing psychological unrest. Some more than others, yet is there a gender divide? This NYT's article, "Why the Sting of Layoffs Can Be Sharper for Men," asserts that men are more hurt by being laid-off, as the male "ego" is more dependent on being a financial provider.
I'm not convinced, and am somewhat put off by the conclusions that this article makes. First of all, this only talks about homes in which there is a husband and wife, no mention is made of single women or mothers. Secondly, the primary evidence provided to show layoffs effect men more than women is the increase of males going to therapy. “Considering that women tend to seek psychiatric help more often that men, what I’m seeing is striking,”says Dr. Richard A. Friedman. Are the numbers of women going to therapy increasing as well? This isn't mentioned, and without a comparative analysis one can't conclude that more men are seeking therapy due to the economy than women. No doubt some of the issues the article discusses exist. I think there is a societal pressure for men to be the main financial providers, a stereotype which hurts both genders in the workforce. Yet it is an oversimplification to conclude that men are thus more psychologically affected by job-loss. As a fledgling psychologist, I find the leaps of logic in this analysis to be too great for such little evidence. Also, you loose me when you start to talk about the "Cinderella syndrome."
