Note that the article has the word "women" in it only twice (and in an inconsequential sentence); and the word "female" 0 times. Discussing the unemployment le

Note that the article has the word "women" in it only twice (and in an inconsequential sentence); and the word "female" 0 times. Discussing the unemployment levels of men in America without taking into account the vast sociological changes involving the genders in the last 20-30 years e.g. a lot more women in the workforce, societal expectations of more parenting involvement from men, etc.) is not much use unless you are trying on some sort of strange shaming tactic on men. FWIW I don't think the author is doing this intentionally.