Manliness

Manhood.
As a child whose formative years straddled the turn of the millennium, raised on syndicated reruns of Home Improvement, I perceived it as a largely lighthearted concept revolving around power tools and chest-thumping. Although I never felt especially in tune with the brasher normative stereotypes of my gender. From my earliest memories walking through the toy store as a 4 or 5 year old boy, I would instinctively shy away from all the sets of toy soldiers or plastic guns and knives in the Boys' aisle. I liked monsters and robots, but had less interest in camping or cars. I always liked cats more than dogs. I loved sports but disliked jocks. None of this was based on any sort of pressure from my parents; to their immense credit while they taught me morals and principles, they rarely tried to direct my recreational interests into or away from anything in particular.

By the time high school rolled around I'd found a superb group of friends on a similar wavelength; who still largely enjoyed sports and the outdoors, but were more interested in creative pursuits from making movies to art projects. We walked this fine line where overt masculinity was something we both simultaneously mocked yet kind of enjoyed embracing, if often satirically. (I even gave this book as a gag graduation gift to one of my friends, knowing nothing about it but its title).

This was probably best exemplified by the Four Square Club we founded our senior year, where we blended a fun active game with the ability to put our own unique stamp on it through t-shirts, posters, nicknames, mythology, a rule-book laced with (mostly inside) jokes, and even our own Constitution. Exercising both body and brain, we pretended to take ourselves over-seriously, self-aware almost all the while. The balance was we struck gold, quickly attracting over 50 co-ed members who shared our enjoyment of the sport - which was legitimately a lot of fun - and our senses of humor.

Within days of the club's founding our imaginations had run through the roof. We talked of logos, mascots, uniforms, tournaments, and more. And while, as described, we were able to swiftly bring a surprising numbers of those goals to reality, we also half-joked about how someday it could be not just a club, but a recognized varsity sport. Though we didn't speak of it much after the first few weeks, at least privately in my mind that was the dazzling benchmark at the top of the mountain. It would be the ultimate validation - that we could excel not just academically and socially, but athletically - we could equal the jocks on their own turf.  

I didn't think that it was very realistic, and accepting that never really tried to achieve that particular objective, but it was fun to dream about - the glory and veneration of competing against rival schools in front of classmates and other fans. So while the bulk of this pipe-dream was self-serving, when carrying the vision forward further I did honestly believe that, were it to pass, another benefit would be that we would make better role models than the football players or other athletes who more traditionally held that mantle. Having greater empathy and social responsibility, and knowing in younger years perhaps what it was like to be picked on, we would set a better example than the show-boaters or bullies that come to mind when one mentions high school sports.

I felt like we'd cracked the code. We understood the worth of sports and other male-oriented pastimes as a way to have fun, de-stress, stay fit, meet friends, and learn competition and teamwork. We'd even taken it a step further by adding a creative component, but without fully subscribing to the cutthroat culture of winning at all costs and demeaning others that often came along with it (or perhaps, the instincts that gave rise to it). Indulging those atavistic impulses could veer into unhealthy territory if left unchecked. And if some minor laurels and recognition came along with our pioneering balancing act than so be it!*

(*Not that we totally lost perspective. The class one year older than us was full of over-achieving activists who organized massive fundraisers. My friend Andrew liked to joke that their legacy would be saving Darfur, while ours would be... Four Square).

Though to be honest, I rarely encountered many of these macho villains in my daily life. There were a few in our grade, but their influence was minimal. My friends and I barely even interacted with them. Although we observed enough to understand how well some seemed to fit the stereotypes, known better to us through TV depictions, as they racked up minors and DUIs, glorified partying, spoke of little beyond sports, babes, and hip-hop, and occasionally teased nerds.

But still, when I describe this dynamic where I imagined my friends and I could ride in to supplant these roughnecks and become the building's well-rounded role models, it must be admitted that the boorish bros I use for contrast were exaggerated straw-men, built up for a narrative in which we could play the good guys.

Frankly, I thought the old fashioned manifestation of meathead culture was already dying. We privately mocked these would-be members of the in-crowd, and most seemed to be going nowhere fast (I even felt sorry for the ones who weren't jerks). If it were some battle for the soul of the school, we'd already won. One of my best friends, an overweight theater-geek class clown, won the vote for Homecoming King in direct competition with that year's stoic star running-back.

The tide had turned. Perhaps it was moving more slowly in other parts of the country or world, but they would catch up.

The first sustained crack in this theory appeared when I got to college and noted, with surprise, not only how the frats and sororities matched the rowdy superficial stereotypes I'd heard about to a tee, but just how much clout and sway Greek life held. I went to a large relatively selective public university, so I certainly knew Greek culture would be present, but barring the tiny fraction of scholarship athletes with lower academic standards, everyone enrolled was theoretically a pretty intelligent person. And yet these presumably intelligent guys were whole-heartedly embracing the beer-guzzling, chest-bumping, female objectifying ways of yore.

The first time I went to a frat party I almost couldn't believe how accurately it lived up to the reputation. Everyone was packed into a sweaty basement, kegs were flowing, bodies were grinding, and the bass was blasting so loud conversing was effectively useless. I wanted to yell, "don't you realize you're all walking cliches?"*

(*Not to be outdone, much of the rest of the campus lived up to the challenge as well, from the angsty art students, to the outspoken activists, to the arrogant business majors. I sometimes felt like I was in a comic strip.)

If that wasn't your scene it was easy to avoid and still have a social life, but its existence was undeniable. It was truly somewhat difficult to fathom, coming from the adolescent experience I'd had. The Wolf of Wall Street wasn't a cautionary tale for these well educated men, not a slightly funny but mostly gross exhibition of male excess, but something to aspire to.

As I've done so many times over the course of my life, especially the past year and a half, I made the mistake of believing most people think more like me than they apparently do. My hubris and naivete has led me down a lot of embarrassing trails.

But even so, smack in the middle of my undergrad career the country elected Barack Obama in a landslide, perhaps the most cerebral anti-frat boy to ever become President. As with my high school's homecoming vote, I thought that culturally this marked another pronounced step for our nation away from the glorification of frat-row. The days of the wet t-shirt contest appeared to be numbered.

And while some social changes have been pushed in the interim to lengths they've never reached before, more appear to be sliding back to the way they were decades ago, or were revealed to be nothing but glossy facades. Once again reality seemed to revel in proving me wrong, shaming me for being so presumptuous.

The ever-growing list of men revealed to be sexual predators the past few months via Me Too and Time's Up is just the latest incarnation. I was shocked as the list of familiar names continued to grow, and then embarrassed realizing I shouldn't have been, thinking back to female friends in college whose concerns about other guys being creepy I wrote off as preemptive paranoia when confided to me.

The recent cascade of allegations is not what prompted this post though, I began drafting it a year ago in response to a number of conservative politicians blasting the concept of "toxic masculinity". Specifically, the University of Wisconsin-Madison began offering an optional 6 week course called The Men's Project, open only to males, partially intended to investigate the ways masculinity can lead to violence. Its stated objective is to, “explore masculinity and the problems accompanied by simplified definitions of it.” As a longtime advocate of increased nuance and breaking down stereotypes, to me this sounded highly promising.

A UW-representative elaborated:
"men are socialized to believe they need to act a certain way to be accepted as ‘masculine’... this can lead to self-destructive behaviors that impair their ability to complete their education... young men are less likely to enroll in and graduate from college, less likely to seek help from campus resources and more likely to engage in risky behaviors such as abusing drugs and alcohol."

Wisconsin State Senator Steve Nass stated that the class "declares war on men," and implied he might withhold University funding as a result. Another detractor stated the program was “jihad against what it means to be a man.”

The irony of these claims, when contrasted with right-wing politicians and pundits calling out liberals for supposedly dramatizing issues like sexism and acting too quick to play the victim, seemed to be lost on Nass. The blunt inaccuracy of his statement bears even greater examination, and seemed especially tone deaf as it came just two months after a male UW-Madison student was charged with stalking and sexually assaulting over a half dozen women on campus (and recently plead guilty to felony charges).

The class's critics went on to posit any criticism of the traditional Western ideal of men as a feminist ploy, only embraced by some men as a way to score with feminists. I couldn't help but both laugh and be annoyed by these claims, knowing how misguided they were from my own experience.

To the degree that feminism is responsible, it's simply through the successful, and widely laudable, gains the movement has made into earning equal rights for women and wider recognition of the pervasive sexism perpetrated by alpha males. In turn, thankfully, that latter role is no longer viewed as the sole or primary optimal life-course for those with Y chromosomes.

As a result, men like me, who never felt inherently comfortable with many of the prescribed pastimes and attitudes of post-war masculinity, faced a much smaller burden to shoulder them.* As stated at the outset of this piece, I enjoy some of them, I love watching football and playing sports, I love the outdoors, but as time has gone on I've felt increasingly little obligation to embrace them because of my gender. Instead I've been afforded the opportunity to pick and choose those that interest me, and leave the rest by the wayside, bolstering the claim that feminism is beneficial to everyone, not just women.

More bluntly: as a straight man I haven't watched Fiddler on the Roof five times because I'm trying to impress chicks (In fact I'm fairly sure most women my age, including feminists, would be bored by it). I've watched it because it's one of my favorite movies.

So thank you feminist trailblazers, my life has been significantly better as a result of your efforts. I truthfully never made that connection until it occurred to me while writing this. Otherwise I might still be spending hours in preteen vain trying to appreciate Slipknot and Limp Bizkit to fit in.

(*Don't get me wrong, especially in elementary and middle school there definitely was notable pressure to conform, and I tried -- memorizing football players in 3rd grade to prove I really was a fan so the class bully would stop picking on me**, spending the whole summer before 7th grade memorizing rappers and death metal songs, even when I detested them, so I'd hopefully have something to talk about with the cool kids when school was back in session, and so forth.

In addition, I will say I feel lucky that I do naturally enjoy a mix of activities that fall on both ends of the spectrum from sports to the arts. It's been a nice way to bridge into conversation with a huge variety of groups, gaining their trust when they're not quite sure whether to open up to me.

(**A bully who, in true after school special perfection, later became a friend of mine by 8th grade and enduring into college.))


No Sen. Nass, this isn't war, it's progress.

Nass went on to say the class sought, "to purge male students of their so-called toxic masculinity," putting words in the mouth of a course description that never used the word toxic. A columnist for the right-wing bellwether National Review said the class was a symptom that, "feminism has infected child-rearing."

While they were busy trying to be offended on behalf of all men, they were also blithely ignoring or refusing to address any of the issues this old-fashioned masculinity may have caused or perpetuated. As cited by the UW-spokesperson: men abuse drugs and alcohol and drop-out at higher rates than women. Nationwide men commit 78% of all DUI's and 78% of suicides. Further, a 2017 study of over 19,000 participants found that, "conformity to masculine norms," defined as, "self-reliance, power over women, and playboy", "was significantly and unfavorably associated with mental health and psychological help seeking".

And this hasn't even touched the much higher (and rising) incidences of violent crime committed by men both against each other and against women. In the U.S. men are responsible for, "90.5 percent of murders, 98 percent of forcible rapes," and 1/3rd of all female homicide victims are killed by a male domestic partner or former partner.

One of the main issues is too many of the critics actually wish for a war, or some diluted iteration of it, where they can prove their mettle or demonstrate their dominance.

Challenging oneself is a fine goal, and a great way to spur growth and motivation, but physicality or intimidation need not be a part of it; mental innovation or perseverance are just as challenging (and far more often beneficial to societal advancement). Of course excelling in most sports or exercise regimens requires intense mental preparation and determination as well, but there should be no accepted place for the physical version when it spills over into victimizing the innocent or self-destruction.

Virtually all of the most recognized accomplishments in history have been those that allow us to rely less on base instinct, labor, and violence, and become more peaceful, thoughtful, and kind. While we've long since  moved past hunting and gathering, even the bulk of occupations a century ago - from the farm to the factory floor - still relied much more on manual labor than intellect. As automation allowed the workplace to shift evermore towards white collar office jobs, and helped level workplace opportunities for females, it assisted the women's movement's push for greater equality across the board in other facets of the societal landscape from relationship expectations to legal protections.

Part of the problem is our instincts and physiques, particularly male ones, are still deep down genetically coded for survival in conditions much harsher than those in the developed world today. As such, a number of men granted these physical gifts at birth find they're no longer valued the way they used to be, and wish to turn back the clock. These talents still come in handy in daily life, are useful in some occupations, and still help them attract many members of the opposite sex, but the value and respect prompted by a chiseled frame has been diminished.

For centuries this was held up as the model of what men should aspire to because it increased chances for survival, and culture reinforced it by punishing those men who strayed from the path with ostracism, humiliation, or tangible force. That's important to underscore - some of this behavior is tied to genes, but much of it is taught. Meanwhile, many of the negative consequences this had for women were simply swept under the rug when men failed to restrain these physical instincts and talents they'd honed, during their social or domestic lives. Or worse, men would intentionally use them to brandish their power, stroke their egos, and take whatever their libido desired.

The effects this has had on men's internal social circles has been just as pronounced, and is probably best exemplified today through the debate playing out over football safety. As much of a fan as I am, it's certainly given me some pause.

In a nutshell, research over the past decade has revealed that the repeated collisions of playing tackle football often leave players with long term brain damage, far worse than was previously believed.

And yet, despite a decade of evidence, a large percentage of players and their families are simply ignoring the science. One parent even described it as a "war on football".

Though the lesson has stuck for some, and progress has been made with leagues informing participants of the risks and pulling out players who show any symptoms of concussions, many soldier on in a state of willful denial. Continuing the tradition that has already led so many retired players to suffer debilitating health effects (from depression to memory loss to chronic headaches), others simply keep urging themselves or their peers or children on by telling those who get rattled to tough it out and keep playing. If not some are derided as sissies and their manhood is called into question.

In the midst of this last year I read the story of Zac Easter, a star high school player who committed suicide at age 24 after severe symptoms of CTE. I didn't expect to get as wrapped up in it as I did, but it was perhaps the most visceral reaction I've had to reading an article. I was heartbroken for him and his loved ones, but far more than that I was filled with fury at the culture that propelled so much of his tragic path.

He was a hard-nosed defensive player who prided himself on making big hits, trying to compensate for his small stature and impress his father, an ex-college football coach and player who egged him on, and older brother. He was repeatedly allowed to keep playing after suffering concussions, often lying about symptoms, until his last concussion left him with a vacant stare and his helmet was confiscated.

My sadness was only truly surpassed by anger upon reading his father's reaction. Prior to seeing the effects on his son, he "never really believed the disease existed. To be honest, even the mention of it kind of disgusted him. CTE was an excuse, he had always thought: a bunch of millionaire athletes who had it made, blew through all their money, fell out of the limelight, got depressed, then killed themselves."

After his son's death his wife tried to convince him to go to counseling with her. Apparently learning almost nothing, he snapped back, “F%*k, I don't need no counseling.”

Recognizing the link between traditional masculinity and an increased propensity for violence, (or self-loathing for those who fail to meet its standards), isn't leftist crockery, it's easily traceable history. The Senator's knee-jerk impulse to defend the status quo without even permitting inquiry exemplifies part of the attitude this course seems intended to address.

There's still a place for a tempered version of that conventional masculinity for those who wish to continue it (through most sports, the armed forces, the beach), but to expect everyone to conform to that norm or perpetuate its place on a cultural pedestal, is both selfish and wrong. Society no longer requires brawn. The marketplace of ideas has largely adapted past that and is being asked to hold back momentum and subsidize those outmoded skills.

And to those who argue that men shouldn't have to restrain themselves because it's human nature to exert their strength: wouldn't the true test of strength be demonstrating mastery over one's instincts? With power comes responsibility.

I get it, everyone would prefer a society that values their particular natural abilities most, thus gym rats and blue collar workers are more prone to resist changes in culture and economy that shrink their role. And sometimes liberals and academics make it worse by overestimating their own newfound prominence or gloating about how the tables have turned.

But the world has changed. Life used to be a literal game of survival for all. Now, as we've civilized through generations of technological and social breakthroughs every child born in the developed world has inalienable rights and a basic safety net of shelter and education.

And none of that is an excuse to deny that the old way of doing things has a dark side - much less to insult and threaten others who attempt to study it. The core mission of a University is to foster greater learning and understanding about our world, and when that research is unpopular or challenges orthodoxy to protect it from being shutdown before it has been completed.

The biggest hurdle standing in the way of greater satisfaction for most of the old guard is a simple shift in expectations; to acknowledge both the sometimes painful past and  the chance for a new healthier reality for all, not to tear down others or attempt to reassert their control.

If it's competition you crave, the world's economy is still framed on the free market incentivizing hard work and ingenuity. If you seek physical release, it's both necessary and healthy to exercise and find outlets to expel frustrations or pent up energy - but sign up for a basketball league, don't vent at the expense of unwilling third parties or pressure them into things they've tried before or have no interest in. Simply verbally venting can do wonders as well so long as it doesn't become a cyclical negative spiral.

Perhaps some feminists have pushed too far or used poor tactics, perhaps not, but that's irrelevant to the questions being asked here. Namely: Are our customary visions of manhood linked to unhealthy behaviors and is that worth studying? To combat this scrutiny of masculinity by attacking possible flaws in the feminist movement is simply deflection. I'll leave the latter debate for another forum, we can tackle more than one issue at a time.

Similarly, lashing out at a mere investigation of our masculine culture's implications comes off as little different than the Dickey Amendment or the Tobacco industry trying to silence research because they fear the results might point to culpability or need for change.

But in the spirit of positivity, I'll end with a word of encouragement and shift focus for a moment. At its best the classic form of manhood has held up bravery as a pinnacle, and thousands inspired by this model have committed acts of heroism, sometimes foolhardy, always courageous. That's what masculinity should be - a beacon for good, not an alibi.