Return to Transcripts main page

The Situation Room

Why Are Men and Boys Falling Behind?; Scientists Blast Trump Administration Over Climate Change Denial; 80th Anniversary of End of World War II. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired September 02, 2025 - 11:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[11:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:31:35]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: Well, as a mother of two young boys, I think a lot about how to raise them in a society where boys and men are falling behind in several different areas, according to the data, like in education, the work force and social settings.

And that led me to want to further explore the why behind it. So, this week, we're rolling out a series with social scientist Richard Reeves. And he has studied these trends extensively as the founding president of the American Institute for Boys and Men. And he's also the author, "Of Boys and Men: Why the Modern Male Is Struggling, Why It Matters, and What to Do about It."

So I want to begin with the foundational years of shaping boys in the classroom starting with kindergarten. This summer, Washington, D.C., joined a group of major school districts across the country banning the practice of redshirting, where families delay kindergarten a year to give their child more time to develop emotionally or academically.

New York City, Chicago and Oklahoma public schools have all passed similar bans or restrictions on that practice, arguing it benefits wealthy families and that students should be with kids their own age. Other states support redshirting, with Tennessee finding that redshirted students perform better later on in third grade literacy tests than their peers.

Reeves explains why he's concerned about this growing trend of banning redshirting and why parents should strongly consider holding back their boys in kindergarten.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: What are your big issues with education and men and boys?

RICHARD REEVES, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BOYS AND MEN: The education system has become less boy-friendly over the last few decades. There's a few reasons for that.

One is a huge decline in the share of male teachers. And I think that inevitably has an effect on the culture and ethos of the school. And we do know that, when it comes to behavioral issues, et cetera, that having some men around helps, because, whether we like it or not, there are differences in the way that we behave.

And so having male teachers around just really helps us not to immediately pathologize the way in which boys are acting. I think one of the problems is that we have this view about how a student should be, that they should sit still for a certain period of time, focus on abstract work, have a certain level of emotional maturity.

And probably that student we have got in mind is a girl. And if boys aren't like that, we treat them like malfunctioning girls, sort of defective female students in a way. And so they get overdiagnosed with ADD, et cetera, or sometimes behavior just gets treated as requiring suspension or whatever.

And so it's a good reminder that these things are all on the average. The average 5-year-old girl is older than the average 5-year-old boy. And the average 15-year-old girl is definitely older than the average 15-year-old boy, as every parent will tell you, and as every teacher will tell you.

Girls hit puberty earlier. Their brains develop earlier. They just -- they become adult or more adult earlier than boys do. And that really translates into academic outcomes, because then they do, do their homework, they do turn up on time. They have got their acts together a little bit earlier than boys. And so that's why you see some of these huge education gaps that we couldn't see before.

BROWN: So, then, if you think the -- based on the data, that the 5- year-old girl is more ahead than the 5-year-old boy, should 5-year-old boys be held back and redshirted for kindergarten?

REEVES: I think they should, or at least they should have that option. I think that the fact that boys are known to be developmentally a little bit less mature than girls -- so, in terms of school readiness at around the age of 5, the gender gap is bigger than almost any other gap you can find, class, race, et cetera.

[11:35:10]

And so what you're seeing is just everyone knows this. It's just that boys are just a little bit less likely to be ready. So why not give them more time, give them an extra year of pre-K, give them a few months more of pre-K, so that then you would actually be leveling the field?

I think, at the very least, that should be an option that's available to parents and teachers.

BROWN: And it's not always an option, like in D.C., where we are right here.

REEVES: Right. In D.C., they just banned this, following the lead of some other cities. And the reason they did that was because they saw more affluent parents doing it. So, more affluent parents were actually holding their boys back especially to give them more chance in the school system, right, to give them more chance to succeed academically.

The irony here is actually it's the lower-income boys who would benefit more from a bit of extra time. And so the challenge here is that what the D.C. School Board and other see is, like, a class gap. So they see affluent parents doing it, but not lower-income parents doing it.

BROWN: What's your advice to parents through this journey of putting their boys through school and trying to get them ready for the world?

REEVES: Well, the key thing is that there's much more variation, like, between individual kids of all genders and races than there is -- like, you can't just have one rule. There is no one-size-fits-all rule here.

But I would say that if you are concerned that your son, in particular -- this could apply to your daughter too -- is just not ready for school, is not ready for kindergarten and certainly not ready for first grade, talk to teachers about it. You know, take your own instincts seriously.

There's a sort of industrial quality to the education system too often, which is like the conveyor belt starts at this age and we have to put your kids on and then they will fall off the conveyor belt on the other end, and that's just the way the system is. And the kids are, like going on to this conveyor belt, like in a factory.

It's like, well, maybe they're not ready for the conveyor belt. Like, maybe we could be a little bit more human about this and just ask the question, are they ready and could they benefit from a bit more time and talk to the teachers about that. So we should definitely take your instincts seriously about that.

And the other thing I would say to parents as much as to teachers is that there is a danger, I think even in the home, where we're holding our boys to a different standard and we're saying to ourselves and sometimes even to them, why aren't you more like your sister?

I used to think about my boys, why aren't you more like your sister? And they didn't have a sister. I made one up.

(LAUGHTER)

REEVES: I had an imaginary daughter that I could compare them to, always badly. And she would be able to remember to put both her shoes on before going to school.

BROWN: Right.

REEVES: When I opened her book bag, it wasn't like a controlled explosion of stuff. When she brought chemistry homework home, it wasn't in a ball, right? It was in a file. It was in a folder, right?

(LAUGHTER) REEVES: And so even without having a daughter, I think I had this kind of imaginary ideal.

And I do think that we all need to show a bit more patience, a bit more grace to our boys if they're struggling in the education system.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BROWN: Really interesting hearing his perspective on it, right, as someone who has studied the issue.

My kids, actually, they just went back to school today, and...

BLITZER: First day of school today.

BROWN: First day of school today.

And teachers are amazing. And he said that too. Look, teachers really are, and they should get more credit than they currently receive. At the same time, what he pointed out was interesting about just some of the issues in the education system now with fewer male teachers. And those male teachers might be able to better understand the boys' behavior and that kind of thing.

And his concern was that, without that, there's a -- you overpathologize with boys and diagnose them with things such as ADD, and some rightly have it. But by doing that, you're pathologizing with typical boy behavior, right?

And so it was really interesting, the case he made for holding kids back a year in kindergarten.

BLITZER: I'm really happy that you're doing these special reports for us here in THE SITUATION ROOM. And I know our viewers are happy as well. And there's more to come.

BROWN: Yes, there's more to come. And, tomorrow, we're going to dive into fatherhood and how important fatherhood is. So we're going to explore more about this decline of boys and men.

And we're really good to dive into, Wolf, what does it mean to be a dad and the positive effect dads have on boys and girls' lives? He makes it very clear it's not a zero sum game, right, Wolf? Here's a preview.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: How important are dads in the life of a boy?

REEVES: Dads are really important for kind of teenagers and adolescents, girls and boys, but especially boys, getting out into the world, kind of learning how to navigate the world, take some risks.

So, again, at the risk of stereotyping, but true on the average, dads are a little bit better at encouraging their kids to take risks. Moms are a little bit better at keeping them safe. And so the stereotype here would be throwing your kid in the air, right? You throw your kid in the air and catch them. When dads do that, they get a spike in the hormone oxytocin, which is like the bonding hormone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[11:40:12]

BROWN: And I have been guilty of saying, wait, don't -- make sure their head doesn't hit the ceiling. We talk about all of that. Make sure you tune in tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. for this continuing series.

BLITZER: The second hour of THE SITUATION ROOM at 11:00 a.m.

BROWN: Yes, that's right, 11:00 a.m.

BLITZER: We will be watching. Good work. Thank you so much.

BROWN: Thank you.

BLITZER: And just ahead: scathing words from more than 85 climate scientists pushing back against a Trump administration report for -- quote -- "making a mockery of science."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Happening now: Today marks 80, 80 years since Japan formally surrendered aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay, ending World War II.

[11:45:06]

A ceremony is being held at the World War II Memorial here in Washington, D.C.

BROWN: CNN correspondent Brian Todd is at the memorial.

Brian, you spoke with a veteran there today.

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Pamela and Wolf, we did. I'm going to get to that sound in just a second.

But setting the stage behind me here, we have a separate camera shot. You see this gentleman speaking here. His name is Dave Yoho, 97 years old. He is the keynote speaker here. He served on a Merchant Marine ship supplying combat ships in the South Pacific during World War II just at age 16. He's speaking here. A lot of other veterans are here.

This is a very important day, because this is one of the last chances we're going to get to hear these firsthand witness accounts from those who served during World War II regarding just what they went through and how they feel about the symbolism of this day. Right before he got on the stage to speak, I had a chance to catch up to Dave Yoho, asked him what the symbolism of this day means to him.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DAVE YOHO, WORLD WAR II VETERAN: It means that I am alive by God's grace to celebrate and spread the word, the truth of what happened to this great country and how we survived and how men and women gave up that space of life that they enjoyed to serve our government.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TODD: And a lot of people are just coming up to these veterans and thanking them for their service. Others on the stage here who aren't speaking, but include Jeffrey Donahue, 102 years old. He served as a Naval aviator during world war 2. He survived a kamikaze attack.

There's another gentleman here, Dominick Critelli, 104 years old. He served in the Battle of the Bulge. Guys it's so important because, again, this generation is fading from the scene. The Veterans Administration estimates that there are fewer than 66,000 living American veterans of World War II still around, so, so important to hear these stories and to honor these men and women here today -- guys.

BROWN: It absolutely is so important.

Brian Todd, thank you so much.

Coming up right here in THE SITUATION ROOM -- quote -- "It makes a mockery of science," strong words from scientists. They say the Trump administration is downplaying the severity of climate change. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)'

[11:52:10]

BROWN: Well, new this morning, more than 85 veteran climate scientists are pushing back against a Trump administration report that downplays the severity of climate change.

In a 400-page rebuttal to the Energy Department, researchers say the report -- quote -- "makes a mockery of science."

BLITZER: CNN's chief climate correspondent, Bill Weir, is joining us right now.

Bill, can you walk us through what these scientists are now pushing back against?

BILL WEIR, CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely, Wolf.

So the National Climate Assessment is the work of hundreds of experts, volunteers around the country, scientific luminaries to really assess how an overheating planet is affecting your health and wealth and happiness and how national security and international relations, all of these things are affected by it.

The Trump administration has methodically tried to bury that science, taking it offline, firing the scientists who are responsible for it for the next climate assessment. And, instead, the Department of Energy in July put out a sort of hastily assembled critique of basic climate scientists written by five noted contrarians.

And then the Environmental Protection Agency says, we're going to use that to take away the endangerment finding, which underpins all the legal regulation of big industrial pollution, tailpipe pollution, all the things that contribute to our overheating planet.

Well, finally, after -- they're only given about 30 days to respond. So these 86 different scientists, experts in the field, they put together a book-length response, 450-page response, and it's basically calling out everything in the Department of Energy's memo, Chris Wright, of course, a former fracking executive, assembling that.

They call out how they pooh-pooh sea level rise and how they call this trillion tons of climate extra carbon pollution plant food, the benefits of these sorts of things. They call out what they got wrong on the modeling, how they cherry-picked data and seems to almost intentionally misinterpret science in favor of fossil fuel industries and big polluters.

Andrew Dessler is one of the climate scientists behind this. He's out of Texas A&M. He said: "This is really a rerun of the tobacco battles. The goal here is not to win the debate. They're never going to win the debate. The science of climate change is incredibly solid. All they're trying to do is muddy the waters, create this idea that there is a debate, and then the government will use that to roll back regulations."

Just last week, the American Meteorological Society, the group that represents your local weathermen and science communicators at the local level, called this report a foundationally flawed and decrying it as well. I'm not sure if they're going to put that on the public record right now.

But whether this has any teeth, Wolf, means to be seen. We're seeing how the Trump administration is just chainsawing expertise and hollowing out these bureaus right now. These scientists, though, desperately hoping people will pay attention to science that's critical to prepare this country for what's coming.

[11:55:11]

BROWN: Yes, as Andrew Dessler said, there is no debate. Climate change is real. Look at the facts. Look at the data.

Bill Weir, thank you so much.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Finally, a very personal thought as we mourn the loss of two really incredible journalists I greatly admired.

Former CNN anchor and correspondent Charles Bierbauer has died. Charles joined CNN back in 1981 covering the Pentagon after an established career as a foreign correspondent. He served as CNN's senior White House correspondent and later as CNN's senior Washington correspondent. He retired from CNN back in 2001 and became the founding dean of journalism at the University of South Carolina, mentoring a new generation of reporters.

Charles Bierbauer was 83 years old.

We're also remembering the life of legendary CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller. He died at the age of 73. Mark covered eight presidential administrations and was celebrated here in Washington as the -- quote -- "unofficial presidential archivist" for his encyclopedic knowledge of the White House.

Both Charles and Mark were truly brilliant journalists, very generous people, and dear friends. Their work helped shape how we all understand Washington, and they were both instrumental in helping me when I became a CNN White House correspondent back in 1992. Like so many of my journalistic colleagues, I will always be grateful to them.

Our deepest, deepest condolences to their loved ones. May they rest in peace, and may their memories be a blessing.

BROWN: True legends.

BLITZER: They really helped me a lot.

BROWN: Sorry for your loss, Wolf.

BLITZER: Yes.

BROWN: It's very tough.

Well, thank you so much for joining us this morning. We will see you back here tomorrow morning and every weekday morning at 10:00 a.m. Eastern.

BLITZER: "INSIDE POLITICS WITH DANA BASH" starts right now.