
Earlier this week, I began a discussion of the way that manhood in American society is changing. Today, I want to revisit the topic with some of my own ideas about how these changes could lead to a more enriching and satisfying take on masculinity.
Before I do that, though, I want to say how thrilled I was at the response the first post got – I had never expected such lengthy, thoughtful comments and the depth of insight that you, Lifehack’s readers, have shared with us. I had intended to respond directly to some of the comments, but they turned out to be so rich and complex that any response I could give would hardly do them justice. If you missed that post, I implore you to go back and look at the comments.
I also want to point out that these changes are not limited to the American scene, though that’s the context I know best. Around the world, women are emerging as major players in the increasingly global economy. One sign of the role women are playing is the success of the microloan movement, many of whose programs lend primarily or solely to women.
I don’t claim that I have all the answers, by the way. In fact, despite the fact that I teach women’s studies for a living and have spent more than a decade dwelling on the issues I’m raising in these posts, I am as prone to chauvinistic thinking, objectification of women, and just plain dumb behavior as the next guy. It’s the way we’ve been socially and culturally conditioned — creating unconscious thought processes that aren’t always immediately apparent. The best I think we can hope for is self-awareness and growth, not the instant transformation of every man into a superhero overnight. It will be the next generation, the kids who grow up in a world where women are full participants in our public lives, that will show us best how to be men that embrace true equality – and I have no doubt that they’ll look on me as unkindly as I look on, say, the anti-Suffragists of the last century.
We are all feminists now.
Aside from a few hard-core traditionalists, just about everyone now accepts as a given that both men and women will have an education, a career, and a public life. Each and every one of us benefits daily from the greater participation of women in our society: we use medicines developed by women, we use products designed by women, we live by laws written by and voted on by women, and so on. By lowering the barriers that prevented women from developing to their fullest extent in the past, we have effectively doubled the pool of talent that we as a society draw on.
The idea that a woman can’t be this or that is falsified by the reality that there is virtually no job category that women haven’t entered and excelled in. Real men encourage those around them, male or female, to realize their fullest potential, regardless of their own or others’ preconceptions. That’s feminism.
There is no “men’s work” and “women’s work”, there is only work.
Sociologists estimate that there are as many as 2 million stay-at-home dads in the US right now. And fathers as a whole – stay-at-home dads or otherwise – spend almost as much time with their children as mothers do. Men do laundry, cook dinner, buy groceries, and drop the kids off at soccer practice. Meanwhile, women write legal briefs, run for office, work construction equipment, and direct corporate mergers. The idea that certain kinds of work are “feminine” or “masculine” is dead in the water. Although there are plenty of holdouts who are still inclined to fill positions based at least in part on gender, the most successful businesses work hard to focus their hiring on demonstrated talent. Likewise, the most successful families have found that splitting household tasks not according to gender but according to skill and available time. There are plenty of un-handy men around, and plenty of non-domestic women, and we all benefit when they’re encouraged to do the things they’re good at instead of the things their gender allegedly suits them for.
Parenting is fundamental.
The reason that so many men are choosing to spend all or a significant part of their lives elbow-deep in domestic parenting tasks is that we are finally learning how much we’ve been missing in our traditional 8am-8pm work+commute+overtime workaholic schedules. Whole generations of men have missed not only seeing their kids grow up, but seeing themselves grow up. Parenting is about so much more than financially supporting someone through their childhood years, it’s about tending to cuts and scrapes, putting a balanced meal on the table, and dealing with the scores of childhood traumas that mark our growth into personhood. It’s about sacrifice, hands-on responsibility, and struggling alongside our kids to make sense of the world. The stereotypical middle-aged man sporting a ponytail and a convertible is, I think, a product of the kind of selfishness that real parenting necessarily eliminates.
Passion is a priority.
Manhood in the 20th century was about financial success – working a job you hate because it puts food on the table. With both men and women supporting their families, though, some of that pressure is lifted. Of course, we still need to work, but just as important as earning a living is the passion that drives us to excel – even at careers that are not especially lucrative. We can see, for instance, the rise of “lifestyle entrepreneurs“, people who start their own businesses not so much in hopes of getting rich but in order to support themselves doing something they love, as an indicator of the way that income is giving way to passion as a measure of one’s manhood.
Embrace difference.
It’s becoming harder and harder to take people who rant about the difference between men and women seriously. For every generalization, we can point to a thousand exceptions – men who love shopping and women who hate it, women who whoop and holler over their football team’s victory and men who couldn’t tell you if the Cleveland Browns play in the American League or the National League*.
Traditional masculinity was about punishing any man who stepped out of bounds, whether it was because he was gay, feminine, physically weak, or in some other way short of the masculine standard. That simply doesn’t fly any more – there are as many different ways of being “manly” (or “womanly”, for that matter) as there are men (or women). And success doesn’t come in spite of those differences, it comes because of it – they create the diversity that allows businesses, organizations, and other endeavors to be flexible, to adapt to changing circumstances, and to innovate. In short, difference allows us to thrive, and we need to stop fearing it and embrace it.
And that goes for other kinds of differences, too – racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, religious, national, linguistic, you name it. Being a confident man these days means not being threatened by what we don’t understand, it means seeking greater understanding.
* Yes, I know. It’s funny, see?
It’s about us.
Though “being one’s own man” has long been held up as a standard of masculinity, it’s rarely been realized in practice. The eras of manhood that we look back to nostalgically as models of “when men were men” – I’m thinking, for example, of the Mad Men era – were times of stunning conformity. We weren’t our own men, we were beholden to a particularly narrow model of what men should be, and men who didn’t fit that model were punished, often brutally.
The 21st century offers men a real opportunity to live up to the ideal of being our own men, though. The possibilities for personal development and self-expression have never been greater. It’s no longer about what women find attractive – freed from the need to find man to support and protect them, women are finding themselves attracted to a wide range of types that in the past might have been considered “unmanly”. It’s no longer about being “one of the boys” – that kind of conformity is poison to the modern workplace and to modern communities. No, manhood today is about us, about living our own lives as fully and satisfyingly as we can.
It’s about you.
Like I said, I don’t have all the answers, and I’m intensely curious about your thoughts. I’ve left some things out, too – most notably sex, but also fashion, personality, and matters of taste or style. These things have become so various that there’s no way I could do them any justice here. By and large, I think they fall under the category of embracing difference – of recognizing that in a society where diversity is a crucial value, men will find a huge variety of ways to dress, act, enjoy their leisure time, and make love. But maybe you have thoughts on those topics as well – the conversation in part 1 was brilliant, let’s see if we can keep it up in the comments here!







Dustin, such great thinking and writing and talking goin’ on here!
As a feminist (yes, we are all feminists) and a mother to a 13-year-old boy, the biggest challenge is for all of us to become conscious about what we ingest from our culture.
For example, we all know that housework is anyone’s work. And yet I’ve assumed complete responsibility for all those tasks without even a thought of having a conversation with my husband. I also assume that my husband will handle the car stuff.
The good news is that I also assume that he would never objectify or belittle me, or expect me to be less capable, or tell me what I can or cannot do. Those things don’t even occur to either of us, thanks not only to the feminist movement, but to the many examples in our families of accomplished, driven men and women.
Despite how groovy we are, I overheard my son telling a raunchy sexual joke, basically a sexual put down of a woman. The joke was actually way beyond his years, his experience and his understanding. I pulled him aside and had a conversation about being a real man. Upshot was that a real man never objectifies or belittles another to make himself look better. It comes off as smarmy and weak. I asked him to take a stand for himself, his friends and his future girlfriends. If his deer-in-headlights expression is any indication, he got it.
If my examples can be extrapolated to the larger culture, it seems that we’re standing in the middle of a bridge between where we were and where we’re going. We’ve come a long way, but we have a long way to go.
Lisa you also said great things. I have a feeling that your son got those attitudes from pornography which is extremely sexist,woman-haing,and dehumanizes women as nothing but sex objects to be used to sexually please and serve men,unfortunately because it’s been unjustly mainstreamed and made to seem acceptable,even if you are a feminist mom he can still be influenced by it to have these kinds of attitudes towards women.
These posts have been great. It is amazing how many people still think certain jobs or qualities are on acceptable by a single sex. Slowly things are emerging, especially in the workplace and that is likely because of the anti-discrimination laws that are in place. Hopefully as time goes on people will continue to be more open minded about being individuals and not based on ones gender.
Regardless, these posts have been awesome! I would be interested to hear more on the subject.
Brad C thank you! You really are great,what you said shows *you* at least are a guy who does really get it and cares, and aren’t too threatened to recognize this. What you said was so well said and true! Can we clone you?
Alas! Part 2 has arrived! I can once again be nourished by your wisdom! Ahhh – Tastes Brilliant!
When I look back on the evolution of gender relations, advancements and accomplishments I feel an overwhelming sense of pride. With time has come the importance and action to address the issues between us and how in turn it will impact our lives and future.
I really liked the spotlight you placed on parenting. Personally I am able to see the significance of having a male role model in a child’s life (whether the child is male or female). I feel the representations of males and females that we were exposed to throughout the duration of our upbringing directly impact how we relate and conduct ourselves in relations with those of the same and opposite sex as adults.
In terms of sexuality, development and exploration have been constant and the degree to which expression has evolved is superior. More and more men have rejected labels, stereotypes and confinement in terms of being honest and connecting with their sexuality and that of their partner. It is exciting and intensely liberating to be able to share yourself with another on an intimate level without the confines of rules or fears (At least once trust has been established).
By cutting the proverbial rope that has hog tied our potential as men and women, it is now clear to see that what the human body, heart and mind have the capacity to feel, experience and achieve are indefinite and when you achieve that level of peace and freedom then you are really experiencing the miracle of being alive.
Beside every great man is a great woman!
Dustin, great post, as always.
On the idea that “We are all feminists now”, I really want to believe this, though my observations tell me we have more evolution to do in this regard…
Eighty-fourth in the world — that’s where the United States ranks for women in elected office, behind Mexico, China and Pakistan. Even after the most recent 2008 election, women make up just 17% of the U.S. Congress.
As for the rest of the world, when mass rape of women takes place in the Congo today, when many more girl babies in China are dying because they are not getting the care that their boy counterparts get today, I struggle believing that we are all feminists now…
Oh, Dustin, I wish you would grow a pair.
Why does being a man in the 21st century have so much to do with feminism? Why does it have so much to do with women in general? Who did you write this article for, Dustin? Men? It doesn’t sound like it.
“The 21st century offers men a real opportunity to live up to the ideal of being our own men, though.”
This ideal you speak of… It’s been generated for you by feminists.
This is really a sad article. Rather than empowering men to be men, you’ve tucked tail and said everything you were supposed to say. Congradulations!
No, Mike what is *really sad is that you like so many people just don’t get it. And your sexist anti-feminism is very sadly typical too. congratulations!
Mike: Maaculinity has *always* had “so much to do with women” — my contention is that the more equality we have for women, the more *all* of us can focus on developing our own skills and talents instead of trying to fit into the box society has laid before us.
Since I am a feminist, I guess that means this idea has been generated for me by… myself! And that’s the potential I wish for all men. Yay!
I think the most amazing part of all this is the possibility that men and women have to choose what they want to be.
As a man you don’t have to stay at home, but you can choose to do it if you want to, same goes for women. The way the ideas about manhood and womanhood are changing gives freedom to women, but also gives men the chance to live free from the traditional expectations of what a man should be.
Sadly, somehow this makes some men (and even some women) feel threatened.
Cath you hit a the zillion nails on the head! And you are *SO RIGHT*! That’s why so many women and men buy the Mars Venus false terrible sexist gender myths,and also read horrible Dr.Laura’s(who like Gray,tells women they should give their husbands sex even if they don’t want and or are too tired for it) best selling books,and others like them.Most people’s whole idenities all of their lives has been based on being taught these sexist gender myths,gender roles,and gender stereotypes,so that is what is so threatening to them,and so terribly damaging inaccurate books like these tell people what they want to hear because it reaffrms what they have been taught to belive their whole lives.
Dustin, I don’t think being masculine or being a man has anything to do with women. Masculinity, by definition, is the antithesis of femininity… A yin and yang sort of thing, don’t you think?
To be honest, being masculine in the 21st century means biting your tongue. It means giving other people an unfair advantage because of their gender. It means watching what you say, look at, or imply around co-workers. It means saying no to progress at times because it will hurt someone’s feelings.
This is truly a miserable time to be a man. If you’re willing to castrate yourself and act like a eunuch, than you might make out OK.
This is a joke.
Those things don’t even occur to either of us, thanks not only to the feminist movement, but to the many examples in our families of accomplished, driven men and women.
Mike: You’re getting the details, just not the point. Maculinity only means the “antithesis” of women in a society that hates women. We are moving beyond that, and have an opportunity to define ourselves as something other than the “opposite” of women (whatever that might mean — what, we grow our hair on the inside?). ow are you going to define yourself as the “antithesis” of the woman police officer, marine, or backhoe operator? Of the woman CEO, surgeon, or (one day) President? By beating stuff up? There must be *something* left to men other than physical brawn — especially as, with so many women in the gym, there’s a good chance that they can outlift, outrun, and outlast you and me.
It’s not a miserable time to be a man — it’s a miserable time to be a man without inagination.
BElinda: This is a forward-looking post, and I’ll admit that there are places where present-day circumstance blends into wishful thinhing. I think we have to *admit* that feminism has created huge changes, mostly positive, in our society, and that if we’re honest with ourselves we can see that any misgivings we historically had about women in any capacity have been proven wrong again and again. That said, there is a lot of resistance to that; my point is that this resistance is misguided and that it hurts both women *and* men.
Flawed, flawed, flawed arguments all. You presume men stay at home and do the household chores because they want to without regard to the increase in women going to work. You assume the women at work want to be there rather than at home. And the women responders say this is wonderful because…they read in a magazine somewhere it’s supposed to be wonderful so it must be. Yet, in a poll shown on the national news last week, half of all men and women wish the women could stay home.
So where are those numbers, hearts and minds coming from if, according to your article, the opposite must be normal? The opposite of your article is how men and women have behaved since dawn of life!
Mike, PLEASE don’t encourage castration…It is the kind of liberal thinking and modern mind set that make women need men like Dustin for procreation so that we can introduce a generation of boys to be men into the world who will be confident and uphold the true definition of a man and achieve their destiny!
I feel the introduction of women into a “man’s world” did impact men because it redefined their masculinity. Alleviating the responsibilities and showing a man what a “little feminine flower” can do proved to them that women can (figuratively) have balls too. I think it was inevitable that men would acknowledge and embrace their feminine side and through that redefine who they were.
Let’s take a look at metro sexuality. If that isn’t proof of masculinity infused with feminity I don’t know what is. Some people question whether metro sexuality is in reality an offspring of homosexuality. I personally don’t feel it is. Homosexuality is clearly defined by 1 factor – sexual attraction to someone of the same sex. We don’t need to go into the extremes of eyebrow plucking and using tea cozies, but by man opening himself up to experiences that in past were an unheard of practice based on his gender(such as an interest in activities and products that will maintain an attractive and healthy body, exposing himself to the passion and beauty derived from nature, music and art), he has improved his quality of life, connected on a more significant level with his partner and gained more freedom because he also could now express his emotions. He could allow himself to be vulnerable and face the truth that he needs help sometimes too. That even the rock that is man can crumble. None of these things make a man any less of a man, if anything they make him more.
If we are to truly embrace equality amongst the sexes, there should not be gender advantage and no, you should NOT have to make any adjustments to your conduct unless you are guilty of being inappropriate or offensive. Heterosexual men can launch complaints in the work place if they are offended by the words or action of another MAN or WOMAN. The only one who hinders you is yourself. If you lack confidence, or are intimidated by women or feel that you had to adjust yourself to be any less of a man in order to maintain tranquility in the 21st century then you need to come out from under that umbrella and get in the rain!
Except the whole point and what a large amount of strong psychological research studies shows,is that there isn’t really any “feminine” and “masculine” sides,they are really *human* traits,abilities,thoughts,feelings, etc,that our very sexist gender divided,gender stereotyped male diminated society labels and defines as “masculine” and “feminine”, and this is what is so limiting and damaging for many women *and* men,because people only are allowed to become a half of a person,instead of total full balanced humanbeings!
Most men’s entire “masculine” idenities are based on being strongly taught and trained from the time they are born,to reject,and put down anything that our culture defines as “feminine” and to be nothing like girls and women,which encourages woman-hatred because it teaches them that anything considered to be anything what our society defines as “feminine” or anything like females is inferior and should be rejected in themselves. It makes sense that most men would want to seem as different from women as possible though,because if they didn’t then they would be discriminated against,hated too,and be victims of other men’s hatred and violence like women are.
It makes sense that the oppressor and discriminators would not want to seem to be too much like the oppressed,hated and discriminated against.
I can appreciate the question(s) you pose with regards to what it means to be man in our current times; but, what about looking deeper than just at the surface of how we as men ‘have’ acted over the last few generations?
Though I didn’t pay much attention at the time, the mytho-poetic movement of the 70′s and 80′s started to ask similar questions of men and what it means to be a man. From that time has sprung several efforts to allow men to recreate themselves anew from their upbringing and socialization. One effort in particular that has helped me is the Mankind Project, a non-profit born in the 90′s that has evolved for just this purpose for men. Quite simply, it’s an org. that run of, by and for men to help other men become ‘better’ men. Some of it’s processes and practices are based on the concepts based on the book, “King, Warrior, Magician, Lover”, by Moore/Gillette, which reintroduces the Jungian male archetypal concepts. Contrary to some info on the web, the org. is not a cult and is simply a tool in my life for looking honestly at myself as a man and allow other men to help me hold myself accountable to behavior that fits with the man I want to be. Further, the man I want to be is far different from man my upbringing was fashioning!
book review: http://www.menweb.org/kingwarr.htm
I would like to say that this article is pointing out the development we have gained in the recent years in terms of social and culturel aspects.
One of thing I’ll throw in as part of the discussion is that in stepping out of a traditional male role a man also steps away from the relative safety that role provides in maintaining his masculine image. For example, working construction is typically considered a masculine profession. I’m not saying women can’t; that’s not my point. But when a guys says he works construction we don’t think to questions his masculinity. He might not either , yet take him out of that role and how does he view his masculinity then?
Let me frame this in another context. I once was an Infantry officer and later a corporate executive – pretty manly stuff by traditional standards. Then I lost my job and by default ended up being a stay-at-home dad. This was a double whammy because not being “good enough” for a company to keep me and then losing my role as the family’s provider were direct threats to my masculinity.
Over time I came to realize that masculinity is not contingent on my title, but rather in what I bring to the table in any given situation. It takes a different (and more authentic) type of confidence to embrace the masculinity that comes internally from accepting yourself rather than the masculinity that comes externally from traditional roles.
Hi,
I have not read part 1. But some comments:
Being a man is about honoring the unique differences between men and women. Men and women are equal but not the same. Ask any boy who grew up without a loving & nurturing Father or Mother and they will agree. A Father is the one who calls out the man in a boy. A mother can not do this. She may be a fantastic Mother, but what ever she imparts it will not be the masculine that a boy needs.
To the daughter the father nurtures and calls out the feminine. He expresses kindness, gentleness,tenderness in cherishing the feminine in his daughter.
A man is faithful to his wife and the children live under the umbrella of the commitment to the marriage. This may sound very sentimental to many people, but read all the evidence out there that says: children who live with married parents do better in life than those who come from broken homes.
85% of youth in prison grew up in Fatherless homes.
http://www.fathermag.com/news/2778-stats.shtml
I have two daughters 13 & 12 and I believe that they are capable & gifted of doing the great majority of jobs that any man can do. The ones they would not be able to do as well as a man would have to do with their physical strength, not their mental capacity.
Tim
I would really like to agree. But i simply can’t believe all women want and expect the same from men. As i see it the classic “masculine” features has certain types of work as part of the manifestation. But the nature of the work really does not matter as long as the outcome is money and power. Most women are turned on by power and money, whether or not they react to it is decided by their mental aptitude. Most men are turned on by women who confirm them in their position of power by some form of submission. I believe this behavior is primal, and the society we see today is moderation of this primal behavior by intense cultural programming. I don’t associate femininity with “feminism”, actually i see them as two poles where feminism is some kind of hyper-masculin counter-reaction to an inefficient model of society. Im not sure what i want to say here except the terminology confuses me a bit. A feminist is like a modern socialist, nobody know what it really means. But everyone has a theory. Pardon my English, its not my first language.
Dustin,
You teach women’s studies? Now I understand where you are coming from. Although I find the article insightful, I’m disappointed in the perspective you took. Masculinity should be looked at on it’s own terms. Any good social constructivist/postmodernist knows that. And if you are going to take the feminist perspective, at least bring up some of the negative impacts feminism has had on masculinity: Normal little boy behavior now labeled as undesirable. The percentage of little boys diagnosed with ADHD. The ban on competitive play during recess in our public education system.
“It’s becoming harder and harder to take people who rant about the difference between men and women seriously. For every generalization, we can point to a thousand exceptions – men who love shopping and women who hate it, women who whoop and holler over their football team’s victory and men who couldn’t tell you if the Cleveland Browns play in the American League or the National League*.”
Of course there are thousands of exceptions to stereotypical gender roles. This isn’t the 1950′s. But what I have always found frustrating about this debate is how social scientists constantly ignore the fact that biological and neurological differences in men and women lead to, not only physical differences, but inherent behavioral differences. Our brains are wired differently. Our bodies produce different levels of different hormones. These differences have even been observed in other primates. I swear, the only time social scientists ever accept findings of biological and neurological studies is on the debate of whether or not homosexuality is a choice. And that’s only because it fits with their sociopolitical beliefs.
And if your going bring up gender differences in the work place, let me share some stats: Men account for 93% of work related deaths. http://bit.ly/1jZNVH The unemployment rate for men is 10.3%, and only 7.8% for women. http://bit.ly/1tFtVK
So to say “The idea that certain kinds of work are “feminine” or “masculine” is dead in the water.” is jumping the gun a little.
I’m wary of Belinda’s citation of statistics on women in elected office as a measure of progress (or lack thereof). Not that I hold dear a belief that women are intrinsically incapable of serving in such a position, but it seems like an arbitrary standard that ignores circumstances. The question is NOT, “Do we want women in public office?” The obvious answer is “Sure!” The question is, “What are we willing to sacrifice to make that a reality?” I think it requires more than meets the eye. Assuming that women don’t have some super-advantage in getting elected (some would argue the opposite), equal numbers of women would have to run for office as men. Hopefully they’d be equally qualified in terms of education, career experience, and track record in other positions. Some problems arise, though, when you consider statistics on the careers of married men vs. unmarried men. The effect is NOT the same for women. So to make the numbers fit, cultural norms on stay-at-home moms/dads would have to change. This is quite a ways from equal positioning in public office! I like to think that I find certain policies no less meritorious (or ridiculous) dependent on the gender of the one proposing them—though I could be wrong, of course. But in any case, I doubt that we will EVER see an equal number of women in elected office as men, and I’m completely comfortable with that—just the existence of pregnancy stacks the deck against it ever happening.
I’d also like to point out that “Embrace Difference” can be taken a number of different ways. My mother quit her job the day before I was born and has never worked (for pay!) since. Barring unforeseen tragedy, I’ll likely work for decades in the marketplace to support my children—very differently from my mother. Telling men that “being a stay-at-home dad is ok” while telling women that “being a stay-at-home mom is a hindrance to your full potential” is disingenuous.
A couple quick comments:
1) I have no problem with women (or men) choosing to stay at home and raise children, except a) it’s not at all clear in most cases that this is a choice, rather than the playing out of old-fashioned gender roles, and b) women are punished in the workforce far more than men for taking time out to raise children — in fact, many women find their careers stalled after motherhood even if they *don’t* take time off.
2) Men and women simple y are *not* wired differently. There is practically no well-supported scientific evidence that there are any inherent neurological differences between males and females.There are differences that emerge in response to different socializing practices, but that’s sort of beside the point. What *isn’t* beside the point is that there are literally thousands of journalists willing to jump on the latest piece of research that shows some kind of innate difference, even when a) nobody can replicate the results, b) dozens and even hundreds of other studies show no such difference, or c) even the authors of the piece disagree that their research shows such differences. This is a tough nut to swallow, I know, but it’s true — there are very few innate differences that are supported by actual evidence, and what few there are tend to be exceedingly small. Sorry.
I don’t know about neurological differences between men and women or anything like that, but I am concerned with the idea of men and women being treated the SAME. I’m all for equality of the sexes, because I believe they naturally are equal. What concerns me is society’s treatment of men and women (and especially boys and girls) as the same socially.
What masculinity means seems to be at the center of this for me. Masculinity is free to be defined in a multitude of ways and it changes with time. But masculinity or manhood, whatever the definition, still needs to be at the heart of men. I see masculinity as, among other things, confidence, bravery, toughness, and caring for and protecting others. Timothy Wright’s comment basically hits the nail on the head for me.
Being the college kid that I am, I very frequently think about manhood in the context of relationships and girls. I’m a fan of (culturally reasonable) chivalry because I feel it respects women and communicates and establishes my manhood. For those reasons I don’t know why so many knock these gestures. But I feel like the feminization of society has the negative affects of creating gender neutrality. Why do women complain about not being able to find “real men”? Well, if the feminine and masculine attract, and if society is doing away with the things that make men “men”, what do you expect?
Basically, genders need to be equal but not the same.
I feel like I disagree with you in several places, Dustin, but thank you providing this forum. It’s a complicated subject to wrap your head around.
Tim: It *is* a complicated subject to deal with, and I appreciate that most of the people who have objected, including yourself, have done so respectfully. I posted it less thinking “I’m right, everyone must bow down to my rightness” but in the spirit of provoking a discussion that’s slightly different from the usual “blame men, no blame feminists, no blame aliens, no blame [whoever]” debate, and I’m glad to see people disagree.
As for the issue of “neutrality”, I’m not sure we’re there yet or will ever be there, but I’m not that concerned about that aspect. My feeling is that we can (and should) still appreciate the differences between us, but they’ll be the differences between two *people*, not between men and women (which simply aren’t that large, especially as both men and women are socialized into the same workplace). Talents and personalities don’t seem to hew very close to gender lines.
Balderdash!
It is incredible how whimpy and psychologically castrated modern man really is, and all for the supposed “empowerment” of women. It is sad to see how many intelligent women fall for this huge psy-op. It shows how weak people are; how self-indulgent. Many of you, who buy into the Great Game, are dupes who haven’t done your homework. Look it up: Feminism (via its top authors and more) was funded by the CIA… Why? For double the taxes. Why else?
It has never been about Women’s Rights, or Men’s Rights, or Gay Rights, or the rights of any other demographic. It IS and always will be about: HUMAN RIGHTS; honoring the potential of each person, whatever and whoever they may be. The real man knows this, and is ready to defend those rights.
The powers that now rule don’t want you to know these simple, powerful facts. Instead, they muddy and taint the waters. ‘Divide to Conquer’ is their M.O…
When they come marching down the streets, many of you will regret not having exercised those human rights, now, when it counts. Instead, you were too busy stroking the egos of those who also enjoyed the Koolaid you guzzle. When the time comes (sooner than you can imagine), to defend what is truly precious to you (freedom), you will go running, looking for real men—but none will be found. Those that will be discovered will be found hiding, like shivering children, behind the pants of disillusioned feminists.
Any sort of discussion on masculinity and femininity is inextricably tied with gender roles but I’m afraid the tenor and point of view espoused here leads to a very unsatisfying relativism, where everyone is right therefore no one is right.
Gender roles play an important role in culture and the socializing of future generations. While many believe the old patriarchal and chauvanistic model is outdated not enough criticism is given to the “progressive” model. What effect does ambiguous gender roles have on society? Well a positive aspect might be that there is freedom to decide your outcome and that one isn’t caste into a role for life. A negative might be that there is such a lack of clarity in roles (when do men lead or not? or open doors for women?) that we devolve into our basic selfish natures and leave responsibility to others. I think if you really want to make it work you need to have an honest critique of where we are going and not simply being happy with not being where you have been. Some wise person said that history repeats itself. I’m not sure we’re in wholly uncovered territory.
That being said I think this article may point more towards maturity as opposed to masculinity or feminity. Maturity in the sense of being fully developed and capable of taking on responsibilities as adults. The clearest model of maturity is sexual maturity, the ability to procreate. In modern society we now have emotional maturity and intellectual maturity. In the end it points to our ability to be responsible in our positions in life; to take care of ourselves, our families, and manage our relationships.
American society has institutionalized adolescence by prolonging it through college and reinforcing it through pop culture with the undying need to be young forever and live carefree while not being responsible for the messes we make (ever increasing credit card debt, unwanted pregnancies, STDs, unhealthy lifestyles). And it amazes me that we spend so much effort atoning for our excesses (read: sins) by recycling because we overuse, working out because we are fat, reducing carbon emissions because we drive to much, government bailouts because we weren’t careful or were greedy.
In short if you want to be a real man or a woman, grow up! Do everything in your power to exercise responsibility for what you were given. Understand consequences of your actions. A little prudence goes a long way. If you need to be a stay-at-home dad be the best stay at home dad! If you have to work that 12 hour day and be the sole provider for your family, do it without compromise! If you are on your own be responsible for yourself, your profession and relationships. There is nothing that will improve your standing in the world than that. And everyone should be held to that standard, man or woman, according to their lot.
As an aside I believe women have more influence than some care to admit. Every man was born of a woman and men are shaped by them. Every success of a man can in no small part be contributable to women. I can’t even really fathom separating it. And that is the beauty of God’s order, that we are made to be complimentary in all ways, equal yet different.
In the end you have to realize it’s really not about you. But if it is about you then that’s all you have.
This is an interesting topic. I can agree and disagree with many of the comments made so far. I agree that there is something missing to being a man today. There is something that has been taken away. I say something because I cannot put a word to it.
The stuff that makes a Man a Man! just seems to be missing – or depressed. The process that allows a boy to become a man seems to have been altered and sissified. Being tough doesn’t have to be cool – hurting someone never is – but tough is more than fighting – it is adventuring into the woods, playing in a creek, riding bikes out of sight, throwing rocks, building forts, wrestling with buddies, launching rockets, digging holes, etc…. Now you just get in trouble for doing these things. Gone are the days where boys can *grow* into men and we – the men – can guide them. Nowadays things don’t get fixed they get replaced. Broken bike chain – take it somewhere for repair vs. get greasy and fix it….etc…
Gone to are the days of just being a gentleman for the sake of being a gentleman – there always has to be a reason. Should I open the door for the lady in front of me, or will I just get a look – that look that says either “I can get the door for myself, thank you very much” or that other look that says “He must want in my pants, men don’t open doors anymore – don’t you dare touch me creep”. The day of chivalry, pulling out chairs, opening doors, standing when a lady comes or goes from a table, tipping of the hat, offering genuine non-sexual comments, all seem to be gone – or fading.
Several of the comments touch on dads assuming more of a role around the lives of their kids. This is great. I don’t want to work 8-8 and never get to be around. I want to cheer at football, or karate, or dance, etc…I want to help with homework, or cook dinner, do the dishes, manage the yard, grow a garden – who doesn’t. But the idea that this is somehow derived from the modernization of man just seems weird. I bet a large majority of men – and women – want these things but they are not always attainable. Someone has to pay the bills. Daycare alone – assuming you have kids – is ridiculously expensive – check out the atlanta area (~400$ a week per kid at an average daycare) – someone has to stay home in most cases (or at least in my case).
Good article and conversation. I still think that being a man has changed, and maybe feminism is driving that change – i don’t really know – whatever it is though I don’t think it is for the better – I think the world will wake up one day and realize that all the bits that were, by design, different than women – mannerisms, strengths, weaknesses, etc…were that way for a reason be it evolutionary or social – forget about jobs and the work place – but the concept of a man and what a man stands for (including the bits about being your own man) are less today – or more blurred – than they were in the past.
Being a man, or identifying as one today is hard.
THe changes *are* for the better,and many pro-feminist men have recognized this too! THey say it has freed them and allowed them to develop and express more of all of the shared common *human* traits,emotions,behaviors,abilities etc. Definitions of “msculine” and “feminie” differ across time periods,and in different societies.
John Lennon is a great example of how feminism changing limited artificial gender definitions and roles,changed him for the much better. JOhn as a child and teenager had a lot of traumas that permanently psychologically damaged him,but because of his and Yoko’s beautiful loving relationship,and as he said she was a feminist before he met her,(and he said that because she was a feminist before he met her,they were going to have to have a 50/50 equal relationship which he never had before) he went in to primal scream therapy and Yoko went with him and he dealt with all of his pain and anger for the very first time at age 29.
When John was a young guy,he was often drunk getting into fist fights with men,hitting women,and womanizing including cheating on his girlfriends and then his first wife Cynthia.Of course Paul,George and Ringo did the same with all of the groupies all 4 of them had while touring from 1963-1966. I hadn’t watched them in years until last year when it was the 30th anniversary of John’s tragic murder.
Out of the 5 Mike Douglas shows that John and Yoko co-hosted for a week that was taped in January 1972 ( Ihadn’t watched these tapes in years until last December with the 30 year annivesary of John’s tragic murder) and aired in February,a young criminal lawyer Rena Uviller(she went on to become a Supreme Court Judge) who worked with juveniles, and she,Mike Douglas,John and Yoko were discussing the then very recent women’s liberation movement. George Carlin was on too.
Rena said,she agrees with Yoko,that the idea of Women’s lib is to liberate all of us,and she said ,I mean we could talk hours on the way men really suffer under the sex role definitions.Yoko agreed with what she said too. Rena said that men don’t really realize they have only to gain from Women’s Lib,and that she thinks that maybe with a little more propaganda we can convince them.
John then said,yeah there is a lot to gain from it,just the fact that you can relax and not have to play that male role,he said we can do that,and he said that I can be weak,( but notice how then in a male dominated gender divided,gender stereotyped,sexist society,and even unfortunately still now in a lot of ways,the “female” role was defined as the weak one,and the male role as the strong one) I don’t have to protect her all the time and play you know that super hero,I don’t have to play that,she allows me to be weak sometimes and for me to cry,and for her to be the strong one,and for me to be the weak one. John then said,and it really is a great relief,after 28 years of trying to be tough,you know trying to show them,I don’t give a da*n and I’m this and I’m that,to be able to relax.and just be able to say,OK I’m no tough guy forget it.
Rena then said,I think in some funny way,I think girls even as children,have a greater lattitude because a little girl can be sort of frilly and feminine or she can be a tomboy and it’s acceptable,but a little boy if he’s not tossing that football,there’s a lot of pressure on him.John said,there’s a lot of pressure,not to show emotion,and he said that there was a lot of pressure on me not to be an artist,to be a chemist and he said he discussed this on another Mike Douglas episode.
Rena said that unfortunately some of the leaders in the Women’s Liberation movement fall victim to being spokesmen,for Women’s Lib, and yet at least in public personality they seem to really have a certain amount of contempt for the hair curled housewife and there is a kind of sneering contempt,and she said I think it’s a measure of their own lack of liberation.And Yoko said it’s snobbery,and Rena said yeah,they really don’t like other women,but I’m sympathetic,and Mike Douglas then said a sexist woman-hating statement,saying,well women don’t like other women period.Rena said,no see that’s very unliberated and Yoko said, in response to what Mike Douglas said,that’s not true,that’s not true.And John said,you see they are brought up to compete with men.
Yoko said that even though in Japan they say they don’t have much of a woman problem and women already had some liberation,there is still a long way to go that she really agrees with Rena that so many female liberation movement people basically hate women,and we have to first start to understand women and love them whether they are housewives or not,and she said that snobbery is very bad and we have to somehow find out a way to co-existing with men,and she asked Rena don’t you think so and she said most definitely. George Carlin said,that actually many successful women are acting out male roles just like a lot of blacks think they escaped are acting out white roles.John also said that he thinks that women have to try twice as hard as to make it as men,and he said you know they have to be on their toes much more than a man.
On another Mike Douglas episode from the same week,former actress and acclaimed film maker Barbara Loden was on and Yoko had requested her as a guest.John asked her ,Did you have any problems working with the men,you know like giving them instructions and things like that and Barbara said,I did, but I think it was because I was afraid that they would not accept what I said,and I wasn’t quite that authoritative in my own self.John said it’s certainly a brave thing to do,and Yoko said it is.
Mike Douglas asked Yoko if John’s attitude had changed much towards her since The Female Liberation Movement,and at first Yoko says John’s attitude from the beginning was the same,and that they met on that level.John then says,twice, I was a male chauvinist and Yoko says,yes he was a male chauvinist but,and then John says,Can I say how you taught me,and Yoko says yes.John says,How I did it in my head was,would I ask Paul or George,or would I treat them the way I would treat a woman? John then said,it’s a very simple thing maybe it’s fetch that or do that ,and I started thinking if I said that to them,they’d say come on get it yourself,and if you put your wife or your girl friend in the position of your best friend,and say now would I say that to him,then you know when you’re treading on some delicate feelings.
Mike Douglas said years later that after this week of John and Yoko co-hosting his show,many young people who had never watched his show before,(and his main audience was middle America and people older than their 20′s and even mostly their 30′s) told him they loved the show,and that it was great and his ratings went up high for those shows.Even if John didn’t always live up to his feminist ideals and beliefs in his personal life,(although he did with Yoko because of her and this why and how he emotionally evolved into a caring,nurturing,house husband and father to Yoko and Sean),just the fact that he spoke out as a man in support of the feminist movement on a popular TV show back in early 1972 when most of the sexist male dominated woman-hating society looked down at it and considered it crazy which in some ways it’s still unfortunately wrongly misunderstood(and it’s really the male dominated,sexist,woman-hating society that has always been so wrong and crazy!),and the fact that John was (and still is) greatly admired and influential to many young people male and female,he did *a lot* to legitimize it and show it was rational,reasonable,needed and right!
A few months later he was performing Woman Is The Ni**er Of The World on The Dick Cavett Show and then months after that live in Madison Square Garden.In his very last radio interview done by Dave Sholin etc from RKO Radio just hours before he was tragically shot and killed, John said I’m more feminist now than I was when I sang Woman Is The N**ger,I was intelectually feminist then but now I feel as though at least I’ve put not my own money,but my body where my mouth is and I’m living up to my own preachings as it were. And Yoko keeps promoting John’s great music and art not for money,(she doesn’t need the money anyway,John was a millionaire and in addition she made her own money as she still does from her work as an artist)she does this because she still loves him deeply,and she wants him to be remembered for the truly great music artist and art artist he was who was killed for no rational reason at only age 40!
Out of the 5 Mike Douglas shows that John and Yoko co-hosted for a week that was taped in January 1972 ( Ihadn’t watched these tapes in years until last December with the 30 year annivesary of John’s tragic murder) and aired in February,a young criminal lawyer Rena Uviller(she went on to become a Supreme Court Judge) who worked with juveniles, and she,Mike Douglas,John and Yoko were discussing the then very recent women’s liberation movement. George Carlin was on too.
Rena said,she agrees with Yoko,that the idea of Women’s lib is to liberate all of us,and she said ,I mean we could talk hours on the way men really suffer under the sex role definitions.Yoko agreed with what she said too. Rena said that men don’t really realize they have only to gain from Women’s Lib,and that she thinks that maybe with a little more propaganda we can convince them. John then said,yeah there is a lot to gain from it,just the fact that you can relax and not have to play that male role,he said we can do that,and he said that I can be weak,( but notice how then in a male dominated gender divided,gender stereotyped,sexist society,and even unfortunately still now in a lot of ways,the “female” role was defined as the weak one,and the male role as the strong one) I don’t have to protect her all the time and play you know that super hero,I don’t have to play that,she allows me to be weak sometimes and for me to cry,and for her to be the strong one,and for me to be the weak one. John then said,and it really is a great relief,after 28 years of trying to be tough,you know trying to show them,I don’t give a da*n and I’m this and I’m that,to be able to relax.and just be able to say,OK I’m no tough guy forget it. Rena then said,I think in some funny way,I think girls even as children,have a greater lattitude because a little girl can be sort of frilly and feminine or she can be a tomboy and it’s acceptable,but a little boy if he’s not tossing that football,there’s a lot of pressure on him.John said,there’s a lot of pressure,not to show emotion,and he said that there was a lot of pressure on me not to be an artist,to be a chemist and he said he discussed this on another Mike Douglas episode. Rena said that unfortunately some of the leaders in the Women’s Liberation movement fall victim to being spokesmen,for Women’s Lib, and yet at least in public personality they seem to really have a certain amount of contempt for the hair curled housewife and there is a kind of sneering contempt,and she said I think it’s a measure of their own lack of liberation.And Yoko said it’s snobbery,and Rena said yeah,they really don’t like other women,but I’m sympathetic,and Mike Douglas then said a sexist woman-hating statement,saying,well women don’t like other women period.Rena said,no see that’s very unliberated and Yoko said, in response to what Mike Douglas said,that’s not true,that’s not true.And John said,you see they are brought up to compete with men.
Yoko said that even though in Japan they say they don’t have much of a woman problem and women already had some liberation,there is still a long way to go that she really agrees with Rena that so many female liberation movement people basically hate women,and we have to first start to understand women and love them whether they are housewives or not,and she said that snobbery is very bad and we have to somehow find out a way to co-existing with men,and she asked Rena don’t you think so and she said most definitely. George Carlin said,that actually many successful women are acting out male roles just like a lot of blacks think they escaped are acting out white roles.John also said that he thinks that women have to try twice as hard as to make it as men,and he said you know they have to be on their toes much more than a man. On another Mike Douglas episode from the same week,former actress and acclaimed film maker Barbara Loden was on and Yoko had requested her as a guest.John asked her ,Did you have any problems working with the men,you know like giving them instructions and things like that and Barbara said,I did, but I think it was because I was afraid that they would not accept what I said,and I wasn’t quite that authoritative in my own self.John said it’s certainly a brave thing to do,and Yoko said it is.
Mike Douglas asked Yoko if John’s attitude had changed much towards her since The Female Liberation Movement,and at first Yoko says John’s attitude from the beginning was the same,and that they met on that level.John then says,twice, I was a male chauvinist and Yoko says,yes he was a male chauvinist but,and then John says,Can I say how you taught me,and Yoko says yes.John says,How I did it in my head was,would I ask Paul or George,or would I treat them the way I would treat a woman? John then said,it’s a very simple thing maybe it’s fetch that or do that ,and I started thinking if I said that to them,they’d say come on get it yourself,and if you put your wife or your girl friend in the position of your best friend,and say now would I say that to him,then you know when you’re treading on some delicate feelings. Mike Douglas said years later that after this week of John and Yoko co-hosting his show,many young people who had never watched his show before,(and his main audience was middle America and people older than their 20′s and even mostly their 30′s) told him they loved the show,and that it was great and his ratings went up high for those shows.Even if John didn’t always live up to his feminist ideals and beliefs in his personal life,(although he did with Yoko because of her and this why and how he emotionally evolved into a caring,nurturing,house husband and father to Yoko and Sean),just the fact that he spoke out as a man in support of the feminist movement on a popular TV show back in early 1972 when most of the sexist male dominated woman-hating society looked down at it and considered it crazy which in some ways it’s still unfortunately wrongly misunderstood(and it’s really the male dominated,sexist,woman-hating society that has always been so wrong and crazy!),and the fact that John was (and still is) greatly admired and influential to many young people male and female,he did *a lot* to legitimize it and show it was rational,reasonable,needed and right!
A few months later he was performing Woman Is The Ni**er Of The World on The Dick Cavett Show and then months after that live in Madison Square Garden.In his very last radio interview done by Dave Sholin etc from RKO Radio just hours before he was tragically shot and killed, John said I’m more feminist now than I was when I sang Woman Is The N**ger,I was intelectually feminist then but now I feel as though at least I’ve put not my own money,but my body where my mouth is and I’m living up to my own preachings as it were. And Yoko keeps promoting John’s great music and art not for money,(she doesn’t need the money anyway,John was a millionaire and in addition she made her own money as she still does from her work as an artist)she does this because she still loves him deeply,and she wants him to be remembered for the truly great music artist and art artist he was who was killed for no rational reason at only age 40!
Mike Douglas also said to John and Yoko,You’re both so different,you had such different childhoods. John said,it’s incredible isn’t it? Yoko said,Yes! Mike asked,What do you think has attracted you to each other? Yoko said,We’re very similar.John then said,She came from a Japanese upper-middle class family.Her parents were bankers and all that jazz,very straight.He said they were trying to get her off with an ambassador when she was 18.You know,now is the time you marry the ambassador and we get all settled. I come from a an upper-working class family in Liverpool,the other end of the world. John then said,we met but our minds are so similar,our ideas are so similar.It was incredible that we could be so alike from different enviornments,and I don’t know what it is,but we’re very similar in our heads.And we look alike too!
Mike also asked John about his painful childhood,and how his father left him when he was 5,and John said how he only came back into his life when he was successful and famous(20 years later!),and John said he knew that I was living all those years in the same house with my auntie,but he never visited him.He said when he came back into his life all those years later,he looked after his father for the same amount of time he looked after him,about 4 years.
He also talked about how his beloved mother Julia,who encouraged his music by teaching him to play the banjo,got hit and killed by a car driven by an off duty drunk cop when John was only 17 and just getting to have a realtionship with her after she had given him away to be raised by her older sister Mimi when he was 5.
And John also said,And in spite of all that,I still don’t have a hate-the-pigs attitude or hate-cops attitude.He then said, I think everybody’s human you know,but it was very hard for me at that time,and I really had a chip on my shoulder,and it still comes out now and then,because it’s a strange life to lead .He then said,But in general ah,I’ve got my own family now …I got Yoko and she made up for all that pain.
John’s psychologist Dr. Arthur Janov told Mojo Magazine in 2000( parts of this interview is on a great UK John Lennon fan site,You Are The Plastic Ono Band) that John had as much pain as he had ever seen in his life,and he was a psychologist for at least 18 years when John and Yoko saw him in 1970! He said John was a very dedicated patient. He also said that John left therapy too early though and that they opened him up,but didn’t get a chance to put him back together again and Dr. Janov told John he need to finish the therapy,he said because of the immigration services and he thought Nixon was after him,he said we have to get out of the country.John asked if he could send a therapist to Mexico with him,and Dr. Janov told him we can’t do that because they had too many patients to take care of,and he said they cut the therapy off just as it started really,and we were just getting going.
I wanted to mention that John Lennon emotionally evolved into a nurturing house husband and father (during the mid to late 1970′s starting in 1975 when hardly anybody was doing this,John even would turn on the TV and see news reporters making fun of him for doing it) to Yoko and his second son Sean for the last years of John’s life to Sean during his first 5 years. John fed him,bathed him,taught to read,changed his diapers,and there is a picture of John pushing Sean in a sttoller in Central Park.
Also, last year I read an online review of the great PBS John Lennon documentary,LennonNYC that aired last November. I don’t remember the site or the guy’s name but he said something like that John help change gender definitions and roles more than just about any modern man.
Dustin: Awesome discussion; thanks for bringing up forum for exploration rather than regurgitating preexisting opinions. And THANK YOU for mentioning how much BS and how little fact goes into the “Men and Women are Wired Differently” claims.
I totally agree with Tim and Isi that men are missing opportunities to become tough, strong, independent, brave, and so on. What they miss is that women are too. I think one downside of the feminism movement (for which I am overall extremely grateful) is that we have to a certain extent defined the “traditionally masculine” traits as bad, and cut out all the opportunities for skinned knees and frank discussion (which as a plainspoken woman, drives me CRAZY!)
It’s true that men and women are not the same, and I’m obviously not proposing equal rights to pregnancy or sperm-donership. But what we need to do, and Dustin has started here, is really LOOKING at what gender roles should be, and what differences should be taken into account, rather than defaulting to what we’ve always done whether we like it or not.
And yes, it does mean that we no longer have preset roles that we can just implement mindlessly — we have to actually think about it and define our own roles. But those of us in the US have been doing that for decades, coming up on centuries. When you marry someone, they’re coming from a different national background, often a different religion, and you both have a whole bunch of different traditions and expectations. One of the things you do in the first 5 years of marriage is experiment and explore to decide which traditions you’re going to keep, discard, or modify in YOUR marriage. So why not gender roles?
My boyfriend and I are starting that process. A few of the decisions we’ve made:
– He does dishes (I HATE doing dishes)
– He cooks, I bake (I dislike variables in my activities, he dislikes fixed requirements)
– I handle the finances (he doesn’t have the patience for creating and managing financial statements, nor the discipline to ensure that bills are paid on time)
– Whoever gets to the door first holds it open for the other person. This is never a reflection on one’s opinion of the other’s capability.
I think the biggest benefit of the feminist movement is not to eliminate gender roles, but to allow everyone to choose the role they want, that fits them best.
I feel that people read too much into gender roles in modern society. Now Dustin, I’m not knocking your profession, I’m sure there’s some validity in it though its far from a hard science. There aren’t any constraints inherent to women today. Anything holding one back has more to do with socioeconomic class. More women go to college than men.
Here’s an example of traditional “gender barriers” within a profession: women only make up around 10% of the architects and engineers in the U.S.- nobody is stopping them from going to school for these professions. Nor should anyone force them to. People argue that women are discouraged from going into these fields(engineering especially due to all the math/science). However I think that’s a sexist idea, its basically calling intelligent women weak minded. So I’m still not convinced that men and women’s minds work exactly the same.(I suppose you could take 100 boys and 100 girls at birth and create a 100% controlled social experiment, void of any societal norms on how boys and girls act, but I digress). There’s a difference between striving for gender equality and holding oneself back to make everything seem “equal”.
Steve: I address some of the ways that women are catching up to or even surpassing men in Part ! — I think a lot of the comments on this post would be different if the commenters had read both parts. For example, it is not only true that women outnumber men in college, but in every field but computer science the percentage of women in any given field of graduate study is growing too, with women outnumbering men even in some fields of math and science (traditionally considered “male” domains).
There are complicating factors, of course. One big one is that much of the advance of women relative to men has come not from an increase in women’s pay or opportunities but from a *decrease* in men’s pay and opportunities. There just aren’t many of those traditionally male-dominated factory, farming, and construction jobs around any more. Also, women pay a much greater price for leaving the workforce for parenting than men do — but that will have to change. Most other industrial countries offer both maternity and paternity leave, with pay, while the US is hampered by the weak short-term leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. If we’re going to keep our most talented workers productive — female *and* male — we’re going to have to address parenting.
Amanda: There are a lot of tough, skinned-knee types in the Feminist movement, so I doubt they’re against traditional masculinity 100%. The general consensus, if there is one, seems to be that traditional roles limit both men and women from experiencing and expressing the entire range of what it means to be human. Some aspects of masculinity as currently defines are derided, yes — the fact that a whopping majority of violent crime in our country is performed by men (we’re talking 90%+) isn’t something we should be cheering about, for example. But here’s the funny thing — a lot of “traditional” masculinity, as it’s understood today, wouldn’t be all that familiar to our great-grandfathers, who might well end up siding with the feminists on a lot of this. Heck, a lot of our *fathers* look at us and shake their heads, recognizing in our ultra-tough exteriors more fear than manhood.
I think you sum it up perfectly when you say it’s about allowing people to fill the role that suits them best. We should have the strongest people, male and female, where strength is required, the most agile people, male and female, where agility is required, and the most nurturing people, male and female, where nurturing is required.
There may be many problems with the identification of “modern” gender roles. This has not grown out of feminism in a good way – this is one of the downsides to it. Institutionalized learning dominated by teachers with the “correct ideas” has changed the perception of what the norm of one’s gender is. Being a man today is not necessarily more difficult than it was in the 1960′s. Manliness, as I see it, it its true incarnation, is still the same. Being the sole breadwinner isn’t necesary – but knowing that one could if one had to is probably necessary for a lot of men to feel good about themselves. Still – what defines manliness? The ability to take action when needed, to not steer away from difficult tasks when they need to be done, comradeship over a beer of two at the pub, and the ability to act as a gentleman toward’s women. They do still like it, you know, if you hold a door or let them choose the table at the café…. I still think James Bond in Sean Connery’s incarnation is a pretty good image of what manlines is. Cheers people, I’m off for a beer at the pub. And, btw, tomorrow is the wife’s turn, and, yes, she is making more money than me. But that’s quite allright, people, I am still the man of the house :-)
People are raising really good points and it is great to see such a lively conversation.
Dustin, I think that as an academic you have moved away from the dualistic either/or thinking about gender and are suggesting a more inclusive both/and type of thinking – both men and women are in the work force, both men and women are sometimes dissatisfied with the roles assigned to them, etc. (I realize we’re not even touching on the topic of transgender in this conversation.)
I am not always sure people are ready to give up their familiar (and therefore safe) labels, even when those labels no longer provide a satisfactory description of their lived reality. (In case you are familiar with the work, I’m thinking of Kegan’s “durable categories” here.) When traditional male roles are no longer exclusively male, either/or thinking translates the change into a loss for men, while both/and thinking can provide a more neutral interpretation (e.g., hurray, I don’t have to bust my ass working two jobs to make ends meet!).
I consider myself a feminist and have a strong appreciation for the women who have and who continue to shape my thinking about who I am in the world. At the same time, I take great pride and satisfaction in creating things with my hands, using tools, etc. Being a man and enjoying “manly activities” doesn’t mean I can’t also support the right of women to receive equal pay for equal work or to simply be treated like something more than a doormat. Put another way, I can be both a feminist and a man without having my masculinity diminished in any way.
I’ve really oversimplified a lot of this, but I hope people can see my meaning.
Dustin, keep being a prophet in the wilderness!
Chris: Thanks. I specifically leave out transgender and intersex issues, as well as (for the most part) questions about sexuality, simply because it would unnecessarily complicate the issues presented here. My intention was to provide a list of things that we men (however we arrive by the gender) should be thinking about as we move deeper into the 21st century. I might slot GLBTIQ issues under “Embrace difference”, since at root the issue is that here are a lot of ways to be a man these days, and the kind of diversity that gives rise to innovative solutions to business, environmental, political, and social problems goes hand in hand with diversity of manhoods.
I think the article should have been titled “Being a Human in the 21st Century”, as it treats mostly the subject of personal identification and not necessarily that of men.
On the subject of manliness – it was already said: men and women are equal but not the same!!! From that on, everyone should be able to tell why not the same, what are the differences, and so on.
I wanted to share one of my favourite movie quotes:
The Big Lebowski: What makes a man, Mr. Lebowski?
The Dude: Dude.
The Big Lebowski: Huh?
The Dude: Uhh… I don’t know sir.
The Big Lebowski: Is it being prepared to do the right thing, whatever the cost? Isn’t that what makes a man?
The Dude: Hmmm… Sure, that and a pair of testicles.
Well, I followed these comments and the articles eagerly. While I agree there are many ways to be a man (by way of Dustin’s comment re: GLBTIQ), I think it could be fascinating to not necessarily talk ABOUT transgender but rather talk TO transgender people. That said, as a transgender man myself, I’ll talk at ya. ;)
Here’s what I know from my personal experience:
There is something to be said for the role brain chemistry plays in aspects of gendered behavior. In my post-transition self, the testosterone I take has changed my brain chemistry, anatomy, physiology, PH, damn near everything. Those who have been with me for the long haul can see it and I can see and feel it in myself in my behavior, my emotions, my body – all of it.
There is also a lot to be said about the role of environment and social patterning. When I was first transitioning, there was a (largely-b.s. imho) guide to enacting a male presence through behavior, positioning and the like. If I had followed it to the letter, I would have turned out somewhat like your traditional frat boy dressed in Abercrombie and Fitch.
But in truth, the way I learned to be a man wasn’t in any of this. It wasn’t in the books I read by Robert Bly etc. It wasn’t by having some paternal trans figure (though I did have them). I learned to be a man through picking and choosing what worked for me and what didn’t. I took a lot of the blueprints from my own father but expanded on it in terms of social responsibility, being progressive, and exchanged his religion for my Buddhist spirituality. For the most part, I figured it out on my own by doing self inventories about the sort of man I’d fashion myself to be with no object (no monetary demands, etc.) stopping me. Most of all, I’ve grown into my manhood by flying by the seat of my pants balls to the wall, taking action when I exhaust all of the armchair research and there’s nothing left to do but leap.
I’ve been told by some feminists that I can no longer be feminist since I’m supposedly upholding the patriarchy by choosing to take steps to feel right in my own skin. I’ve been told by some men that I can never be a man because I wasn’t born one. Yet, I persist in both regards.
I’m sure that the different amounts of the same exact hormones can some small effects,physically, but I posted about the fact that there is a lot of evidence from tons of psychological tests and studies done for decades now,that the sexes are psychologically a lot more alike(with the same kinds of emotions,*human* emotions) than different and that most large differences are actually between *individual people*. Boy infants cry just as much and as easily as girl infants do,before they are harshly trained not to cry or show any sensitive emotions,especially crying and are instead punsihed for doing so.
Riley: Thanks for sharing your experiences here. Of course, there are lots of way to be a transman, as well! Not sure which feminists you’re hanging out with, but until they put together a national certification board, I don’t think I’d worry about whether some thought you had “disqualified” yourself or not.
“Men and women simple y are *not* wired differently. There is practically no well-supported scientific evidence that there are any inherent neurological differences between males and females.There are differences that emerge in response to different socializing practices, but that’s sort of beside the point. What *isn’t* beside the point is that there are literally thousands of journalists willing to jump on the latest piece of research that shows some kind of innate difference, even when a) nobody can replicate the results, b) dozens and even hundreds of other studies show no such difference, or c) even the authors of the piece disagree that their research shows such differences. This is a tough nut to swallow, I know, but it’s true — there are very few innate differences that are supported by actual evidence, and what few there are tend to be exceedingly small.”
Umm… actually… there’s rather a lot of evidence now. Now there *is* overlap, and people should be treated on their individual merits. If we say “80% of males have characteristic X, vs only 30% of females, so this is a male characteristic”, it’s kinda true – but inaccurate for 20% of men and 30% of women.
It’s also incontestible that journalists have over-sensationalised most of the very iffy preliminary studies, while ignoring the less spectacular but well-founded and replicated ones. “Findings of 1996 and 2000 confirmed once again in latest test in 2009″ doesn’t have the cachet that sells papers.
Most of the really interesting comparisons use “Nature’s experiments” – Intersexed and Transsexed people, which I know you don’t want to talk about.
Nonetheless, the stereotypical “men are from mars, women are from venus” does have a neurological basis. Just as saying “men are taller than women” has a biological basis. It’s true – but only in aggregate: a well-nourished woman from 3 well-nourished generations of parents will usually be taller than a male from 3 generations of malnutrition. But she’s likely to be shorter than men of her cohort.
Excluding a talented woman from a “male profession” because “women are neurologically unusited for it” makes as much sense as a basketball coach hiring a 4’11″ swede rather than a 6’9″ Japanese, because “swedes are taller than japanese”.
Saying that there’s no difference in height between swedes and japanese contradicts obvious reality though.
I have an excellent book from 1979 written by 2 parent child development psychologists Dr. Wendy Schemp Matthews and award winning psychologist from Columbia University, Dr.Jeane Brooks-Gunn, called He & She How Children Develop Their Sex Role Idenity.
They thoroughly demonstrate with tons of great studies and experiments by parent child psychologists that girl and boy babies are actually born more alike than different with very few differences but they are still perceived and treated systematically very different from the moment of birth on by parents and other adult care givers. They go up to the teen years.
They also show that surveys show that boys are overwhelimingly prefered over girls,(sadly nothing has changed and shirts (and other sexist anti-female ads,pornography,etc do too) like these both reflect and contribute to this injustice.They also explain that when people guess if a pregnant woman is having a girl or a boy,and they list a whole bunch of false unproven old wives tales,that assign all negative characteristics to a woman if they think she’s having a girl,and the imagined girls or given all of the negative characteristics.
For example they say that author Elana Belotti(1977) explained these examples, The man and woman each take hold of one end of a wishbone and pull it apart.If the longest part comes away in the man’s hand,the baby will be a boy. If you suddenly ask a pregnant woman what she has in her hand and she looks at her right hand first ,she will have a boy;if she looks at her left hand it will be a girl.If the mother’s belly is bigger on the right-hand side a boy will be born,and also if her right breast is bigger than her left,or if her right foot is more restless.
If a woman is placid during pregnancy she will have a boy,but if she is bad-tempered or cries a lot,she will have a girl.If her complexion is rosy she’s going to have a son;if she is pale a daughter. If her looks improve,she’s expecting a boy;if they worsen,a girl.If the fetal heartbeat is fast,it is a boy;if it is slow it is a girl.If the fetus has started to move by the fortieth day it will be a boy and the birth will be easy,but if it doesn’t move until the ninetieth day it will be a girl.( Belotti 1977,pp.22-23)
Dr.Brooks-Gunn and Wendy Schempp Matthews then say, now rate each of the characteristics above as positive or negative. A woman expecting a girl is pale,her looks deteriorate,she is cross and ill-tempered,and she gets the short end of the wishbone,all negative characteristics. They then say,furthermore ,a girl is symbolized by the left-the left hand,the left side of the belly,the left foot,the left breast. They say,left connotes evil,a bad omen,or sinister,again the girls have all of the negative characteristics. They then say,that sex-role stereotypes about activity also characterize Belotti’s recipes:boys are believed to be active from the very beginning and girls have slower heartbeats and begin to move around later.They then say,the message although contradictory(girls cause more trouble even though they are more passive) is clear in that it reflects the sex-role stereotype that boys “do” while girls “are” and the belief that boys are more desirable than girls.
I once spoke with Dr.Brooks-Gunn in 1994 and I asked her how she could explain all of these great studies that show that girl and boy babies are actually born more alike with few differences but are still perceived and treated so differently anyway, and she said that’s due to socialization and she said there is no question, that socialization plays a very big part. I know that many scientists know that the brain is plastic and can be shaped and changed by different life experiences and different enviornments too and Dr.Mary Stewart Van Leewuen told this to me too when I spoke to her 13 years ago. DR.Van Leeuwen also said that humanbeings don’t have sex fixed in the brain and she told me that humans have a unique highly developed cerebral cortex that allows us to make choices in our behaviors and we can learn things that animals can’t.
Speak for yourself. We certainly are not all feminists now; and feeble attempts to represent your preferred brand of organised bigotry as anything other than its true nature will fail, in the long term.
Truth will out.
Riley – you’re a guy. So whatever you choose to do, however you choose to behave, is masculine by definition.
I’m convinced of the neurological basis of transsexuality. It’s gone beyond the “if” and we’re now examining exact mechanisms, which parts of the lymbic nucleus, frontal gyrus etc are involved, and what the effects are of different configurations.
As Dr Sidney Ecker wrote to me:
“Yes, we gave our presentation to 60 plus psychiatrists from the US, AU, FR, IT, EU, UK, Holland etc.
We spoke for 2 1/2 hours on why cross gender identity was a normal inherited variation of humans. We showed how Transgender Brains think, smell, and hear like the opposite sex.
…
My greatest personal compliment came from Frank Kruijver, from Holland, whose research of the human brain in TSs started it all. He thought we have taken his work very far in our understanding of the human brain.”
That wasw in regards to the American Psychiatric Assocn annual meeting seminar s10 -
S10. The Neurobiological Evidence for Transgenderism
1. Brain Gender Identity Sidney W. Ecker, M.D.
2. Transsexuality as an Intersex Condition Milton Diamond, Ph.D.
Basically neuro-anatomists, urologists, endocrinologists etc etc giving the results of experiments on animals, and objective measurements (autopsies, fMRI scans etc) of humans. Not a lot on behaviour as such, only insincts and hard-wired capabilities that (we think) cause gender identity formation.
Basically, rather than “men are from mars”, it’s more like “all martians are men”.
Those who wish to enforce some stereotyped male gender role pattern on someone who’s trans don’t get it: he’s a guy, let him do what he feels right for him, as standard factory model males do.
@ Christo, I agree with you. There are no more men because it is no longer “politically correct” to be a real man. Women are made to look graceful and always in control while men are made to look dumb and uncoordinated.
Jimmy: “Women are made to look graceful and always in control while men are made to look dumb and uncoordinated.”
I’m trying to think of where this might be true. Certainly not in action movies — at least for “uncoordinated”. The clearest example of men looking “dumb” is sitcoms — interestingly in sitcoms featuring male comedians like Tim Allen, Ray Romano, etc (all the way back to Cosby), developed by men and largely directed and produced by men, showing men looking “dumb” and “uncoordinated” IN THE HOME. That’s not new — men have been claiming their ineptness at diapering for a century, at least.
Your post reminded me most of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn, two boys who hate book learning, church clothes, and domestic duties, who are “tamed” by the overbearing adult women presences in their lives. That’s a common theme in most Westerns and adventure stories, too. (Think “Outlaw Josey Wales”.)
The other thing I thought of while reading aboutmen being “made” to look dumb is that men are avoiding books and learning, dropping out of school, and ignoring university at an unprecedented rate. As much as I hear about the feminization” of schooling, I’ve yet to hear anything all that compelling — mostly I hear stereotypes about boys that insist they’re “different” without much backup. CLearly we’re failing boys in the educational system, but I think it has more to do with the perpetuation of those stereotypes than anything else — I think we let boys believe that learning is “sissy stuff”, and we let them live with that fear of “sissy stuff” their whole lives.
I read both article twice since theyve been posted and I seriously dont understand what the the author is trying to say. That men are more free to be themselves now, but at the same time women get more opportunities too. I cant find the point in them.
You know great, change, but that kinda stuff happens. Nothing new. They could have written the same thing in 1920 compared to the 19th century. Actually more women would seek a job to make some money for the household during that period due to increased luxury by electrification and industrialization of society.
I seriously doubt that whatever you say is different AMONG the people compared to 20th century, back to the beginning of our modern society. Which is a society of fast changing trends, not just now, always has been. It definitely is different in the media but with the revolution in information technology of the past 15-20 years it isnt a surprise were more informed about the world beyond our own city and national newspapers and TV.
Its easier to be cause its easier to identify even of you dont know them personally but only through the media. Its not harder now, its easier.
But in 15 years well be looking back at these years and think we were oldfashioned and traditional back then. There is no point in this, just be, period. If anything try to be inspired by the past not discuss how were changing away from it.
It popped my mind what bothers me about these articles, even though it discusses graying out between being feminine and masculine its all based in stereotypical perspective on how men and women are which I think I false. its just that were more aware of different kind of values to which to live now. But theyve always been there, (free) media just opened them up for us.
dustin raises some good points about men but misses the boat by a longshot on men’s current roles, expectations and social standards….
to wit: that men with ponytails or convertibles don’t have a clue when it comes to parenting…
wake-up-dude! you’re still stuck!
bacaman
This is an article I read once on being a man that I keep on my desktop. It is, in my humble opinion, what masculinity is.
“Found out a man ain’t just being macho.
Joseph Bayly has some excellent thoughts on the societal current today against masculinity, which caused me to do some thinking on the subject myself. My oldest son just turned 17, and he’s going off to college next fall, and I’m afraid for him because he’s male in a culture that despises maleness. My next-oldest son doesn’t live with me, but with his mother. The first I’ve only raised for the last three years; the second only during summers. How do you convey to a boy what a man is with that kind of time constraints?
Between the contradictory role models of “new-age sensitive man” and “clueless Tim-Taylor man,” it’s no wonder today’s boys don’t know what a man looks like. I’ll give you a hint: neither one is accurate, because they’re both self-centered and immature. The one is whiny, the other overblown, but both of them are completely missing what a man is and does.
So what does a man do?
A man works. Like a dog if necessary. Not just at a job, but at home, as well, because if anybody tells you that child-raising isn’t work, they’ve been smoking the drapes. A man gets up in the night with a crying baby, or works a double shift, or makes trip after trip with the moving van. If it takes a lot of coffee, drink it. If you don’t do it, it won’t get done. Rest when things are finished, not when you’re tired.
Erma Bombeck once listed off qualities her dad had had, and one of those was that he was always the one who went to the parking lot in the rain to get the car. That’s a man. The women and children may stay under the shelter; a man may not. If someone’s going to get wet, it should be you.
Ditto with disgusting things. Yes, I’m talking about diapers, but I’m also talking about things like stopped plumbing, pet messes, hairballs, and whatever’s in that container in the back of the fridge. Clean it up, gag a couple of times if you must, then go wash your hands. God made your skin washable for a reason.
Tim the Tool Man notwithstanding, no man is born with a knowledge of gadgets and machinery. You acquire it a bit at a time. If you’re lucky enough to have a father who is skilled at those things and available to teach you, great. If you’re not (as I wasn’t), you’ll just have to figure it out. When I was in high school, my dad gave me a beater car, and I had to figure out how it worked. I’m still not a mechanic, but I’ve learned that a screwdriver and a wrench aren’t magic wands. Read a manual if it helps, but if you can’t, then take the thing apart and try to figure out which part does what. Never let “I don’t know how” be an excuse for not doing something. Do or do not; there is no try.
As a man, you are stronger physically than women. You are also bigger than they are and hence intimidating to them, if only on a subconscious level. Never loom over them, never yell at them, never treat them as though they were men. (On the other side of the coin, don’t condescend to them either. They’re small, not dumb.) Bear in mind that you have all the equipment and strength necessary at any moment to overpower and violate any woman. It’s therefore vital that you conduct yourself in a way that makes obvious that you not only wouldn’t do something like that, but you’d step in front of a bullet or a grizzly bear to keep her safe. This isn’t something you say out loud, but an attitude that stays in the back of your mind.
Men speak a different language from women. You should be able to handle “Woman” as a second language, but it’s never going to come naturally to you. Don’t make it your native tongue. Women talk through their feelings, but if you do it, it just sounds neurotic. Talk when you have something to convey to someone else.
On the same note, remember that men talk differently according to whether there’s a woman present or not. If your vocabulary doesn’t run toward vulgarity, good. If someone else’s does, live with it. My father is a gentle, polite, soft-spoken man, and my mother knows for a fact that his language is invariably fit for the Ladies’ Sewing Circle. She believes this because she’s never heard him speak when there are no women around. Some of my most colorful phrases I learned from him.
Religion is not a female thing. I don’t mean that it’s supposed to be male-dominated, but it is male-led. Look around you at Mass, and see how many families are there without Dad. Don’t let yours (when you have one) be one of them. Make sure your kids see you genuflect and kneel. Make sure they know you pray. They may appreciate their mother’s faith, but it’s yours they’ll imitate. If you want to raise Godly sons, show them what one looks like.
Remember that although not every woman is potentially a wife or girlfriend, all of them are still women. Treat every female with the same respect and care you would show a woman you wanted to marry. Believe me, once you master this, you’ll never lack for a date when you want one. Kindness, good humor and gentlemanliness aren’t just for a girl you’re hitting on. They can see through that a mile away. It’s how you treat the ones you’re not letching after that they’ll notice. If you open doors and carry packages as a matter of habit, word gets around. After that, it doesn’t matter if you look like Boris Karloff; you’ll still be a hot property. And even if you’re not looking for a woman at the time, what the heck? It never hurts to be well-liked.
Finally, as a great writer once said, “If my father was the head of the house, my mother was its heart.” A man isn’t the soft comforting lap the kids sit on to be rocked to sleep, or the kiss that makes owwies all better. He may be called on to do those things sometimes, but he’s not really constructed for it. A man is the solidity in his family, the rock that can’t be broken. He’s also the wall that shields them from storms, and the roof that keeps their heads dry. Which usually means getting rained on or wind-beaten himself. If you don’t do that, a woman has to, and it’s something they’re not constructed for.
That’s the essence of being a man. Sometimes what you have to do sucks. That’s the way it is. A man has both rights and duties, but when there’s a conflict between them, duty always wins. Period. Your rights will be compromised over and over, but your responsibilities must never be. A man does what needs doing and worries about his rights some other time.
Don’t be a guy. The world is full of guys. Be a man.”
A further remark.
Yes it’s true that women don’t ‘need’ the protection of men the way they once did. But that doesn’t mean that some don’t want it (I have a twin sister who would vouch for this).
I’m young and I’ve been with these modern, strong, wonderful women. But all of them, of their own accord, said they felt safe with me.
And as a man, that makes me feel like I’m doing something right.
Both articles were crap…
This guy is a fat, effiminate whimp and justifying it by advocating all males to be like him. Most of the time from up the block you can’t even tell if someone is a man or a woman…
Males ,especially “White” males have been neutered. These attitudes have been specifically engineered into society by specific groups to destroy it. Primarily to destroy (evil,racist) White, Christian society. It’s working and its not hard to do. Just continuously bombard the morons with various media (along the lines of the crap this author wrote)and the sheeple conform.
Gay, Black,Diversity…GOOD,
White, Male,Christian,reward for production..BAD
Men have been so brainwashed and effiminate that there isn’t much difference is a woman is a lesbian or normal, they lost their desire to have children and aren’t having them anyway.
Very Good! You’re going willingly to your own demise…
“White, Male,Christian,reward for production..BAD”
Now you’re finally understanding how the world works, Rush Limbaugh. And when the curtains finally fall on your Racism and Homophobia Hour, you’ll have lots of free time. Who knows? Maybe you can even learn to read.
Dustin,
Great work, as always! I really like the ideas and thought-provoking discussions you’ve started here.
One thing I would mention, though is your comment on women’s work, etc., “The idea that certain kinds of work are “feminine” or “masculine” is dead in the water.” I wouldn’t have a funeral for this notion, yet. Perhaps this is one example where the article is forward-looking, as you stated in a comment, but I’d like to highlight a few counter-examples to develop this thought a bit further.
I work with a lot of “manly” men who regularly go shooting, hunting, riding motorcycles and beef up their Jeeps, etc. Young, old and middle-aged alike, they all “have a woman” to do their laundry, cook their meals and raise their kids. While paternity leave and stay-at-home dads are on the rise, I still see snickers about such ideas. More subtly, being the only woman on my work team, there is an unspoken assumption that I will organize team outings and group potlucks, etc., just as women in other teams organize their group activities.
Likewise, my sister talks about how good her husband is to her, and cites examples that include doing the laundry and cooking periodically. If these were truly shared responsibilities, they wouldn’t come up as surprise acts of kindness.
I have a classmate who is currently unemployed, and his girlfriend is employed, and she still does the laundry for him. He claims he messes it up, etc., and that she likes doing it, but I think there is something still deeper than that.
My point is not to completely disprove your idea, but instead to show that I think there is a lot more subtle things going on now. Indeed, rules and gender roles of the past may no longer be adhered to or even pronounced, but those ideas still play into our assumptions and how we operate; the rules have left their mark on society and I think we are a long way from removing the stain of gender roles.
Thanks,
Laura
I have to agree. As a transwoman, I feel that although gender roles are no longer prescribed (I grew up in an equal opportunity family with both my parents working, cooking, etc.), they still exist among the majority of society, and I reckon that they will continue to do so.
For example, if I began walking ‘like a man’ in public even if I wear heels, a cute skirt, and make-up, it would be jarring to a number of spectators.
But if I end up being in a relationship again, I know that I will fall back on the traditional gender roles of cooking, cleaning for him, etc. It becomes automatic, because despite my home that I grew up in, a woman still would do such things in order to keep a man happy.
While we are not used to this uncomfortable nature of nebulousness, I’d say that we should embrace a post-modern understanding of life instead. It only makes sense that we provide a world where both men and women, and those who do not identify with a binary set of gender, an equal opportunity for individual growth and empowerment.
[...] [...]
Disgusting, thats all ihave to say.Why don't we call feminism what it really is- 'How To Infantilize a Culture 101' , a constant stream of social engineering, and everyone one of you buy it hook line & sinker and then congratulate yourselves on how civilized you are. Deconstruct the family unit, make men limp wristed women and the women rampaging whores & men wannabes, then promote it as 'progress' and begin to ship your poison all around the planet, then wonder why foreign cultures despise you and everything you stand for & fly planes into your buildings. And you wonder why things are so screwed up, why society seems to be burning in front of you.
Hey screw that man, lets go clubbin!
Make people weak, hedonistic,navel gazing & emotionally insecure, lower the tone of culture to that a braying teenage girl (all in the name of equality, naturally) than do anything you want to your slaves including raiding their savings , financially DESTROYING them, destroying their job base, sending them off to fight in pointless ass wars- and not get a boo in return. This is the legacy of your blurring of the gender roles- mass confusion not a coherent future, broken homes & communities , desperate men , an unending worship of unearned female privalege (because wimmin in the wil west are OH SO OPPRESSED), total insanity. There was a reason women were held in check in the past, but its been totally refraimed by power hungry feminists who fancy 'gender' as simply a social construct. Now we go the way of Rome
You got what you wanted girls, give youselves an applause.
You castrated your sons & husbands with a smile on your faces, now we're all like you.
Brave New wOrld
The average American IQ is 100. Half of all IQs will fall below 100, and yours is clearly one of them.
I’d say it’s no higher than 85, and that’s my being generous.
babbling nonsense!!! LOL…silly little man..
God, some of the self righteous, pontificating crap women even here are writing, telling us how 'we' should be.
The funny things is that when the real crap starts to happen, my god will you go back to where you've been throughout the rest of history- OUT OF THE PICTURE
I think the most amazing part of all this is the possibility that men and women have to choose what they want to be.
perfect artile!i need to read more times to understand it.
[...] Being a Man in the 21st Century (Part 2) – Stepcase LifehackEarlier this week, I began a discussion of the way that manhood in American society is changing. Today, I want to revisit the topic with some of my own … We are all feminists now. … Earlier this week, I began a discussion of the way that manhood in American society is changing. Today, I want to revisit the topic with some of… [...]
On the idea that “We are all feminists now”, I really want to believe
this, though my observations tell me we have more evolution to do in
this regard…
In 1994, Tom ford was appointed gucci group creative director, all the products in March, he launched its excellent reputation silks and satins shirt, jacket and pants outfit velvet mohair, model a collection of modern, sexy, elegant in one new image. Tom ford sweeping overhaul gucci, Replica Gucci Handbags will this traditional brand for new fashionable change, if the generation of young families become gucci fashion represents. In the 90 s Europe and the transformation of the luxury brands trendy, gucci to redefine himself in the position in the fashion industry is undoubtedly made the most successful. From 1994 to now, gucci has been the world’s most influential super heavyweight fashion brand. At the same time, it will start to the global fashion pop of quality brand, yves st Laurent France under a snare and a number of classic brands are become gucci group members. In 1997, Gucci Handbag On Sale bought cooperation for 23 years Swiss watch company famous Montres Severin, so as to fully control their clocks and watches business.
There was another case in Canada that I read about online some years ago about another case in which a normal genetic male baby’s penis was destroyed when he was an infant and in this case he was raised as a girl from the much younger age of only 7 months old,not as late as 18 months as was David Reimer,and research shows that the core gender identity is learned by as early as 18 months old.In this other case,it was reported in 1998 he was still living as a woman in his 20′s but a bisexual woman. But I’m not sure if he still is now. With David Reimer they raised him as a girl too late after he learned most of his gender identity as a boy from the moment he was born and put into blue clothes, treated totally differently, given gender stereotyped toys, perceived and treated totally differently than girls are in every way(in the great book,He and She:How Children Develop Their Sex Role Identity it explains that a lot of research studies and tests by parent child psychologists found that they give 3 month old babies gender stereotyped toys long before they are able to develop these kinds of preferences or ask for these toys. They also found that when adults interacted with the same exact baby they didn’t know was a girl or boy who was dressed in gender neutral clothes,they decided if they *believed* it was a girl or boy. And those adults who thought the baby was a boy,always handed the baby a toy foot ball,but never a doll and were asked what made them think it was a girl or boy and they said they used characteristics of the baby to make the judgement . Those who thought the baby was a boy described characteristcs such as strength,those who thought the baby was a girl described the baby as having softness and fragility,and as the Dr.Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Wendy Schempp Mathews explain,Again remember that the same infant was being characterized as strong or soft,the actual distinction by sex characteristics being only in the minds of the adults. They also explain that in the toy preference studies,girl toddlers often show an intitial interest in the trucks,but eventually abandon them for a more familiar type of toy. Also check out Kate Bornstein’s books,Gender Outlaw and My Gender Workbook,and recently a co-written book,Gender Outlaws. Kate used to be a heterosexual married man who fathered a daughter and then had a sex change and became a lesbian woman who now doesn’t idenity as a man or a woman. I heard Kate interviewd in 1998 on a local NPR show and she totally debunks gender myths,and rejects the “feminine” and “masculine” categories as the mostly socially constructed categories that they really are.She even said,what does it mean to feel or think like a woman(or man) she said what does that really mean.
,
There is an excellent online article that I printed out 10 years ago,by Jungian psychologist Dr.Gary S.Toub,called,Jung and Gender:Masculine and Feminine Revisted. On his site it now only has part of this article and it says you have to register to read the full article. I emailed Dr.Toub years ago and he wrote me back several nice emails,in one he said he really liked my letter,and that it was filled to the brim with excellent points and insights. In this article he talks about what parts of Jungian thought he finds useful and what he finds problematic. The first thing he says he finds useful is, In the course of Jungian analysis, he often assists female clients to discover traditionally,masculine qualities in their psyche and that he likewise frequently assist male clients to recognize traditionally feminine qualities in their psyche. He says this process frees each gender from the straight-jacket of stereotyped sex roles and expands his clients identities. He then said that the process also mirrors and furthers the breakdown of male-female polarization in our culture,and the cultural shifts towards androgyny. He also says that most importantly, his practice of Jungian analysis places the greatest emphasis on facilitating his clients individuation process. He says this means that he tries to assist clients,male or female,to search for their authentic self-definition,distinct from society’s gender expectations.He also says that many Jungian definitions of masculine and feminine are narrow,outdated and sexist. He also says that he has found that generalizing about what is masculine and what is feminine is dangerous,often perpetuating gender myths that are discriminatory and damaging.He says while there is some research supporting biological roots to personality differences,the majority of studies suggest that much of what is considered masculine or feminine is culture determined. He also says that viewing masculine and feminine as complementary opposites,while useful at times,is problematic. He then says as his gay,lesbian, and transexual clients have taught him,gender is more accurately viewed as encompassing a wide-ranging continumm. He then says that likewise,the more people he sees in his practice,the more he is impressed at the great diversity in human nature. He says he has seen men of all types and varieties,and women of all kinds. He then says,he is hard-pressed to come up with very many generalizations based on gender.He says he knows that there are some statistical patterns,but how useful are they when he works with individuals and in a rapidly changing society? He says if each person is unique,no statistical norm or average will be able to define who my client is. He then says,from a psychological perpespective,men and women are not, in fact,opposite. He says his clinical experience is that they are much more psychologically alike than different,and the differences that exist are not necessarily opposing.
Please consider reading the excellent thorough book, Myths Of Gender:Biological Theories of Women and Men. by Brown University Biologist Dr.Anne Fausto-Sterling. Also there is a lot of evidence from sociologists and anthropologists that there are androgynous cultures. Many anthropologists like Walter Williams author of the award winning,The Spirit and The Flesh,and many other anthropologists have done field work for decades in places like Tahiti and Malaysia, women and men are encouraged to have androgynous roles there and they are not polarized into “opposite” categories and gender roles,and they are more alike in their personalities and behaviors. This is thoroughly explained in the good book, Manhood In The Making:Cultural Concepts Of Masculinity. And the men there unlike in our very gender divided,gender stereotyped, sexist male dominated society ,aren’t punished for being similar to women, they are encouraged and rewarded for it! And it’s in the very gender divided, gender stereotyped sexist male dominated societies where the sexes are polarized into “opposite” categories and gender roles that makes *more* gender differences!
As I already explained,here are also a lot of studies by good parent child development psychologists that clearly demonstrate that female and male babies are actually born biologically more alike than different with very few differences,yet they are perceived and treated systematically very differently right from the moment of birth on from parents and other care givers.
There is also tons of psychological studies from decades showing that most psychological differences between the sexes are very small in most areas and that most large differences are actually individual people differences.
And there are also plenty of very good academic studies by communication professors and experts that have actually found very small differences in communication between women and men.
Women and men are actually biologically and psychologically more alike than different and gender is mostly an artificial socially consructed category.
Our brains are actually more alike than different just as our external genitals are and plenty of research shows that the structure and function of the brain can actually be changed by the interaction with different life long enviornments,different life long experiences,and social and cultural conditioning.
Home About APA Psychology Topics
Think Again: Men and Women Share Cognitive Skills
Research debunks myths about cognitive difference.
What the Research Shows
Are boys better at math? Are girls better at language? If fewer women than men work as scientists and engineers, is that aptitude or culture? Psychologists have gathered solid evidence that boys and girls or men and women differ in very few significant ways — differences that would matter in school or at work — in how, and how well, they think.At the University of Wisconsin, Janet Shibley Hyde has compiled meta-analytical studies on this topic for more than 10 years. By using this approach, which aggregates research findings from many studies, Hyde has boiled down hundreds of inquiries into one simple conclusion: The sexes are more the same than they are different.In a 2005 report, Hyde compiled meta-analyses on sex differences not only in cognition but also communication style, social or personality variables, motor behaviors and moral reasoning. In half the studies, sex differences were small; in another third they were almost non-existent. Thus, 78 percent of gender differences are small or close to zero. What’s more, most of the analyses addressed differences that were presumed to be reliable, as in math or verbal ability.At the end of 2005, Harvard University’s Elizabeth Spelke reviewed 111 studies and papers and found that most suggest that men’s and women’s abilities for math and science have a genetic basis in cognitive systems that emerge in early childhood but give men and women on the whole equal aptitude for math and science. In fact, boy and girl infants were found to perform equally well as young as six months on tasks such as addition and subtraction (babies can do this, but not with pencil and paper!).The evidence has piled up for years. In 1990, Hyde and her colleagues published a groundbreaking meta-analysis of 100 studies of math performance. Synthesizing data collected on more than three million participants between 1967 and 1987, researchers found no large, overall differences between boys and girls in math performance. Girls were slightly better at computation in elementary and middle school; in high school only, boys showed a slight edge in problem solving, perhaps because they took more science, which stresses problem solving. Boys and girls understood math concepts equally well and any gender differences narrowed over the years, belying the notion of a fixed or biological differentiating factor.As for verbal ability, in 1988, Hyde and two colleagues reported that data from 165 studies revealed a female superiority so slight as to be meaningless, despite previous assertions that “girls are better verbally.” What’s more, the authors found no evidence of substantial gender differences in any component of verbal processing. There were even no changes with age.
What the Research Means
The research shows not that males and females are – cognitively speaking — separate but equal, but rather suggests that social and cultural factors influence perceived or actual performance differences. For example, in 1990, Hyde et al. concluded that there is little support for saying boys are better at math, instead revealing complex patterns in math performance that defy easy generalization. The researchers said that to explain why fewer women take college-level math courses and work in math-related occupations, “We must look to other factors, such as internalized belief systems about mathematics, external factors such as sex discrimination in education and in employment, and the mathematics curriculum at the precollege level.”Where the sexes have differed on tests, researchers believe social context plays a role. Spelke believes that later-developing differences in career choices are due not to differing abilities but rather cultural factors, such as subtle but pervasive gender expectations that really kick in during high school and college.In a 1999 study, Steven Spencer and colleagues reported that merely telling women that a math test usually shows gender differences hurt their performance. This phenomenon of “stereotype threat” occurs when people believe they will be evaluated based on societal stereotypes about their particular group. In the study, the researchers gave a math test to men and women after telling half the women that the test had shown gender differences, and telling the rest that it found none. Women who expected gender differences did significantly worse than men. Those who were told there was no gender disparity performed equally to men. What’s more, the experiment was conducted with women who were top performers in math.Because “stereotype threat” affected women even when the researchers said the test showed no gender differences – still flagging the possibility — Spencer et al. believe that people may be sensitized even when a stereotype is mentioned in a benign context.
How We Use the Research
If males and females are truly understood to be very much the same, things might change in schools, colleges and universities, industry and the workplace in general. As Hyde and her colleagues noted in 1990, “Where gender differences do exist, they are in critical areas. Problem solving is critical for success in many mathematics-related fields, such as engineering and physics.” They believe that well before high school, children should be taught essential problem-solving skills in conjunction with computation. They also refer to boys having more access to problem-solving experiences outside math class. The researchers also point to the quantitative portion of the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT), which may tap problem-solving skills that favor boys; resulting scores are used in college admissions and scholarship decisions. Hyde is concerned about the costs of scientifically unsound gender stereotyping to individuals and to society as a whole.
Sources & Further Reading
Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta- analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 53-69.Hyde, J.S., Fennema, E., & Lamon, S. (1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.Hyde, J.S. (2005) The gender similarities hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60(6), 581-592.Spelke, Elizabeth S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic aptitude for mathematics and science?: A critical review. American Psychologist, 60(9), 950-958.Spencer, S.J., Steele, C.M., & Quinn, D.M. (1999) Stereotype threat and women’s math performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 4-28.American Psychological Association, January 18, 2006Research in ActionEducationTesting and AssessmentGender Issues
And I want to thank Dustin for your great important article. And it’s always depressing and disturbing to see all of the hostile irrational woman haters post who are threatened by any cultural social changes in gender definitions and gender stereotypes,myths and roles that still have a long way to go. And too all of the people who have common predictable sexist gender myths,biases,stereotyped beliefs. And Dustin,you are *SO* right about there being little to no evidence evidence to support most of these claims about “natural” sex differences,but there is a lot of evidence that the sexes are much more alike than different!
You are right, “manhood today is about us, about living
our own lives as fully and satisfyingly as we can.” The question is how do we
do it? We don’t want to do it like the men of the past, the men the media wants
us to be or like women.
We need to learn from other men how to be men. Other men
know when a man is being a man. I’m not talking about being macho. I’m speaking
about having honor and integrity, the qualities that make a man.
Where are all of the comments?