Are White men victims of their own top-dog status? Equity researchers eye provocative hypothesis through lens of health and wellbeing

Conventional wisdom holds that social standing and economic stability tend to manifest as long life, good health and optimal wellbeing. In the U.S., the subpopulation holding the most such power and footing is White men. Therefore, White men should evidence longer lives, better health and superior wellbeing compared with all other subgroups. 

As it turns out, the syllogism isn’t even close to being reflected in reality. 

Or, as put by researchers in an analytic essay published April 30 in the American Journal of Public Health:

“[I]t is paradoxical that non-Hispanic White American men do not collectively experience better health outcomes than minoritized racialized and gendered groups.”

The authors of the report, health-equity experts Caroline Efird, PhD, MPH, of Georgetown University and Derek Griffith, PhD, of the University of Pennsylvania, spend the bulk of the piece asking why “structural advantages” don’t consistently translate into health heighteners for “all men racialized as White.”

Their core justification for the project is their conviction that “understanding White men’s health and wellbeing through the intersection of structural whiteness and hegemonic masculinity may enhance our ability to improve U.S. population health.”

The researchers’ more thought-provoking observations, all backed by references to prior research, include these five. 
 

1. White male bodies have been the (often unnamed) standard in biomedical research, but this approach fails to consider how gender and other structural factors affect White men’s health.

White men are “frequently the default comparison group in health research, and it is rare for investigators to designate them as the population of interest explicitly,” Efird and Griffith remark. 

And yet, as of 2022, non-Hispanic White men could expect to live an average of only 75.1 years. That’s a significantly shorter life expectancy than the evidence-based projection for Hispanic men (77.0 years), non-Hispanic White women (80.1 years) and non-Hispanic Asian men (82.3 years), the authors note.  
 

2. Men are four times as likely to die by suicide as women, and White men account for more than 68% of suicide deaths.

Over the life course, White boys and men have the highest suicide rates of any demographic group.

 

3. Related to well-being, White Americans report less satisfaction with their number of friends than do Black and Latino Americans.

Among men, loneliness is significantly associated with a higher prevalence of cognitive impairment for White but not Black men, Efird and Griffith report. Loneliness and social isolation “can be as detrimental to health as smoking 15 cigarettes per day,” they write, adding that social isolation generally increases the risk of stroke and inhibits proper management of chronic conditions such as diabetes. 

“Moreover, White men experienced greater declines in happiness in recent decades than White women and Black men and women.”
 

4. In a nation that has yielded them myriad political, economic and social advantages, it is paradoxical that White men do not experience the best health relative to women and minoritized racial and gender groups. 

“The structural conditions of oppression (e.g., racism) and supremacy (e.g., whiteness, hegemonic masculinity) in the United States generally work to elevate the social dominance of White men in ways that provide systematic advantages,” Efird and Griffith point out. “Yet these structural conditions can simultaneously harm their health and wellbeing.” 

Here the authors name the stress of unrealistically high expectations for achievement and status. When frustrated, such expectations can contribute to adverse outcomes in mental and behavioral health. These, in turn, can cascade into poor outcomes in physical health-and-wellness categories. 

“To be clear,” the authors clarify, “we are suggesting simply that White men’s health and well-being warrant attention, particularly if the goal is to achieve optimal U.S. population health.”
 

5. There is a potential health penalty associated with being in the most socially dominant racialized and gendered group in a nation where structural inequality thrives. 

“This should be alarming, even for the most privileged populations, who are least likely to experience oppression or discrimination,” Efird and Griffith comment. “Similar to how the costs of dominance are key reasons men are more depressed by the experience of cancer than are women, we contend that the costs of whiteness and hegemonic masculinity are associated with worse morbidity, higher mortality and poorer mental health and wellbeing among some White men.”

More:

‘Policies and programs aimed at reducing structural inequality have the potential to improve the health of both majoritized and marginalized populations. Furthermore, as the federal government restricts access to data that are disaggregated by race, ethnicity and gender, it is imperative to continue conducting research that exemplifies the value of an intersectional approach.’

The full paper is posted here (PDF behind paywall).