All posts by walklikeaman

How To Raise Boys

On the  March 20th  NPR show “1A” the entire hour was devoted to the topic of how to raise boys.   The now infamous Gillette commercial and the controversies it precipitated was the impetus for the show’s topic.   A common theme from the invited guests was how boys are taught to suppress their feelings and how destructive this is to the boy.   The conclusion reached was that if a boy cries in the presence of other boys he will be bullied and ridiculed.   A young man who was a guest on the show told of falling in gym class scraping his knee and holding back tears because he didn’t want to embarrass himself.   The thrust of his story was that  boys are taught not to cry.   My problem with the example is that if a girl fell in gym class I believe she would have also felt the pressure not to cry.   At least for handling physical discomfort not crying is a shared norm by both genders.   The notion that boys get the message that “boys/men don’t cry” is a culturally imposed norm that leads men to emotional denial and stuffed feelings that get expressed through self harm and violence is far from accurate.  Whining and crying is far from the best strategy in dealing with a strong emotional feeling.  Yes, it is probably true for some men but the reality is that not overtly expressing a strong emotion is not equivalent to not experiencing that emotion and not dealing with it in a healthy manner.   Being self aware of one’s emotional state and using rational thought to understand the emotion and taking action, when indicated, to figure out the best way to respond to that feeling is manly.   Instead of telling boys to just let it out and not be afraid to cry we should be teaching emotional intelligence and utilizing our thoughtfulness to understand what our emotions are telling us.

The show guests also talked about empathy and how men are allegedly taught that being manly means that when men perceive vulnerability in another man  they will automatically dominate and shame the weaker or overtly suffering man.  Again, I believe this to be a misinterpretation of how men express empathy.   Men are highly empathetic but handle it differently than women.  For example, men who have experienced combat often state that their motivation to fight and to protect their fellow soldiers is not about loyalty to country or a higher cause but the attachment and fellowship with their comrades.   Male empathy is often expressed in acts of protection.   One protects when they sense the need in others to be protected.   Isn’t that empathy?

One of the guests stated that, “gender norms are getting in the way of boys being good human beings.”  This speaks to the question I raised in my last blog.  Is there a difference between what constitutes a good man or good woman as compared to being  a good human?    To begin to answer this difficult question I offered my take on how a man acts responsibly that is different from how a women acts responsibly.   Another trait of being a good human being is being supportive.   Men are often supportive as mentors and fixers.   Teaching and modeling to other men, particularly to younger men, is an example of men supporting other men.   Women tend to support by listening and expressing sympathy with less of an emphasis on problem solving and fixing.  As we strive to be good human beings understanding that achieving this personal goal will look differently for men and women.

Good Man, Good Women, Good Human

Dr. Morgan T. Sammons, a psychologist responding to the recent American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines on masculinity wrote, ” Let’s face it. When men are compared with women on a variety of psychological and physical health parameters, men pretty much lose across the board. Women outlive men, indeed, in every age group, death rates for men exceed those for women. In 2018, women in the US lived on average a whopping five years longer than men (81 vs. 76 years). Nor is the difference limited to humans. In practically every mammalian and avian species, females live longer than males. In comparison to women, men engage in more risk-taking behavior, consume more alcohol, are more likely to use more tobacco and other substances, and get diagnosed with ADHD more frequently.  Men also experience more behavioral disorders in childhood and adolescence, where we develop a pattern of externalizing behaviors that not only bring us to the attention of the wrong type of people but also lead us to ignore internal cues that modulate psychological health. As a sex, we are, in a word, a mess.”

Nothing particularly new in what Dr. Sammons wrote just succinctly highlights some of the challenges faced by men today.   An additional challenge for modern masculinity, that Sammons did not mention,  are the issues brought to the forefront by the “Me To” movement and the subsequent confusion for men about their relationships with women both personally and in the work place. 

In a response to the mess painted by Sammons, former President Obama in a recent interview was asked what is being a man today.   His answer started with the premise that a good man is a good human.  He then elaborated offering the following characteristics of a good man or human – responsible, reliable, hard working, kind , respectful, supportive, compassionate. 

Unfortunately Obama’s response does not bring any clarity to the big questions.   Is there a difference between what defines a good man or good woman as compared to being  a good human?    Do good men demonstrate the characteristics of being a good human differently than women but still meet the standard of being a good human?  My take is that men do exhibit and demonstrate the good human characteristics differently than women and this understanding might be helpful for mitigating the mess and confusion that men are facing.

Since defining the characteristics of a good man – good women – good human appear quite subjective I propose taking one trait as an example and ask my readers for their input on what they believe, on average, differentiates a good man from a good woman while both qualify as good humans for a particular characteristic.  I’ll begin with the first trait mentioned by Obama – responsible.   As an illustration, suppose a family is faced with a decision about whether or not to move to a new city so that the husband can start a new job at a substantial pay increase.   However, his wife is deeply concerned about moving the family at a critical time in the schooling and  social life of their two children.   The husband is acting responsibly in attempting to secure the best financial situation for the family’s future while his wife is acting responsibly by protecting the welfare of the children.    Both alternatives demonstrate being a good human but differentiate in priorities based on gender roles.   My conclusion is that in a close call a responsible women might more likely choose the short term  well being of the children while a responsible man might more likely choose the long term financial benefit of moving for a new job. 

What do you think?

Men In The Media

Several recent references to masculinity in the media are worthy of comment.   An article on girl boy friendship stated that, ” Children have an often overlooked conservative streak, one that’s most easily identifiable in their attitudes toward gender. Even as more grown-ups come around to the idea that gender is a spectrum, children continue to draw a bold line between “boy” and “girl” and police these categories with a great fervor.”  The author clearly believes that the gender spectrum perspective should outweigh the conservative streak among children.   However, what about the notion that the children are acting more closely to a degree of biological determinism and that gender fluidity is more of a socially ascribed construct.  How revolutionary, beyond anatomy boys and girls are not the same.   In the same article the author does make a case against same sex schools.   Her point is that boys and girls need to learn how to get along and work together in order to prepare them for the world of work where men and women should be treated equally.   No disagreement but a reminder that we do not have to be gender neutral to be gender equal.

Laura Ingraham on Fox News started an interview with Dr. Ed Adams, a psychologist who was there to explain the new American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines on masculinity, by commenting on his clothing and what message his choice of clothes signified.   Not only was the comment inane but illustrated a double standard.   If a male commentator had started a conversation with a female professional by discussing her outfit the cyber universe would have erupted with a call for the interviewer to be fired for obvious sexism.    Did not hear a peep resulting from Ingraham’s behavior.

I have tried to pay attention to how men are portrayed in television commercials since the vast majority of ads make men out to be simpletons needing help and correction from their female companions.    Some of the latest examples.  In a Turbo Tax ad a man is sitting in an office talking to the tax person and pretending to be on a yacht.  His intention was to show the tax person that he was actually wealthy and this year’s income was not representative of his true financial status.   A female office mate then tells him that the tax person can’t really see his pretend yacht props and that he was being foolish.   The take away, it takes a women to shame a man with his reality.  An H& R commercial showed a man and his wife leaving their tax consultation with the knowledge that they didn’t have to wait for their anticipated tax refund.  The guy joyously says they can use the money to buy a pool table for the family room.   His wife then reminds him that the only room in the house for the table is the dining room and how ridiculous his idea is.  The message is that men make grandiose plans and need a women to ground them in reality.

I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge at least one advertisement that portrayed men in a positive light.   A commercial for the Amazon Echo Share device showed a young women who just ruined a recipe while preparing a meal for a boyfriend remotely getting advice from her father on what she could prepare quickly to serve her guest.   The interaction between father and daughter was respectful, natural and illustrated a strong positive relationship between a father and adult daughter.  Fathering is a life long journey and Dad’s can continue to be important in the lives of their grown kids. 

The most effective way to push back on the media which tends to put men into either the toxic or inept basket is for those of us who represent the vast majority of men who live a life of positive masculinity to be outspoken about who we are and what we do every day to lower the temperature of the gender war. 

Gender Debate on Fire

The release of the American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines on masculinity and coincidentally an internet advertisement by Gillette that has gone viral has kindled a much needed debate on modern masculinity.    I will not attempt to regurgitate the main issues raised in these two missives but simply give my feedback on several key issues that are in the forefront of the debate.   I do, however, suggest going to the article in the NY Times for the full discourse. (Right click on the below picture.)

NY Times – The Fight Over Men

Nature or Nurture -The scientific community is in disagreement of how much gender identity is innate and how much is culturally driven.   There is clear evidence that there are differences between the male brain and the female brain but the issue is how these differences, coupled with hormonal variation between  the sexes, translates into behavior.   Further complicating the issue is the evidence that  the social environment can trigger the expression of genes/hormones that impact gender differences.  My take is that we should leave this debate to the research community and focus instead on the value of gender differences regardless of their origin. 

Men & Emotion – Much of the discussion about traditional masculinity is how men deal with their emotions.   The APA guidelines strongly stresses the point of view that the emotional handcuffs men place on themselves because of cultural  stereotypes about masculinity has led to a series of destructive outcomes for men.   However, I believe the guidelines misses the distinction between emotional awareness and expression of emotions.   The guidelines suggest that male stoicism is at the root of  self-destructive emotional denial.  Stoicism does not mean a lack of acknowledgement of one’s emotions.   The ancient Stoics are often misunderstood because the terms they used pertained to different concepts in the past than they do today. The word “stoic” has come to mean unemotional or indifferent to pain because Stoic ethics taught freedom from passion by following reason. The Stoics did not seek to extinguish emotions; rather, they sought to transform them by a resolute that enables a person to develop clear judgment and inner calm.  Logic, reflection, and concentration were the methods of such self-discipline.  In addition, Stoic philosophy is founded on four principles which are at the heart of the best of masculinity – wisdom, courage, justice, temperance.

A man’s emotional health, which is his barometer of making good choices and decisions, is not based on how a man publicly expresses those emotions but how he uses wisdom to understand and choose the appropriate courageous, and just way to act.   Simply put, real men can choose when to cry and not cry.  Withholding tears  does not mean not feeling.

Both the  APA guidelines and the Gillette advertisement offer prescriptions for young men and boys on their emotional health that miss the mark when they measure emotional health by how a man outwardly expresses his emotions.    A man can have intense feelings, understand those feelings with wisdom and choose to appear calm and controlled without being accused of emotional insensitivity

Toxic Masculinity – An overly applied label used whenever a man acts inappropriately.   Yes, there are a small minority of toxic men who believe that being a man imbues them with the right to overpower and dominate women.   However, most men seek to express their masculinity in the light not the shadow and are willing to examine their own biases and behaviors towards women.   The Gillette advertisement in particular heavy handedly illustrates men acting badly and closes with how men should have acted in those situations as a lesson to men and boys on how they should behave.   This non nuanced approach and the guidelines by the APA on how men should behave to avoid being toxic fuels controversy not the subtlety needed for a constructive dialogue on gender roles.

Tyranny of Labels

I am once again reminded how merely using labels to express a point of view or compilation of attributes inhibits dialogue and understanding.   While the labels -liberal, progressive, conservative – have distorted and abridged political discussion similarly toxic masculinity and misogyny name calling have distorted and abridged dialogue about gender issues.

I have previously attempted to highlight the misuse of misogyny by going to its literal definition which is a hatred of women.   Too often, a boorish or insensitive  remark to a women results in some guy being called a misogynist.  The misapplication of the label forestalls an exploration of the misbehavior and puts the alleged offender in the same basket as sexual predator.   The accused will react defensively and a analysis of what behavior caused someone’s distress will often be ignored.

Toxic masculinity describes an extreme form of patriarchy which places men as superior beings entitled to a position of power over women.   The Harvey Weinstein’s of the world are clearly participants in the practice of toxic masculinity.   However,  using toxic masculinity too liberally puts men on the defensive and impedes meaningful dialogue.

A recent article in a New Jersey newspaper highlights the problem with these labels.  The Princeton University all male a capella singing group was vilified in the campus newspaper for the way they performed the song “Kiss The Girl.”   Apparently in previous performances of the song a female member of the audience was invited onto the stage and given the choice to give a peck on the cheek or lips to a male member of the audience.  The Princeton newspaper columnist stated that the practice promotes toxic masculinity.  In addition, the article further labeled the message of the song as misogynistic.  In order to further her perspective the columnist ignored the fact that a woman could easily refuse to participate and that this song routine has been going on for years with no blowback until she wrote her column.  There is no question that misogyny and toxic masculinity exists and examples of these behaviors and attitudes should be exposed and confronted.  The problem is that the liberal and extreme uses of these labels inhibits a rational discussion about acceptable societal norms around gender issues.   A revisionist examination of song lyrics highlighting formerly acceptable but now viewed as sexist stereotyping adds little value to understanding changing gender roles.   In fact, it makes the issue of studying song lyrics for examples of misogynistic references as comical and diverts us from the dialogue needed to explore the gender narrative,

Men & Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence, referred to as EQ,  is defined as the ability to be aware of one’s emotions, to be able to sense the emotional climate in a situation and to be capable of empathy towards others.  A number of research studies have concluded that being truly successful in one’s personal and career life EQ is as important as IQ.  A good timely example can be found in the eulogies for former President George H.W. Bush.   So many individuals highlighted his decency as a human being and his ability to form positive relationships far more than his smarts.

Recent stories in the media bring additional attention to the question of men and EQ.  Anthony Bourdain, the star of his own CNN show and a well respected celebrity chef took his life in a Paris hotel.  Prince William, who one day will be the King of England, revealed in an interview that,  “The relation between the job and the personal life was what really took me over the edge. And I started feeling things that I’ve never felt before. And I got very sad and very down……,” he said. “You start to take away bits of the job and keep them in your body. And of course, you don’t want to share with your loved ones because you just don’t want to bring that sort of stuff home.”

Admiral Scott Stearney, 58, was found dead of an apparent suicide in his ‘residence’ in Bahrain on Saturday .  The decorated Navy admiral was in charge of the Fifth Fleet in the Middle East.  A family man with a history of achievement takes his own life for no apparent reason.

These stories reveal issues with EQ for these men and also for the alarming increase in suicide rates for middle aged American men.  Prince Harry spoke about the impact of stress in the workplace and how it manifested itself with depression like symptoms.   It might also be safe to assume that stressors, either personal or professional, led to Admiral Stearney and Bourdain taking their lives.   Three highly accomplished men with high intellectual intelligence might have been lacking in EQ.   Did their inability to be sufficiently aware of their emotional lives before the negative feelings became overwhelming contribute to the Prince’s depression and the hopelessness that led to the suicides?

We are all familiar with the cliché that real men don’t cry and the belief that men stuff their feelings which lead to depression and men not seeking mental health treatment.  This might be a simplistic view of EQ but achieving a high EQ means a lot more than being able to cry when you are feeling bad.  The ability to be attuned to one’s emotional health and to understand the meaning and appropriate way to deal with emotions is a core component of EQ.  It’s OK if  a man does not cry or whine when he is feeling bad as long as he acknowledges what he is  feeling is worthy of exploration and, when appropriate, sharing with trusted friends and significant others.

Recognizing the importance of EQ for one’s well being and seeking the relationships which foster self-awareness and empathy will go a long way in enhancing the lives of men. .

 

 

International Men’s Day

Surprised to find out that Monday, November 19th,  is “International Men’s Day.”  A worldwide event to promote the movement’s six pillars of masculinity.   They are:

  1. To promote positive male role models; not just movie stars and sports men but every day, working class men who are living decent, honest lives.
  2. To celebrate men’s positive contributions to society, community, family, marriage, child care, and to the environment.
  3. To focus on men’s health and well being; social, emotional, physical and spiritual.
  4. To highlight discrimination against men; in areas of social services, social attitudes and expectations, and law
  5. To improve gender relations and promote gender equality
  6. To create a safer, better world; where people can be safe and grow to reach their full potential.

Hard to quibble with any of the six, even for an ardent feminist.   However, as usual with broad objectives, the devil is in the details.   The first pillar, to promote positive male role models, is fine on the surface.  The question that comes to mind is,” do we have a consensus of who and what determines if a man is worthy of being a role model”?  Some might find traditional attributes such as providing, protecting and leading as sexist or that these traits also can generally apply to women.  The second pillar  seems to be fairly straight forward – celebrating men’s contributions to society.   We single out women who contribute, especially in the context of the “pink revolution” that brought so many women candidates to the midterm elections, so highlighting a man’s positive contributions is probably unobjectionable.   Focusing on men’s health and well being is a no brainer.   Men traditionally do not seek mental health services at the same rate as women and male suicide has reached epidemic proportions.  The fourth and fifth  pillars are probably the most contentious.  Are men being discriminated against?   Those who see male privilege as a huge barrier to gender equality would argue that discrimination against men is a trivial issue compared to rampant patriarchy.  But a more nuanced analysis reveals that there are areas, especially in divorce court, where men often get the short end of the stick.   In addition, the “Me To” movement has made many men defensive and wary of potential allegations of sexual abuse and harassment that they feel are unfounded or exaggerated.  When it comes to improving gender relations and promoting gender equality the emphasis should be on how we can have a rational fact based discourse on the subject without name calling and labeling.   So far this has not happened.

Hopefully, International Men’s Day and a toning down of the extreme rhetoric from both men and women can help us make the gender wars a gender dialogue.

 

Defensive & Confused Post Kavanaugh

The fallout from the Kavanaugh nomination has again brought into focus a number of issues raised by the “Me To” movement that impact on how men and boys behave and should behave in a gender equal world.   Men and boys are clearly on the defensive and confused.  Is it time for men to apologize for our Y chromosome and accept the notion that we are predisposed to sexual assault and abuse of women?  Instead, how about some practical advice:

Boys –  A recent article in the Washington Post entitled “What Boys Really Need To Hear” told about a mother who instructed her son, “Do not ever, ever  think that  because you’re both drinking and you both think that it’s consensual that it’s necessarily  okay.”  Her intent was to warn her son that when the girl woke up in the morning she could then declare that their encounter was non-consensual and that her son would face an accusation of sexual assault.  This is what we should be teaching and telling our boys about their sexual behavior:

Fact: teenage boys, especially between 14 to 17, and even young men until 25 do not have their brain based inhibition controls fully developed and are at most likely to engage in risky behavior

Fact: alcohol reduces inhibition for both boys and girls

Fact: inhibition makes decisions about consent even more imprecise

Fact: boys face the risk of false accusations while girls face the risk of not being believed

– bottom line if either of you are drunk sober up before you have sex

– no means no without exception

Men – Sweden, the country on top of the food chain for gender equality is facing some new realities about how far social engineering can change gender roles.   Yes, Swedish dads do get paid paternity leave and spend more time with their children then the typical American dad.  That’s great, but in Sweden women do more child care and tend to take more time on maternity leave even if it does have a negative impact on their careers.   A clear message that gender equality does not mean that men and women view their life’s journey in the same way.   Equality means equal opportunity not that we have to make equal choices.   Some practical advice:

Fact: you do not have to apologize for the actions of sexual abusers, they are the minority, most men treat women with respect

– be cool, we are in hypersensitive times so be extra mindful about your casual remarks and behavior towards women especially in the workplace

– when discussing gender issues with women validate what you hear as being real for that person, even when you disagree, before giving your point of view

– maintain your confidence as a man displaying the best of masculinity

Kavanaugh & Masculinity

I was attempting to resist commenting on the Kavanaugh/Ford Senate hearing because I try to keep the blog apolitical.   However, after much thought I realized that after putting politics aside what annoys me the most – understatement-  is my sense of Judge Kavanaugh’s  inadequacy as a man.  The question is whether or not his performance reflected the best of masculinity?   On one hand he attempted to appeal to stereotypical attributes of manliness – jock, beer drinker, weight lifter – while simultaneously trying  to demonstrate that he is a  highly evolved man not afraid to show strong emotion as he teared up  in front of a TV audience of millions.

My problem is that neither  approach felt terribly authentic.    I have no doubt that he was an athlete and did drink beer but his harping on the subject, especially his frequenting mention of his love for beer, was contrived and clearly a  blatant appeal to his perception of what “real men” think of manliness.  In addition, his display of emotion did not feel sincere.   Was he simply trying to appeal to female watchers by showing that he is a sensitive guy able to unashamedly choke up and cry in public?   What bothered me was not the fact that he got emotional but what prompted the display.   What great personal loss in his life was so powerful that he repeatedly lost his composure.   Yes, the need to defend oneself in public is stressful and does have an impact on family life.   However, remember the worst outcome of the process, if he really did not sexually assault Dr. Ford or lie about his past, would  be that he would become a Supreme Court Justice.   In other words his only loss was having to be questioned a second time by a Senate Committee that was determined to nominate him.  My takeaway is that his crying and sniveling were either crocodile tears or an overreaction to those who dared to question his self proclaimed destiny.   In either case, hardly the best of masculinity,.

Lonely Men

There is strong evidence that American masculinity is creating lonely men.  Rates of depression, suicide and drug abuse are soaring – especially among middle aged men.   Researchers point to loneliness as the culprit and attribute the loneliness to both institutional changes and the self imposed rules that men think they must follow.   Eighteen years ago Robert Putnam’s ” Bowling Alone” was published and focused on the decline of social capital in the United States.   He illustrated how the many community based organizations  – both formal and informal –  have lost membership over the previous 30 years.    Although both genders were affected the loss seems to have taken a greater toll on men.  Traditional male civic/social organizations like Elk’s, Kiwanis, and American Legion have seen a sharp decline in membership as older members pass away and few young men seem interested in joining.  Many volunteer fire companies, traditionally populated by men,  have been replaced by paid fire fighters.  The result has been an increase in male isolation.   Furthermore, role changes in family life have kept men closer to home and more involved in child rearing than in the past.  More women are working and the expectation is that their husbands will be sharing responsibilities at home rather than socializing with other men.

Another contributing factor to male loneliness is the perception by many adult men that they must always demonstrate strong independence and follow social rules that prevent them from forming the intimate friendships similar to the ones that they enjoyed growing up.  Organizational hierarchies at work do inhibit men from sharing their doubts and vulnerabilities which are necessary ingredients of intimacy.  Showing weakness in the workplace might give competing males an advantage in seeking power and promotions.

Intimacy among men seems to be viewed as contrary to manliness unless there is a social organization which brings men together and allows them, within that  group, to find close connections with other men.   In other words without the catalyst of a safe structured group men do not seem to have the tools or inclination to make friends.  Women, on the other hand,  seem to be unburdened by self imposed restrictions and  do a much better job of generating new friendships throughout their lifetimes.

What baffles me is how few men take advantage of existing men’s groups that are dedicated to exploring masculinity and their life’s journey in the company of other thoughtful men without fear of shame or judgment.   National groups such as the Mankind Project and local groups easily found on the internet and on the Meet Up website offer a setting where intimacy among men flourishes naturally and adult friendships develop.   Wives  and female partners rarely object to the men in their lives attending  a men’s group because thoughtful men who have  exposed their  vulnerabilities make better  partners.  Men need to seek out these groups to protect themselves from the ravages of loneliness.  On a personal note I have been part of what we like to call “Men’s Work” for over 20 years and it has sustained and enhanced my well being and connectedness.