Boys Into Messed-up Men

[Altair]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

The Boys Are Not All Right


I find this esp. interesting because I've often wrestled with what masculinity means today, and it's come up in a pagan context in this forum repeatedly (for example, Manhood and Pagan Spirituality, Paganism and Masculinity, and Pagan Guy Talk) with no consensus on what we guys are or should be about.

[Kylara]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

The Boys Are Not All Right


I find this esp. interesting because I've often wrestled with what masculinity means today, and it's come up in a pagan context in this forum repeatedly (for example, Manhood and Pagan Spirituality, Paganism and Masculinity, and Pagan Guy Talk) with no consensus on what we guys are or should be about.

I was sort of thinking about this the other day, there was a conversation about how women had redefined how womanhood was perceived, and now it was men's turn.  The problem is that 90 percent of the conversations I see about how the idea of masculinity needs to be redefined are being held by women (or men in marginalized sub-groups:  gay men, pagan men, men of color....in other words, not the men in power or the men in charge of how society accepts what it is to be masculine).

It always brings me back to the thoughts on breaking free from addiction:  you can't make someone else want to change, and step one is always to recognize their is a problem.  The problem, as I see it (as a woman, so from the outside), is that the 'men in power' do not see that there is a problem.  Point of fact, they see that the desire to change the definition of masculinity is actually a problem (specifically, it is an attack on them as men, and designed to make them powerless and weak....that is how they seem perceive it).

Which reminds me of a meme I saw about how men who fear 'equality for women' don't truly fear equality...what they fear is that women will treat men the way that men have treated women for ages.

It's a viscous cycle, and unfortunately I feel like it has to change from within...but I am hopeful.  While there are many angry young men, who are still growing up feeling pressure to conform to toxic masculinity, there are many other young men who are looking at the issues and seeing that there is a problem.  While 'manly white men' might still be the technical majority, there are SO many other models of what it is to be a man or masculine, that people are absolutely aware that the traditional viewpoint is not the only viewpoint.  There is a conversation starting, about what it is to be a man, to be masculine, and what it isn't.  And I think that people are starting to realize that many of the traditional masculine traits are either outdated (from a time when the man's role was literally to protect the women and children, so things like strength and aggression were more necessary) or not even tied to gender at all (the idea that it is unmanly to show emotions.....or to touch other men in any way that isn't aggressive...)

I think the best thing we can do, today, is to keep the conversation moving.  To keep showing men, and boys, that there are many ways to be a man.  I have a son, who is now 18, who doesn't fit a lot of traditional masculine stereotypes.  While I do think that I tried to raise him to think for himself, I also know that it is just his nature to be more intellectual and less physical.  He is a gamer (and he loves plenty of violent combat games), a math wiz and very much not into sports of any kind.  While my husband fits into a much more traditional masculine template (minus sports...unless you count esports which most people don't).  And yet, if you look beyond the surface, our family dynamic is much less traditional than it first seems.

So there is hope, and I think that a big change will be when the older men, the ones who have been 'in control' of the government, the social climate and the media, start to retire (or die) and the younger generations, the ones who have grown up seeing the hypocrisy and insanity of some of the older gender models start taking control, that things will start to change much quicker.

[TransporterMalfunction]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

The Boys Are Not All Right


I find this esp. interesting because I've often wrestled with what masculinity means today, and it's come up in a pagan context in this forum repeatedly (for example, Manhood and Pagan Spirituality, Paganism and Masculinity, and Pagan Guy Talk) with no consensus on what we guys are or should be about.

I'm a cis-woman chiming in with a completely biased and uneducated perspective on what it is to be a man, so forgive me for my ignorance. Also, my thoughts come from a hetero-centric way of thinking.

I've had some conversations with my husband on what he thinks boys should be taught while growing up. He believes that girls and boys should largely be taught the same things - how to perform basic car maintenance, how to cook, that you need to be responsible for yourself. The differences he mentioned were that he would teach daughters to be more aware of situations - men are stronger, and you need to be conscious of that. He also said that men should be prepared to provide for more than just themselves, whether it winds up being a traditional family situation, or providing for their parents or siblings, or whatever.

I thought that was interesting, because in my mind that is something that shouldn't be automatically expected of anyone. Self-sufficiency, I think, should be a goal for everyone because it gives you independence and the freedom to walk away from harmful situations. But then I tend to think that social expectations that accompany gender should be abolished, whereas I get a sense from a lot of men that they do need masculinity to mean something, and not just to refer to chromosomes. So it may be inherently sexist for me to think that gender roles are bad for everyone.

And then I have to look at myself and ask if I truly believe in complete gender equality, and I find myself still holding onto some ideas of masculinity that are engrained in my mind. For instance, if my able-bodied husband and I were on a sinking ship, and he immediately pushed his way into the first lifeboat and waved at me as his boat rowed away, I would be very angry and turned off. If I had an able-bodied female partner, I don't know if I would hold the same amount of animosity towards the action.

I've also found that men love to be helpful, and I'm not sure if it's an engrained social construct that men find worth through their deeds or some deep-seated hormonal need to provide for and protect others. It's something that I have benefited from, and I have to admit that I am more likely to ask men for assistance. I'm probably being sexist by assuming men are more willing to help, and perhaps I am forcing a social construct on men who might not want to help, but because I am a woman they feel obliged.

So, through all my ramblings, I guess my point is do men need a concrete idea of what it is to be a man? As a woman, do I perpetuate ideas of what men should be even though I claim I'd like to be free from gender constructs? And I'd also ask if the concept of masculinity is different for gay men versus straight men, because I have a very limited perspective, being a cis-woman.

[Altair]

I thought that was interesting, because in my mind that is something that shouldn't be automatically expected of anyone. Self-sufficiency, I think, should be a goal for everyone because it gives you independence and the freedom to walk away from harmful situations. But then I tend to think that social expectations that accompany gender should be abolished, whereas I get a sense from a lot of men that they do need masculinity to mean something, and not just to refer to chromosomes. So it may be inherently sexist for me to think that gender roles are bad for everyone.

I think the reason why we guys need some sort of gender-specific guidance is because of testosterone: We typically have a lot more of it than women, and that has very distinct behavioral ramifications. Males need to be socialized in how to handle that crazy-juice--how to control it and harness it effectively.

[TransporterMalfunction]

I think the reason why we guys need some sort of gender-specific guidance is because of testosterone: We typically have a lot more of it than women, and that has very distinct behavioral ramifications. Males need to be socialized in how to handle that crazy-juice--how to control it and harness it effectively.

I laughed at 'crazy juice'. As a very wise someone once said: testosterone is a hellava drug.

[Melissa]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

The Boys Are Not All Right


I find this esp. interesting because I've often wrestled with what masculinity means today, and it's come up in a pagan context in this forum repeatedly (for example, Manhood and Pagan Spirituality, Paganism and Masculinity, and Pagan Guy Talk) with no consensus on what we guys are or should be about.

I am speaking from a 20-something-year-old woman's perspective. As someone who is trained in mental health and have a deep interest in psychology, I have to state for a fact that men and women are born with different sets of instincts and natural responses to a given circumstance. Men is proven scientifically to be more likely to deal with unpleasant emotions with aggression and violence as compared to women. This, however should be emphasised that, it occurs regardless of sexuality or sexual preferences. When I mention 'men', I am referring to the biological gender and the set of chromosome a human being is born with regardless of morphology or physical appearances.

I disagree with the writer of the article who suggests that the definition of men should be redefined. I believe the traditional idea of being 'strong, powerful and aggressive' might appeal to growing boys who want to emulate what they see on TV, in the movies and video games because they think that is what they are supposed to be but many of us are bad actors in real life. What I mean is as much as there is somekind of a social construct that laid out rules on how genders should behave, there must always be an instinct or a drive inside them that pushed them to react the way they are. Human beings since infancy are born with various different personalities and temperament and some boys are more incline to be more violent than others. I believe that social media and the entertainment industry does have a huge influence when it comes to behaviour manifestations but in order for a person to be influenced, they must already have something in them that drives them to behave how they are behaving. Media influencers enhance violence not create them.

Instead of redefining men, we should try to remove any associations when it comes to gender and allow the younger and budding generation to morph into whatever form they wish to, as opposed to some 'new age' term for males in which they need to start ticking boxes off to. Being more aggressive and violent is actually scientifically linked to testosterone. Since the amount of testosterone vary, the tendency to be violent also varies. The traditional term for men in the media, is actually scientifically-linked, albeit being magnified and amplified as shown by superheroes etc. I agree that we should soften up the definition associated to the male gender but we should not try to create a new box for men to fit in.

In regards to the Florida shooting which really interest me from a mental health point of view, I have to conclude (my own personal opinions) that circumstances in life shaped a person to who he is and what he has become and the choices he choose to take. I don't think gender issue was the main problem but it was a nice perspective to look from. Anti-social behaviour is not an unknown matter in psychiatry. For any personality to shift so far towards the deviant side, the biology, psychology and social aspects of the boy needs to be closely examined. There is a lot of hate, a lot of anger, a lot of pent up unpleasantness that could trip a switch in someone and slowly turn them into a psychopath, sociopath, narcissist and in this aspect, antisocial. In psychiatry, antisocial does not denote a person who dislikes social contact but defines someone who lost all sense of what initially made them human; the ability to have conscience. There is not one cause that could be blame for it but it is usually a series of events since childhood, together with a person's body chemistry and mental state with addition to his environment and surroundings.

I do not pity the person convicted. I think he deserve whatever punishment for his acts. What he has done has to be punished as decided by the law. It is never right for someone to take away another's life what more 17 of them. There is no excuse because it is a cruel and heartless act that is premeditated and caused so many families to grieve and live their lives forever traumatised. But this person has his mind and personality muddled so much that the homicidal urges took over.

I have spent a lot of hours reading about mass shootings (and the psychology behind it) and although indeed, it is somekind of an emotional disorder that pushed them to do what they plan, I don't agree that passing them over to a doctor will fix anything.(as suggested by the US president). Personality disorders take years to form and are usually deep-rooted. Giving a poor boy a better life, show him kindness and compassion in his early days might prevent him from turning into his current state. It is very hard to undo someone with deviant tendencies or have developed psychopathy. We can help prevent it but we can't prevent everything. It is essentially life and circumstances that dictate a huge influence in how we turn up as adults. Doctors can only cure, they can't magically give you a beautiful life.

Will he do the same thing if he was born with a silver spoon and loving parents?
Will he do the same thing if he was educated and brought up in a society that values moral conducts and a deep fear of going against the law?
Will he do the same thing if he had siblings and friends who were there to help him relieve his emotions, for example?

(These are hypothetical questions as I have no idea how his life is growing up or if environment was truly the cause of his gun violence)

Will gun violence even exist if the world is free from injustice and oppression?
Did he has schizophrenic voices that demanded he killed people? (he is proven to be 100% aware while committing murder)
Homicidal tendencies are usually birthed from anger and hurt (not to discount his actions, but just my experience) and very rough and severe circumstances in life.

We don't see princes or royal families trying to commit homicide because they don't need to kill to have a voice or make a mark, they don't have this feeling of having to prove anything because treasure rained upon their open arms.

I should stop before I digress further.

[Altair]

We don't see princes or royal families trying to commit homicide because they don't need to kill to have a voice or make a mark, they don't have this feeling of having to prove anything because treasure rained upon their open arms.

Not so; this may be the exception that proves the rule, but here it is, nonetheless:

Why Nepal's Crown Prince Went on a Killing Spree
https://www.pri.org/stories/2011-06-01/why-nepals-crown-prince-went-killing-spree

He wiped out virtually his entire family.

[Darkhawk]

I thought that was interesting, because in my mind that is something that shouldn't be automatically expected of anyone. Self-sufficiency, I think, should be a goal for everyone because it gives you independence and the freedom to walk away from harmful situations.

I think it's worth keeping in mind that "self-sufficiency" is not possible.  Human beings are social animals and have social needs; further, even in the most technologically simple and naturally oriented cultures nobody can do it all.  Gotta have enough people in your band to handle all of the tasks; humans cannot survive without other humans, barring exceptionally rare exceptions of people who have learned a specific skillset (from other humans, note!) and wandered off into the woods or something.  (Back to "babies that don't get enough human contact die, even if their physical needs are met.")

The thing people need for the freedom to walk away from harmful situations is an extended network of support, not the imaginary "self-sufficiency".  That's why abusers work to destroy their victims' social ties, and why the isolated are often the vulnerable and vice versa.  "I can handle this myself" is a fantastic way to get stuck in a bad situation, and unfortunately culturally encouraged (in different ways for people assumed male and people assumed female, but there for both).

Genuine self-sufficiency is largely unattainable, even for abled adults without children.  Even the rare (and getting rarer) "I can make enough money to handle all my needs and hire out for the things I can't handle myself" requires a money source, people to provide the stuff one isn't doing oneself, and people with broader skillsets.  As soon as there are kids in the picture, or any sort of disability to navigate, there is not enough human in one human to do anything like what needs to be done.

(Argh, now I have an Into the Woods earworm.)

[TransporterMalfunction]

I think it's worth keeping in mind that "self-sufficiency" is not possible.  Human beings are social animals and have social needs; further, even in the most technologically simple and naturally oriented cultures nobody can do it all.  Gotta have enough people in your band to handle all of the tasks; humans cannot survive without other humans, barring exceptionally rare exceptions of people who have learned a specific skillset (from other humans, note!) and wandered off into the woods or something.  (Back to "babies that don't get enough human contact die, even if their physical needs are met.")

The thing people need for the freedom to walk away from harmful situations is an extended network of support, not the imaginary "self-sufficiency".  That's why abusers work to destroy their victims' social ties, and why the isolated are often the vulnerable and vice versa.  "I can handle this myself" is a fantastic way to get stuck in a bad situation, and unfortunately culturally encouraged (in different ways for people assumed male and people assumed female, but there for both).

Genuine self-sufficiency is largely unattainable, even for abled adults without children.  Even the rare (and getting rarer) "I can make enough money to handle all my needs and hire out for the things I can't handle myself" requires a money source, people to provide the stuff one isn't doing oneself, and people with broader skillsets.  As soon as there are kids in the picture, or any sort of disability to navigate, there is not enough human in one human to do anything like what needs to be done.

(Argh, now I have an Into the Woods earworm.)

I didn't mean literal 'I can survive in the woods alone' level of self-sufficiency. But I've seen a lot of people who aren't financially self-sufficient even though they earn a good wage because they spend above their means and depend on their lover/parents/friends to foot the phone bill and condo payments. I have friends who constantly need input on every decision they make in their lives because they haven't developed any level of emotional self-sufficiency or self-confidence. Yes, we are a network of interconnected and interdependent beings, and we all need help sometimes, and we all need love and connection, and there are a lot of times when we need second opinions on something. Some people are able to be more self-sufficient than others due to life circumstance. There's a balance, and personally I think it's good to have enough emotional self-sufficiency to be able to say 'Even though no one in my life agrees with me, I'm going to take this course of action and know that I have the wherewithall to make it through.' I aim to have enough 'fuck you' money to be able to walk away from any job or relationship that makes me unhappy. I may never fully attain these goals, but I think they are worthwhile.

[Melissa]

Not so; this may be the exception that proves the rule, but here it is, nonetheless:

Why Nepal's Crown Prince Went on a Killing Spree
https://www.pri.org/stories/2011-06-01/why-nepals-crown-prince-went-killing-spree

He wiped out virtually his entire family.

When I mention princes/royal families, I meant people with good, smooth and comfortable lives. I read the news article you attached and he obviously had a major crisis in his life, regarding his love life and the throne and also a being born biologically or non-biologically with an interest in violence and exhibited antisocial behaviour just as the Florida shooter did. Thanks for sharing.

[Sefiru]

When I mention princes/royal families, I meant people with good, smooth and comfortable lives.

Then you might have said so? Also, could you clarify what you mean by "good, smooth comfortable lives" and why that would prevent someone from being violent?

I mean, taking a look through history, it's often the wealthiest people in a society that behave the worst towards others.

[Demophon]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

The Boys Are Not All Right


I find this esp. interesting because I've often wrestled with what masculinity means today, and it's come up in a pagan context in this forum repeatedly (for example, Manhood and Pagan Spirituality, Paganism and Masculinity, and Pagan Guy Talk) with no consensus on what we guys are or should be about.

Yeah, traditional masculinity has become politically incorrect, so men don't really know how to be anymore. Of course, traditional masculinity does have its problems, but men have kind of been left behind when it comes to current activist movements, which are especially prominent in fringe groups like paganism.

I used to help out in elementary schools quite a bit, and the boys definitely have a rough time. I noticed a lot of frustration among the male students, and you can't really blame them, as the teachers are mostly female, and students are held to female standards of behaviour, and many boys are sedated with ADHD medication to help them fit into the system.

It's not surprising that young men are acting out in an extreme way. I'm not saying that they are an oppressed class of people, but the culture is messed up in many ways, and one of those ways is how we bring up the boys in our society.

[Emma Eldritch]

When I mention princes/royal families, I meant people with good, smooth and comfortable lives.

Well, that's not really true, either. There's definitely been spree killers who had what many would consider a pretty easy ride.

[Darkhawk]

and students are held to female standards of behaviour,

... what for the love of sweet lambs, kittens, and tiny adorable snakies are "female standards of behaviour"?

(I can't help but remember that when I was in school and got actually physically assaulted the response from the administration was "boys will be boys".)

[Valentine]

In the wake of the Florida school shooting, this opinion piece in the NY Times tackles how ideas of masculinity may be a toxic component of the gun violence mix:

I keep thinking about the specifically toxic elements of American masculinity and how it's involved here--particularly around homophobia and related anxieties. In many other societies, even traditionally masculine men have intimate friends who they see regularly and talk to; they have non-violent physical contact with other men; they hold hands, kiss each other's cheeks, hug, and otherwise express affection; they have outlets for being allowed to express emotions other than anger, like sadness or joy or fear. It's true of fathers and old men and warriors and artists alike.

(Yes, there are other cultures that build sometimes pathological stoicism or refusal of emotions other than aggression into their men--witness the longstanding conversation over Latino machismo--but even those cultures, I'd argue, are less constrained in what's "manly.")

In the States, so many men are exhaustively anxious about all of these things and appearing "gay" or womanish or effeminate. Any of us can do a search on "is it gay to" and see the hundreds of results, and it's everything. I read a whole article on the phenomenon of young straight men having horrible hygiene because of homophobia--men who don't know how to wipe their bottoms after using the bathroom, or refuse to, because they're afraid it's gay or will make them gay. "No homo" has to be uttered after hugging or expressing affection toward another man, by reflex. Straight men don't touch each other except for firm handshakes and brusque back-slapping hard-chested hugs. They get mocked or beaten up as kids for crying or enjoying art too much or for being interested in the wrong things or expressing feelings other than aggression or wearing the wrong colors or cut of clothes.

There's a reason that men from Europe or Africa or Asia get mocked by white American men as effeminate or queer--they often have more freedom in their masculinity and self-expression than American men do, so express themselves in ways that are masculine in their society but seen as sissy stuff here. Men in the States seem to live under this constant cloud of knowing violence will be visited on them if they step out of line and the box keeps shrinking.

None of that is "traditional masculinity" that goes back more than a few decades, any more than the "tradition" of blue being for boys and pink being for girls. It's not normal or healthy. It's brittle and toxic.  It creates these huge emotional wastelands in men, because the "masculinity" available is like an iceberg that gets smaller and smaller, and it seems like every day there's a new thing that if you do it you're not a real man. Maybe it's liking this kind of music. Maybe it's having this kind of haircut.

And the only place they feel permitted to seek out any intimacy or softness is with women, and specifically, with a woman that they get sexually involved with, because having a bunch of female friends or forging close bonds with women not based in sexually pursuing them is also seen as suspect. So women are seen as the only place to get that piece of oneself, the only acceptable place, as the ones who will fix it, and if you can't get a woman to have sex with you, there is nowhere else acceptable to go and be a person. And even then there are all these rules about the right manly way to have sex, and intimacy doesn't come into it much. Men are human. Humans need closeness to other humans--companionship, intimacy, communication and understanding. And women can't shoulder the load of being the only intimate in a given man's world, or the consequences of men who don't have any, while also shouldering their own emotional needs and the needs of other women, and then what happens?

This article isn't perfect, but it's right to identify that anxiety and constraint underlying this mess. Look at the enormous prevalence right now of "cuck" as an insult--literally, "you are the kind of man whose woman would get stolen by a more masculine man*,"--and the obsession among young straight men on the internet around "alphas" and betas." Look at the running 100% of mass shooters and school shooters who commit intimate partner violence and stalking, and/or who express fury at women not sleeping with them in their manifestos. Look at the popularity of hacks like Jordan Peterson, whose science is sloppy as hell, but who promise to make sense of the social structures of dominance that will help men get laid. Look at how smoothly the MRA and pick-up artist movements became tributaries to Gamergate and then to the huge upsurge in American white-nationalist fascism. They love those Turner Diaries, which present the first move in the Upcoming Race War as killing all the white women who "betrayed" white men by engaging in interracial relationships. Hell, witness the recruiting of gay men like Jack Donovan into the fascist movement by promising macho hyper-masculine Spartan relations without any of that sissy stuff. Or, let's go here, the violence visited on trans women, who seem to existentially horrify the men whose masculinity has gone fragile and toxic, both as visions of what could happen to their own masculinity and, as objects of attraction, threats to their conception of their own heterosexuality.

I keep hearing about how various cultural-change movements like feminism have left men behind, but men were always welcome to join them. They were always welcome to be part of that conversation and have consciousness-raising circles and talk to other men and some of them even tried, in that drum-circle Iron John moment in the 90s. They're still welcome to benefit from those movements' work and contribute their own.

As far as I can tell, they're terrified to. Understandably. This culture punishes men who work to counteract the constant contraction of what constitutes acceptable masculinity, leave alone expand it. American masculinity has been reduced to sex drive and aggression and stoicism and nothing further, and that's an innovation, not an ancient tradition. Anyone who's read letters between soldiers from a hundred or two hundred or a thousand or two thousand years ago knows that. We're evidently telling our boys that real men don't even wipe their own asses, and punishing deviations. That might be "political correctness," but it's not feminist or leftist politics constraining them.


*"cuck" is of course also racially charged, and in its current connotation, indicates a white man who would lose white women to Black men. It is not the favorite insult of alt-right white supremacists for no reason.