When did age 30 become a deadline for men?

THE EDITOR, Madam:

A recent podcast sparked debate on male empowerment. Beneath the surface of the discussion lies a deeply problematic assertion: that a man who has not achieved a certain level of financial success by the age of 30 is a “failure” or a “bum.” Such statements ultimately do more harm than good.

Defining a man’s worth solely by his financial position is a form of identity reduction that fosters shame rather than growth. When success is framed as a rigid deadline, men who are still navigating career pathways or economic instability are not motivated, they are marginalised. Several bodies of research in motivation and self-concept consistently show that shame-based messaging undermines self-efficacy and increases the likelihood of disengagement rather than improvement.

The argument fails to account for the broader structural realities that shape individual outcomes. Employment opportunities, access to education, social capital, and economic mobility are not evenly distributed. To label men as failures without acknowledging these contextual factors is to ignore the very systems that influence their trajectories. It shifts the conversation from understanding to blame, reinforcing a narrow and exclusionary standard of masculinity that does not reflect lived realities.

The expectation that all men should achieve financial independence and be capable of supporting a family by 30 is increasingly unrealistic. Rising living costs, unstable labour markets, and shifting family structures have redefined what adulthood looks like. The traditional model of the male sole provider no longer holds as a universal standard. To continue promoting it as a benchmark of success is disconnected from economic reality.

Perhaps most concerning, however, is the language used. Words like “failure” and “bum” are labels that actively shape how individuals see themselves and how they are perceived by others. Language can either build or erode. When men are consistently described in deficit-based terms, it reinforces harmful narratives that equate masculinity with financial dominance while dismissing other dimensions of growth, such as emotional intelligence, resilience, and personal development.

If the goal is male empowerment, then the conversations must evolve. Empowerment cannot be rooted in rigid timelines, economic absolutism, or demeaning language. It must instead be grounded in accountability, yes, but also in context, adaptability, and respect for the diverse pathways through which men grow and succeed.

JAEMAR JOHNSON

Behaviour Analyst