
From birth to death, men and women experience different outcomes on key dimensions of human flourishing including health, education, and economic opportunity. Some of these differences are stark, others less so. Some favor women, others men.
Here we show gender gaps in selected measures at different points in the lifecycle (we recommend pressing the play button and watching all the way through):
Figure 1
American men do worse on measures like educational attainment, criminal status, and life expectancy. However, they have more favorable outcomes on measures like earnings and employment. For instance, about 79% of 25 year-old men were employed, compared to 72% of women; on the other hand, about 39% of 30-year old men have at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to 46% of women. The largest gaps are in incarceration, where men are far more likely to have ever been incarcerated. Outcome gaps related to natal and infant health are smaller in comparison.
Our analysis here is inspired by a similar representation of Danish data, undertaken by the Rockwool Foundation. The key points are simply that measures of gender equality should include boys and men, as an earlier paper by Richard V. Reeves and Allen Downey shows. Likewise efforts to promote gender equality should look both ways.
Data noteData included in this visualization come from a number of sources:
To allow for visualization on the same figure and accommodate data limitations, each measure was standardized as follows:
Bars show men’s deviation from the overall sample mean (rather than the direct male–female difference). In approximately balanced samples for continuous variables, this corresponds to roughly half the gender gap; if one gender is overrepresented (e.g., births are ~51% male), the overall mean shifts slightly toward that group, though this effect is minimal in the datasets used here.
In order to place all measures on the same scale, we standardize the outcomes rather than using the raw measures; for instance, while the difference between average SAT math scores between men and women are 515 and 500, respectively, the effect size for men is about 0.06. This standardized effect size allows us to plot employment rates alongside test scores for instance. See the data note above for a more detailed explanation of our methodology.
Naturally, this visualization will never be able to tell the entire story, as a myriad of other outcomes, like parent and marital status, could be shown. Despite this limitation, the outcomes shown here still cover a wide range of important milestones and indicators across age, and they highlight places where we can help boys and girls, and men and women alike.
The AIBM team thanks Allen Downey for his analysis on this piece.
Get the latest developments on the trends and issues facing boys and men.

Peer pressure and masculine norms discourage boys—especially disadvantaged ones—from visible academic effort, widening education gaps.

How young people not in work or school spend their days—and why NEET men’s leisure time and isolation matter for norms, policy, and work.
Boys face early, lasting education gaps. Research shows most interventions fall short—except high-dose tutoring with proven gains.