I've been participating in a thread on another site about whether masculinity as an institution is facing a crisis. The idea goes that women have spent the last 50 years redefining what womanhood and femininity mean for the 21st century, and so their identities as women remain relevant even as society changes. Men, on the other hand, haven't gone through such a collective sea change. The cis guys on the other site all agreed that no one had ever really taught them what it meant to be men. They were just stuck with old war movies, Marlboro ads, and guesswork. It was theorized that as a result of this lack of direction, some boys and young men feel that their totems of masculinity are being snatched away from them as the world changes. From that arises anxiety, low self esteem, and a reflexive misogyny.
If you were raised as a boy, did the adults around you try to teach you what manhood was about? If so, did their teachings seem relevant or out of touch and outdated? If you identify as a man now, do you have a masculine ideal that you aspire to?
Speaking for myself, I haven't the faintest idea what it "means to be a man." I identify as male because in my gut, I feel that's what I am. Still, I would like to have a useful set of guidelines about what positive masculinity can mean. I admit I was shocked when the guys on the other site said that no one had ever told them about what men are supposed to be and do, because back when I was being socialized female I was overwhelmed by messages about what womanhood was supposed to be about. I got these messages from my parents, peers, teachers, the media--everywhere. Not all of these messages were very healthy, and many of them contradicted each other, much to my vast frustration. Even still though, I felt that a woman had concrete options, even if some of those options were "damned if you do, damned if you don't" dilemmas. I knew that boys weren't drowning in "helpful hints," but I thought that surely someone was teaching them something, maybe their dads in private. Ward Cleaver had "man to man" talks with Wally and the Beaver, right? (Yeah, and June Cleaver wore pearls while vacuuming . . .)
Anyway, I'm very interested in your thoughts on this.
I'll bite,
I was never explicitly taught, " this is what a man does" but the way I and the boys around me were raised devolves into 3 main parts. I'm 35 for reference.
1) everything is your fault and no one will help you.
Basically what it says, if someone is picking on you it's your job, and yours alone to fix it. Even if someone else is clearly in the wrong you are the only one who can fix it.
2) everything revolves around "teams"
It's not just a sports team, it could be a friend group or study group or any group that comes together to accomplish things. Leadership stems from your ability to convince the rest of the team that you are the one to bring the group to the mutually desired goal. (Note, women in leadership situations often struggle with this part. Tactics like picking fights to try to establish dominance are looked down on because they are merely distractions)
3) your value as a person stems from what you uniquely bring to the team.
This is why young men in particular are always so insecure, they haven't developed unique enough skills to have something be their "thing." This is why women being good at something can be threatening to one man but a nonissue to others. E.g. if a woman is good at pool, that won't matter to a guy who doesn't care about pool, but will be threatening to a guy for whom pool is his "thing."
Everyone else seemed to just know this stuff, and I was always lost. I felt like an alien studying the ways of the "hew-man" so that's why I can speak so clinically about this. For more on group dynamics I suggest you look up "horizontal and vertical honor"
I was left to figure out what it was to be a man on my own. My parents divorced when I was quite young, and was raised by my mother, grandmother, and to some extent, my two older sisters. My grandfather was around but was very intimidating and had little contact with us grandchildren. My dad wasn't very macho or anything, but wasn't around much either.
I divorced shortly after my son was born and refused to be the absentee father that my father had been. I stayed local to be there for my son, despite growing up back east. After coming out as transgender my son stunned me when he stated that he always thought of me as very masculine.
I had to ask why. He said that I liked camping, fishing, shooting guns, and I worked on my own cars.
I don't know. Does that make me masculine? Just because I like being out in nature. And fixing my own cars was more out of financial necessity, so much cheaper to do it myself. Yes, I am mechanically inclined. Even as a kid, I took my toys apart to fix them.
But overwhelmingly I have been a kind, compassionate, giving, caring, loving person. All of which, to me, are more indicative or stereotypically feminine traits.
I was taught ... nothing. I floundered through childhood, teens, adulthood. I got a lot of things wrong. I did the best I could by emulation. I got a lot of that wrong as well.
But I'm feeling much better now
:)
Jeez the answer to this will vary greatly with age location and even the type of father figure we had in our up bringing.
For me that was a real tough father who never shed a tear, who worked hard and showed little affection.
We where all brought up to be tough, manual hands on people. He has had a profound impact on the people we are today. My brother's find it hard to get on with him.
I think my innate feminine side aloud me to get on with him and put aside his harsh ways. Many a beating was had in our times as kids, I won't be holding it to him though.
The small things that bother me bout him was his inability to do the most simplest things like say happy birthday come birthday time., And along with my mother and my brothers we must have a collective age of some 150 years.
I have never heard him say happy birthday. So far he has never called me Rachel.
I see him most days. I don't let it get to me. It's not nice mind
I think a few situations could have changed his attitude, no. 1 being having a daughter. I'm sure he would have been nicer had we had a sister growing up.
When I was a "man" I followed the unspoken rules I seen before me, and I was a tough one, worked hard as hell. Working on farms, mechanics all sorts of "masculine" things.
I think honestly I painted the picture of a guy I would like to date. Ha
I also attended an all boys Catholic school from 13-19. I already felt female when I ended up there :(
Now to be honest I try not to resent what I learned with my strange upbringing.
Some things I luckily learned to love like mechanics and cars.
I think my love of them kept me alive when I most certainly would have perished
Anyway that's abit of a ramble really. And the perspective of rural Catholic Ireland
Something might be of use in there lol
Quote from: The Flying Lemur on August 01, 2018, 11:06:27 AM
If you were raised as a boy, did the adults around you try to teach you what manhood was about? If so, did their teachings seem relevant or out of touch and outdated?
This is a very interesting question. One I've pondered a lot of times in my life. I can only speak personally, from my own experience. But no, no one ever tried to teach me. No one ever said "This is what being a man is." Honestly the only time it was even referenced was when being told what a man
isn't. Usually when I did something that wasn't "right".
But the thing is, I think that that was the whole point. If you've ever seen the movie 300, and that scene where the Spartan boy is basically sent into the wilderness with just a loincloth and a spear... I think that to some degree, that's what being raised as a boy is. It's basically teaching by doing. You slay the giant demonic wolf and come back a man, or you don't come back.
Throughout my early life there was never really any instruction from anyone. Not for me or my brothers. I think that, to some degree, men are expected to prove their manhood. To earn it, if you like. By just doing stuff that other men consider "manly". I remember that to my brothers, a lot of stuff was a competition. They always seemed to have something to prove. To do the most foolhardy (read: stupid) stuff just to be seen as "one of the boys" within their peer group. To prove they were brave (again, read: stupid), or stoic in the face of pain (from that stupidity). In my area of the world, the word was "hard". It didn't matter what they did as long as they were seen as strong.
I suspect it's an evolutionary throwback to the notion of the "alpha male". The whole pack mentality thing. I dunno. I never got into it. But I know from how my brothers were, that their "man-ness" was based more on what they did than who they were. Their peers attributed more to them based on their actions than their personality. Maybe that's something to do with it?
Over the course of my life, I've observed people a lot. The way they act and behave. And I've come to the conclusion that, at least in my life, the vast majority of men don't like to talk. They don't like to actually instruct other men on what it means to be a man. Because they themselves don't like to be told that. It's just not the done thing. Maybe it's a pride thing, I really don't know. Maybe it's something that only comes from a gut feeling. As you mention in your post.
Or maybe some men just don't like being told what to do and who to be, lol. That's certainly the case for most of the guys I knew in my life growing up. Although keep in mind that when I was growing up, this was like 25-35 years ago. The world has changed a lot since then, so take that for what it is.
Thank you for posting these thoughtful concepts and questions. Regrettably i was, like too many here, socialized according to my once male genitalia starting in the 50s. I watched my 5 sisters live a life that had far less freedoms than mine but learned to appreciate the assertiveness that came with the territory.
As you suggest, there are tons of stereotypes we are exposed to including the toxic masculinity messages that can result in anger and violence. I felt nothing remotely like the messages I heard that asked me to be the stoic leader, strong, sports oriented and ready to die in some far away war. i did my best to man up and watched men harm each other as women seemed to more often lend a more nurturing helping hand. Rugged individualism, might is right and other less helpful stereotypes are too slowly giving way.
I believe it is men like you who will help create a far greater sense of possibilities for other men and boys. Everything from clothing and emotional range has been conscripted and can yet be a source of new freedoms and choices for men. Too many men, and not just people who are transgender, may feel they have repeatedly failed the tests of manhood. Perhaps those tests and related symbols are no longer helpful to personal development and community needs? All of us have a stake in raising children with greater options and definitions of what it is to be a man, a woman or someone in the non binary zones. The 50s had the Beaver Cleaver family and now we have U Tube, twitter and new worlds on line and IRL too.
Women have worked to set themselves free with declarations of liberty regarding clothing, reproduction and essential life choices. All of us can do that and take our place as liberators on this journey.
I was very early in expressing a more feminine bent. As a result I had my dad trying to teach me "What it means to be a man" and a stepfather who thought ridicule and violence were the way to "deal" with me.
Never understood a single thing my dad tried to teach me. He would tell me stories about how he grew up and end with vocal prominence on some point I was supposed to understand but it never "clicked" so to speak. At least I know how to build retaining walls and plank fences... He did manage to teach me how to do things.
My grandfather also tried to take an interest and advise me on how to act so I wouldn't be made fun of and picked on so much. I think from the way he was advising me he was also trying to "Teach me to be a man".
As a small child I tried to "Fit In" by emulating what I saw the boys doing for a while. Failed.
After I reached adulthood I deliberately left everything I knew and everyone I knew behind thinking I could reinvent myself. It was all too painful after all. Yeah, screwed myself up even more by doing that but I digress. My reinvention was based on the standard writ of stereotypes and misconceptions I had about what male even means... It fooled me well enough but I don't think I fooled many other people. Looking back I can see that what I was presenting was fake. Obviously fake.
So here we are at your original question. I was raised as a "Boy". And all I can say is that for me there were those who tried to teach me "What it was to be a man" but I think that was only because I obviously had no freaking clue...
What it would be like for others? /shrugs Let's just say I don't like trying to crawl into other peoples heads. It's too icky.
<3
Thanks for all your comments! I'm sorry to hear that childhood was so sucky for some of you . . . I certainly can relate to some of it. In order to qualify for the "benefits" of being female, i.e, being entitled to fail and ask for help, you have to appear feminine to others. In my experience, the core quality of femininity is the desire and willingness to please. It matters how you look, how you modulate your voice, how you stand--everything should be inviting, graceful, and above all, nonthreatening. This was not me as a child. I sort of got that "being driven into the wilderness" thing too, only to me, it was clear nobody expected me to come back a man. They just wanted to avoid looking at me until I could manage to be sweet and pretty. (Never happened.) :p
Quote from: AnamethatstartswithE on August 01, 2018, 11:29:29 AMEveryone else seemed to just know this stuff, and I was always lost. I felt like an alien studying the ways of the "hew-man" so that's why I can speak so clinically about this.
I think it's not just you. So far, I haven't heard from a single AMAB person who felt like they knew what was going on while growing up. I suppose my sample could be skewed, since I've only been talking to people over the internet and netizens tend to skew geeky, but I suspect deep gender role confusion among guys is pretty common.
Quote from: AnamethatstartswithE on August 01, 2018, 11:29:29 AMFor more on group dynamics I suggest you look up "horizontal and vertical honor"
I did a Google search on that and found a series of pretty interesting articles: https://www.artofmanliness.com/articles/manly-honor-part-i-what-is-honor/
I think the author did a pretty good job of summing up the unspoken tenets that underlie traditional Western views of masculinity. According to him (and I think he's right), that particular cult of masculine virtue has been dead for about a century. The last article in the series presents an argument for the revival of an honor culture, something that would offer considerable benefits, but exact a considerable cost. The thing that troubles me most about the idea of trying to live in a reconstituted honor culture is that it necessitates the existence of an "out group" that lacks honor. Furthermore, if the author is right and a real honor culture can only exist between about 150 people, that out-group has to consist of 99.9999999% of the human race. Let's be honest here--I'm both AFAB and trans. Western culture doesn't give me a lot of people to feel superior to. And even if it did, why would I want to arbitrarily treat most of my fellow humans like ****? Maybe that's female training talking, but if it is, I'll take it.
Hmm. Masculinity in Western society is facing a crisis. But then so is Western civilization - it's afflicted with nihilism, consumerism, a loss of meaning as we propelled head-first into postmodernism and an "everything is relative" mindset, losing reverence for the values and sacrifices that built our society. It's hardly surprising. But anyway, masculinity - contrast it with how it's viewed in other cultures and societies to see that we definitely demonize it and belittle it at the moment, as well as often belittle men as a group. Which is ill-advised - not only are masculine qualities and bodies required in the building of societies but also in the protection/preservation of them.
Some of the core principles of "traditional masculine values" would be taking responsibility, self-reliance/independence, competitiveness and a desire to achieve things, assertiveness and having self-respect and gaining respect from others (for your actions). Respect is typically very important to men - you'll find slews of men on the internet who are very unhappy and it's largely because they do not have the respect of their peers, or of women, which is why they don't respect themselves, which leads to depression. They can typically gain this respect by doing the other things I mentioned above: take responsibility for their own lives and well-being; stop relying on others and become self-sufficient, i.e. get a job, get educated, excel in a field, buy your own home, learn how to protect yourself, etc. etc.; be competitive and strive to be the best at what you do, which will generally lead to achievement, satisfaction or recognition of some kind, and so on. Men have traditionally been valued (and still are) for what they bring to the table: things like expertise, wealth, protection, provision. This makes them valued, which in turn makes them value themselves, and makes them more valuable and desirable to women. Not every man in interested in these things, but for the most part and on average, this directly affects most men.
Hardly a shocker to see men feeling "in crisis" when masculinity is now treated by Western society as something brutish and crap; when competitiveness is seen as "too aggressive", instead of that which makes people strive for brilliance, and we see the dissolution of the concept of meritocracy in favour of opportunity of outcome; when men are not really allowed to have men-only spaces any more in which they can act like men - they must often allow women into those spaces now and behave in a manner the women find acceptable... so they find less places to be relaxed and "be themselves", and must "feminize" their behavior and way of speaking to meet this standard; men are just not openly respected as a group any more, since it's more acceptable to disparage them openly and publicly - they are often characterized as violent, rapey and/or simply stupid; and they are falling behind at school... perhaps because it's been demonstrated that most schools are now mixed sex and the teaching methods are better suited to girls (not to mention the examples of teacher bias toward upmarking girls and downmarking boys on the basis of gender, which has been discovered recently).... I could go on but you likely got the point. Femininity is more often praised and seen as good, while masculinity is now seen as something bad, something to be tamed and/or dispensed with altogether.
Young boys are not being taught about the positive aspects of masculinity in wider Western society or by the establishment or in academic institutions - perhaps some are by their fathers... I hope so, anyway, but no, the reinforcement of that went out the window in the society we began to enter post-war in the 60s I should say. There was a collective demoralization, and a postmodernist movement that swept away all the old values. Unfortunately, it's started to sweep just about all meaning and notion of responsibility from people's lives, as well. About the only concept left people cling to with any fervour is that of "equality" - which I have to say, probably isn't completely compatible with the competitive nature of the masculine... especially now that it has begun to directly target men and demand they stop behaving "like men". All the rest are gone - religiosity came under attack, traditionalism came under attack, we're left with a rather bland world of narcissism and "pleasing ourselves". Older values of being a part of a larger whole, sacrificing for that whole, a long-term vision for the future..... all gone. Perhaps it is the symptoms of a society which hasn't known great collective upheaval or hardship, like the WWI and II generations did. It has no use for masculinity, and men are left to drift.
Still, I see subtle signs that a return to traditional values may be on the way back. Hardship is coming, one way or another, whether through economic shifts, crashes, and upheavals, and almost certainly demographic ones, which will come with its own host of challenges, and in a harder world, masculinity will be required. We won't be able to afford to disregard it, or denigrate it any more. I am not looking forward to a harder world, but certainly it will give us goals and a sense of purpose again to rebuild it.
As for myself, I was raised with the expectation that I take care of myself, that my problems were my own to sort out, that the world doesn't owe you a living, and that I ought to strive to do something worthwhile or even "great" in life. I was raised as boy would be raised, quite honestly, in a more old-fashioned sense. It was quite ruthless in some respects - nothing was sugar-coated, there was no time for my tears, and I was supposed to transcend my class and come home having done something worth talking about. I'm not exaggerating at all here. A great deal of expectation was put onto me. I did have a capable father figure who taught me "masculine life skills" like carpentry, DIY, survival skills, martial arts. I did not necessarily associate them with "manhood" at the time, but I didn't associate them with femininity either, since I was almost completely blind to feminine matters, or my own, and my mother - like many mothers - didn't see it as her concern to teach me practical life skills. I was not taught anything in the context of manhood - only in the context of "competitiveness"... being better than the other kids at school, getting the best degree at university, achieving something in life, etc. These things were expected by my mother who was projecting at the time, since she herself was denied access to university until I was practically an adult myself. She expected "great things", and has never listened to or indulged any sign of weakness from me. The result seems to be that I was a lot more mentally competitive than a lot of men I encountered in life, and usually very much more than most women.
They didn't intend to instill me with masculine values. I know in retrospect what they feared was that I would become someone trapped in poverty and unable to escape it if I wasn't well educated and competitive. They were lower class snobs, essentially, lol. They hated being lower class and wanted more - and my mother actually did achieve that in later life, so she was very serious about not being a waster in mine. I recognize now that many masculine values and teachings were imparted nonetheless; but if there had been a boy in the family - an older son especially, this would probably not have been the case... they would have projected onto him, and I would perhaps have had a softer, easier life with them, without much expectation. But there being no male kids, and me being the eldest as well, I got the brunt of this teaching. Was it outmoded and outdated? No, it's timeless. Being self-sufficient, capable and assertive is timeless and rational if you want to get somewhere in life. It applies to anyone really, but is especially important for men since society is not so inclined to catch them if they fall, and men aren't human beings they are human doings, as I've heard someone cynically put it. But it's true - men have to have acquired, achieved or posses some value in life if they want respect in this society. They don't get it just for being men. I suppose in some ways I was very lucky to have received such an upbringing - I have never found myself in a situation I could not easily deal with, or find a solution to and I'm mentally resilient and not prone to giving up.
The masculine ideal I aspire to is pretty much how I've described - self-sufficiency, self-help and self-betterment. I rely on other people as little as possible (from a mental desire to always be prepared for the worst and to be ready for it, but not afraid of it - another rather masculine quality) and I try to be pro-active, not passive. Nothing comes of doing nothing. It all seems like basic logic to me if you want to teach a person to be a doer in life, or a winner... teach them at least some "masculine values".
I was raised in a conservative Evangelical Christian environment and have since tried my hardest to fit in to liberal culture, so for me....
As a child and teenager, being a proper man meant that you definitely, %100 had to be sexually attracted to women, but you weren't supposed to think sexual thoughts about women, because that was sinful. Men were also lambasted for "lust" and having a stronger sex drive than women, and so bore the bulk of sexual shaming. Boys were also discouraged from socializing with girls too closely or showing interest in feminine things.
As an adult, I've found that liberal culture only pays attention to your needs and problems if you fit into a category they've decided is marginalized, so if you are (or appear to be) a straight white man, it's difficult to get anyone to listen to your problems. Men are also being scrutinized to absurd degrees for their sexual behavior, so the male sex drive is vilified nearly as much as it is in conservatism. If you complain that you've been mistreated because you're a man, or that your problems are being ignored because you're a man, you're unlikely to get any sympathy, even if it's true. This may not be true for each individual liberal person, but when you look at how much the liberal media promotes the concept of "dangerous male behaviors are threatening to women" and how little it promotes positive ways that men can express themselves and be men, it's not hard to see why it's difficult for men to be open about their problems. Since there are no liberal outlets for male support, this results in the institutions that do support men being rather anti-liberal or mysoginistic.
That's my two cents, anyway.
I can't answer this. I never really identified as a man so guy culture never made any sense to me. I just avoided contact with people as much as possible for 30 years instead.
Quote from: AnamethatstartswithE on August 01, 2018, 11:29:29 AM
Everyone else seemed to just know this stuff, and I was always lost. I felt like an alien studying the ways of the "hew-man" so that's why I can speak so clinically about this.
THIS!! So much this!
I received absolutely no guidance whatsoever. Everyone else seemed to know how to "be a man", but I didn't. I don't know if cis men actually know, or if they are just good at faking it. I didn't know, I couldn't fake it well enough, and no one explained anything to me. I learned over time to muddle along well enough to get by, but that's about it. I had to figure out my own muddling for myself, though.
You've posted elsewhere about how your childhood was pretty painful, Kylo, so I can't quite envy you, but I do envy the fact that it sounds like your parents had a vision of the kind of adult they wanted you to be, and that they gave you the skills to make that vision a reality. My own childhood was kind of screwy . . . my mother was chronically ill and an alcoholic, a combination that killed her young. My dad worked 10-12 hour days, which is what was expected of professional-class men in my region in the 1980's. I wasn't exactly raised as a boy or a girl . . . I was more allowed to run feral. I certainly learned that I was expected to solve problems on my own, but no one ever showed me how. I don't think any of that is related to my transness, fwiw, it just is what it is.
I hear what you're saying about traditional values, and I think that you're right that in some ways we'd be better off if we reinstated them. However, in the US, at least, "traditional values" pretty much means "conservative Evangelical Christian values," which are an existential threat to LGBT people. I really don't want to be packed off for conversion therapy! My hope is that society can find positive roles for men without turning back the clock to the bad old days.
Lucca, I agree that male spaces and male support groups should exist, because men, even straight white men, have their share of problems. It's not fair to both deny them a space of their own to decompress and pitch a fit if they talk about their problems in front of more marginalized people.
Interesting stuff, zirconia. Those sound like some solid values.
QuoteLucca, I agree that male spaces and male support groups should exist, because men, even straight white men, have their share of problems. It's not fair to both deny them a space of their own to decompress and pitch a fit if they talk about their problems in front of more marginalized people.
That's the thing, really. There's no socially acceptable way for straight white men to "blow off steam" and complain about their problems and seek resolution, because straight white men aren't supposed to
have problems. A black man, or a gay man, or a woman, or someone from some other minority group always has an outlet. Straight white men don't, they're just expected to ride in the backseat of everyone else's caravan. I believe that that's why acceptance of progressive social values lags behind the most among straight white men, and why most pro-male groups tend be largely straight white men. Straight white men aren't incentivized to cooperate with people who treat them poorly, and non-straight, non-white men have outlets related to their race or sexual orientation, and so don't become as frustrated with their gender being ignored.
Now, I'm not sure how much a greater acceptance of straight white men would've really helped me in the past, since I've determined that I'm actually a transgender woman. I've always been hesitant to become close with men because male bonding makes me uncomfortable, so even if I had the perfect straight white male outlet, it might not do me much good. But it
would be a positive change for all the real men out there, both cis and trans.
Quote from: Lucca on August 01, 2018, 02:46:59 PMSince there are no liberal outlets for male support, this results in the institutions that do support men being rather anti-liberal or mysoginistic.
Quote from: The Flying Lemur on August 01, 2018, 04:28:39 PM
Lucca, I agree that male spaces and male support groups should exist, because men, even straight white men, have their share of problems. It's not fair to both deny them a space of their own to decompress and pitch a fit if they talk about their problems in front of more marginalized people.
Male support groups do exist. I was a member of two before I came to my senses. Both were quite liberal, though they had some conservative members.
But male support groups are not encouraged in the general culture, hence the counter-cultural slant of the groups. Men are not supposed to ask for help because they are supposed to pretend that they don't need any. Joining a support group is seen in male culture as "wussy".
The groups I was in helped me break away from having to pretend to be macho. That was an important part of my progress to understanding who I am today.
I read a really good article on Jordan Peterson (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-young-peterson-20180601-story.html) recently, which describes the phenomenon that I've been talking about pretty well. The quality of Jordan Peterson's ideas are... mixed, but he's tapping into a lot of frustration that young men are having, who don't have anywhere else to go in order to be respected and be themselves. This is being ignored by liberals, who often just insult him a lot and point out what's wrong with his politics rather than realizing that he's fulfilling a need that a lot of people have, and that if you don't want more people to follow him and adopt his less progressive tendencies, the best course of action is to fulfill that same need in your own group instead of deriding them for wanting respect.
Quote from: The Flying Lemur on August 01, 2018, 04:28:39 PM
You've posted elsewhere about how your childhood was pretty painful, Kylo, so I can't quite envy you, but I do envy the fact that it sounds like your parents had a vision of the kind of adult they wanted you to be, and that they gave you the skills to make that vision a reality. My own childhood was kind of screwy . . . my mother was chronically ill and an alcoholic, a combination that killed her young. My dad worked 10-12 hour days, which is what was expected of professional-class men in my region in the 1980's.
My mother was somewhat similar, a high-functioning alcoholic... the sort who could hide it well and still get a decent job. She made childhood quite hellish before her frustrations were channelled into academia, though - in a slightly similar way I was allowed to run feral also because it was expected that I only needed intellectual guidance, not moral or emotional guidance. It's one reason I believe children need parents who don't assume that just because the child is smart, it doesn't need other things or other kinds of guidance. Smart kids are actually probably more prone to coming undone from thinking they're just too damn smart to fail, than less smart kids who have a more well-rounded upbringing and a moral compass. But anyway, the fact you were expected to figure things out rather than just being told what you want to hear is in truth very valuable training. I could tell when you joined this site that you were intelligent and were the sort of person who searches out the information you require. That's where it comes from, I believe, and it's probably the best skill you can have of all, the wherewithal to find out how to get things you don't already have.
QuoteI hear what you're saying about traditional values, and I think that you're right that in some ways we'd be better off if we reinstated them. However, in the US, at least, "traditional values" pretty much means "conservative Evangelical Christian values," which are an existential threat to LGBT people. I really don't want to be packed off for conversion therapy! My hope is that society can find positive roles for men without turning back the clock to the bad old days.
Oh, absolutely. I've been thinking about this for so long while gauging the sort of public comments left on the endless stream of trans-related news articles people keep frothing at the mouth about on my social media feeds, that I've almost forgotten I'd accepted the idea any sort of revival would probably be reactionary and regressive in nature. They'd want people like us out of the spotlight again, they'd want to de-normalize much of the recent thinking that's been created around the idea of gender and gender expression and so on, I imagine. If there is a revival of some kind, it would be a threat to things like gay marriage probably, and certainly things like openly expressing gender fluidity. My hope, at least, is that whatever does occur retains some respect for scientific findings and historical records that should at least ensure gay and trans people are recognized. The people out there who are currently our most ardent critics seem to be of two kinds - the type that wants us thrown off rooftops, and the type that wants a return to the sort of "discretion" gays and trans people had to keep to in the late sixties and early seventies. I'm not in eager anticipation of either, and I do hope - perhaps too optimistically - that if we do see a comeback some sort of compromise can be reached that doesn't undo much of the work of the last sixty years. At the same time I do understand the concerns of those who see the gender fluidity stuff as asking the vast majority of society to fundamentally change the view and functionality of the concept of gender for the benefit of the feelings of a very small minority, in such a way that can easily be abused, and is already poorly understood and explained outside of our circles, and is a lot to ask. The teaching of it in schools to very young children and the relaxing of rules on treating trans teenagers is also a major concern for these people, which many think of as bordering on "indoctrination". I also have concerns about the potential for influencing young people who may not actually be trans needlessly or accidentally into thinking they are trans - I've heard of a few cases already and the potential damage that would do to a person and the trans community's rep at large is significant. Most of their fears are unfounded but on that point, I think they do have a point, and their concerns will come to the fore soon, I think.... particularly if there's an increase in people who claim to have been misled by therapists, teachers or doctors on the matter. At best we'd be looking at such a movement making it harder to access trans services, or making the process even more stringent, removing education about it from schools, and removing the options to identify as something other than male and female officially, and so on. And of course, removing things like hate speech laws and those against some types of discrimination no doubt, along the lines of the gay cake bakery issue. And that would be if the most progressive sort of traditionalists got their way; it doesn't bear thinking about if something like Sharia had a say.
All the same, society is currently suffering many ills that a dose of traditional values would probably have prevented or insulated against. There's no easy answer and I can't pretend I have one. I would very much like the best of both worlds, but we'd be looking at a compromise in the best possible scenario, because certain traditional views on gender and the sexes would have to be considered, or re-considered.
It's a very complex issue, and quite honestly I don't think any of could be dealt with easily. An answer to the question of the masculinity crisis is often given as something like - "well, just give men back their place as the main breadwinners, statistically men would be happier and
needed, statistically women are happier not
having to work as much" and so on, but a cursory glance at modern economics wouldn't allow for it, and who really knows if modern men and women would necessarily be happier given we've spent the last century training women to work outside the home and men to accept that they do? Everyone has to work now, and Big Corporate likes it that way - encourages it; the more people working the more labour is devalued, etc. So there's no easy route back to situations that allowed for certain values anyway - not without some cataclysmic civilizational reset, which, like probably most of us here, I do not want to see.
But then that's basically where the main battle lines are being drawn - traditionalism vs progressivism, nationalism vs globalism, small government vs big government, protectionism vs the massive global corporations. Given the social failures of the globalists in Europe lately and the human fallout from that, I see that certain nation states - particularly in Europe - attempt to pull back, reassert control over their sovereign nations and have already decided that globalist pet projects -particularly multiculturalism and the single currency - have been a failure. From them we'll start to see the resurfacing of more right wing and traditionalist parties and public sentiments whether we like it or not... we already are beginning to see it from the Visegrad 4, from the UK, from Austria, and from Italy. So one way or another I'd advise we all watch what's happening closely and think about the ramifications of this for the LGBT. It may be a mild sort of immune response or it may become further-reaching. I would keep an eye on Eastern Europe. People seem to be looking at them as examples of societies in which masculinity is still highly valued and the places don't have large amounts of cultural unrest - very homogenous. They are by no means paradise - I have a Polish female friend who gives me the lowdown on what it's like there for LGBT folks and it's absolutely not ideal at all. LGBT have to be very careful there about what they do. But we are rather between a rock and a hard place here in Europe - we have imported a lot of Islam and migrants from homophobic cultures, and that also is not particularly good for us LGBT. I personally believe that we've never had it so good here, nor will we have it so good for much longer. I'm thinking it wise to get the rest of my transition and documentation sorted ASAP so I can "melt into the crowd", as it were. For safety.
Hmm, that's a very thought-provoking post... though personally, I have much less sympathy for those who proclaim that LGBT people and values devalue traditional institutions than you do. An individual's self worth shouldn't be determined by what other people do; a straight man shouldn't feel his heterosexual marriage is worth less just because two men get married, and a cis-woman shouldn't feel threatened in her feminity just because a transwoman is considered a woman and can enter women's spaces. That just trods upon the rights of others to be themselves and reveals that the person complaining is too insecure to feel good about themselves on their own terms, and I don't have any respect for it.
I realize that you probably don't want a reversal of the freedoms that LGBT folk have gained either, but frankly, I just don't have much patience for that sort of logic, and it's worthless to anyone who doesn't fit a specific mold. If that wasn't clear in the past, it's clear now, and should be dropped immediately.
In regards to masculinity, I'd like to see a world where men aren't derided for being masculine in positive or harmless ways, but also aren't forced into being masculine, either, and can be however they want to be. I don't know how how closely that fits your ideal, exactly.
Well, I didn't say I have sympathy for those people or those particular views. What I acknowledge is that society as we have it now is rudderless. It seems to be going nowhere except toward more consumerism, more invasive technology, and more worship of the self. Maybe I'm wrong, but people seem - underneath it all - more empty and unhappy. Social media is great, but people are still lonely. Convenience is great, but people are still too busy to truly "talk". Everyone has so much time and yet no time. People are wondering what will make their lives more meaningful - well, all that gets into the territory of which Jordan Peterson speaks.
The issue with gay marriage is - ultimately - not really an issue of having a problem with two men marrying. I spoke with someone earlier today about this, for their take on why they don't agree with gay marriage. In their case it's not that they want to interfere with two men's consensual relationship but it's the slippery slope argument. I.e. he said: "I don't have anything against two guys being together. But here's how I see it - first there was was legalization of homosexuality. Then civil partnerships, why shouldn't gay people have those? So they're given. Then well, why not marriage? So it's given. Then well why can't they adopt? Given. Then it'll come to issues of sex education in schools - and then it wouldn't be fair not to teach children about gay sex? So it's given. So you go from A to B and in the end our kids are being taught something we never wanted them to have to be taught, but now it's in the school system, we can't object." From their perspective, you agree to one thing, you eventually have to agree to everything because "that would only be fair". They have the same concerns about kids being taught about trans issues when they're young in schools, or being encouraged to think they might be trans because of the increasing acceptance. Despite my assurance that the majority of the time you can't "accidentally" end up thinking you're a trans person, it has happened, and to say it isn't a legit concern for some other parent isn't for me to say. I don't really agree with the guy or disagree with him, at the end of the day he has a point - it started with legalizing homosexual sex but it certainly didn't end there. He wonders about whether a kid brought up with two dads instead of a mum and a dad is good for a kid. It's a legit point. I can't tell him he's wrong there. Kids need balance. Not all kids get balance in reality but... yes, it's still a valid point to make when we're talking about how a decision to legalize something originally for the rights of one person (or a couple) ends up impacting the experience of people who have no say in the matter - i.e. the child with two dads or other people's kids in school. I'm pro-gay marriage myself but I admit I hadn't really thought about it this way, about the unwitting knock-on effects it has on other people.
Regards the second part of what you said.... well it depends on whether that cis woman sees and accepts the transwoman as a woman. I accept trans women as women, but I'm not this hypothetical person we're talking about. If she doesn't, then she's seeing that as an invasion of a female space. I don't empathize with their fear, but I do understand the fact they fear, because generally speaking people fear what they don't understand. And trans issues - the experience or reality of being trans - is difficult to explain to people who aren't. We assume they should simply understand and accept, or even worse demand that they accept. But until they properly understand and accept, I can't see them not feeling resistant. Perhaps they feel like we are treading on their right to be themselves because they reject the idea of a transperson, I don't know. How can that dilemma actually be resolved, because it's a question on both sides of feelings. They may feel we aren't what we say we are, we feel we are what we say we are.
Note: I am not 'endorsing' the particular views of traditionalists. I am talking about certain views they have. As far as I am aware that is allowed and nobody should order me to "drop it".
I wasn't ordering you to drop it, I'm just saying that people who hold regressive anti-LGBT views should drop it. I try to be polite, but very firm. I don't think it does much good to give validity to their fears. Sure, legalizing gay marriage is a slippery slope to legalizing gay adoption- so what? Unless there's genuine scientific evidence that children are significantly worse off being raised by same-sex parents, that shouldn't matter. I think that children would be better off without conservative Christian adoptive parents, but I'm not getting my wish. Not just because it would never come true in a million years, but because that's a level of government control I'm not comfortable pushing.
I'll take for granted that there are some kids who might be damaged by thinking they're trans when they're not, but that's a smaller number than those who will benefit from greater acceptance and knowledge about trans people among children in school. Rolling back the progress made instead of finding ways to minimize the side effects is a poor tactic. We might as well remove anti-segregation sentiment from our classrooms because someone is afraid their child will catch white guilt.
Besides which, I've known plenty of people who were against gay marriage because they thought it was gross, because they thought it devalued their own marriage, or because they thought God commanded them to be against it. I'm not convinced the majority of anti-LGBT people are very high-minded. I've had enough conversations with them on the subject to realize that.
All I require is equal rights and equality of opportunity - I don't need to have their personal acceptance and endorsement. I'm not going to change their minds by ranting at them, anyway. I've had better results talking to these people like a human being, and not talking down to them.
Point is, we don't know what's good for kids in this context yet. They don't and neither do we. But we are acting like we have all the answers. Just this week I saw a BBC segment telling people it's wrong to treat kids stereotypically by gender - aimed at adults who don't know a young child personally. So they got a male and female toddler, swapped their clothes and names, then presented them to a bunch of adults to embarrass the adults into seeing how gendered their treatment of the kids was when they handed the "boy" a car and the "girl" a doll. So wrapped up in making their point about how we mustn't treat kids a certain way they didn't even stop to think that cross-dressing the child and presenting it to someone with a different name is also treating the kid in a way likely to have a negative or confusing effect for the child itself. But that doesn't matter when one is busy hammering an agenda across, I suppose.
And then you've got those parents who delight in telling the press they're raising their (non trans) child genderless, introducing them as "them" and "they". Not for me to tell someone how to raise their child but they're recommending the rest of us do the same. And how do they know that won't have a damaging effect to raise the child that way? To call it "they" and "them" in front of a class of kids raised as "boys" and "girls". I'm not a rocket scientist but I know kids are super-sensitive to anything that might make them look 'weird' in front of their peers, and if my parents had done that in front of my classmates, I know I'd be in for a whale of a time with those other kids. It honestly seems to me that these parents are just out to signal how hip and progressive they are without much thought for the effect it's going to have on their kid who isn't even apparently trans.
Could I argue with that when people said to me they had some concerns about such behavior? I couldn't. Because I certainly wouldn't treat my own child like an experiment, either.
From my interactions with some of those people with "concerns" about the LGBT they're less bothered about what we do personally as adults than the effect this experimental culture is having when directly applied to kids. And to that I have no answer. Because it's going to have some effect, and it's a very, very tricky area. You might have simply run into genuine bigots in your experience. I tend to run into people who are open minded enough to talk with me on the subject matter, and have fair points about whether or not people who are not LGBT should be subjected to LGBT issues. And I have to agree, I'm not sure they should if they are children. They should have access to information and help if they require it, but advising to give every child completely genderless treatment etc. seems a bit much. If they want to dislike pride month or moan about gay marriage, that's their choice. When they start talking about LGBT issues being projected onto kids lately though, they have a point that is very difficult to argue with.
They're concerned because they perceive they are being forced to swallow it. I've said it many times and one more for good measure - if you try to get something by force, including acceptance, you only get resistance back.
Quote from: Lucca on August 01, 2018, 08:10:18 PMIn regards to masculinity, I'd like to see a world where men aren't derided for being masculine in positive or harmless ways, but also aren't forced into being masculine, either, and can be however they want to be. I don't know how how closely that fits your ideal, exactly.
I agree that it would be ideal if we could all be our most authentic, comfortable selves all the time. However, you can't be what you can't see, as they say. How do I know what my most authentic self is like if I've never been educated about the different "selfhood" options that are out there? It's better if you have this kind of education in your youth, but it's never too late to learn. So I asked. :p
In reading, I've run across a few interesting things about masculinity. One is the perceived distinction between "being a good man" and "being a real man." Mr. Rogers strikes me as someone who was "a good man." He was caring, compassionate, collected and determined in the face of adversity, gentle with the vulnerable, and faithful to his wife. By contrast, a lot of Trump's supporters are thrilled that he is, to them, "a real man." By this they appear to mean that he acts entitled to women's bodies and is quick to take offense and threaten violence. When the subject of "real" manhood comes up, Trump is frequently contrasted with Obama, who remained unflappable in the face of insults and to my knowledge never publicly spoke of women in a sexual way. That sort of cool-bloodedness is not "real." "Real" is uncensored, politically incorrect, aggressive, messy, and honestly, kind of "bad." "Real" also probably means "relatable" in a way that "good" is not.
I don't know how we got to a place where being "good" is the near opposite of being "real," but here we are. No wonder boys are confused.
Another interesting thing I found was that there are two competing definitions of "manhood." In one, manhood is the opposite of womanhood. All things soft and feminine are the antithesis of manliness. In the other, manhood is the opposite of childhood. A man is someone who has put childish self-centeredness and impulsivity behind him.
I don't think it's quite so simple as to say that being a good man is the opposite of being a child, while being a real man is the opposite of being a woman, but I believe there is some congruence there. Of the two definitions, it strikes me that it makes more sense to distinguish manhood from childhood than manhood from womanhood, because there are much greater differences between an adult and a child than there are between a man and a woman. To make the "opposite of womanhood" thing work, you have to really exaggerate the differences between the sexes, to the point where they both become stereotypes. It doesn't bother me particularly that both manhood and womanhood can be seen as the opposites of childhood. There are distinctions between manhood and womanhood, but they're subtle, and not really worth making a big deal over.
As for how to deal with anti-LGBT people, I kind of don't. I don't run into them often, and when I do, I tend to calmly state my own position and walk away. Perhaps not as socially responsible as trying to change their minds, sympathetically or otherwise, but it's definitely better for my emotional health. Maybe after a while things will feel less raw, and I'll be better able to engage them.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree, Kylo. I don't think we should refuse to do something just because people think it might be harmful. You need actual scientific evidence for that, not simple fear. If we don't know what will happen, then we don't know it'll be bad. The genderless child raising doesn't sound great, but then, I don't think that's really a common concept at this time, either. At the very least, I would hope that if the child says they want to be referred to and appear as a particular gender at some point, the parents will listen.
Ranting at someone won't help anyone, but giving them undue credit won't help, either. Some things are just wrong or incorrect and should be treated as such.
Edit: BTW, just want to make it clear I've enjoyed this discussion and hope their are no hard feelings; I might make a separate thread with links to some studies when I have the time, but I think we're at risk of derailing this thread at this point.
Bookmarked this for later Flying Lemur. No time now but wanted to say . . .
Was Very Proud of my dad when younger in part because . . . he was always working and never there (until much later?) In the mid-fifties he had a very glamorous working class "dream job" where the work was clearly divided by gender roles so perhaps THAT'S where my sense of 'binary' originates from?
Both were "ex-Marines" (where they met) but mom never worked, was definitely the traditional "stay-at-home" with family type!
I was blessed with amazing an example of what I could only hope to grow up to be as a man~ My Father.
That's awesome, Virginia! What where the specific qualities or actions that you admired?
His balance and confidence in who he was, TheFlyingLemur.
Despite all the damage my parents did to me growing up, they instilled their strong sense of self-confidence. My Old Man was a rock of strength to our family; Slow to judge but quick to defend; Open-minded but cautious about changing his opinion. He cried when something was sad and laughed when it was funny; Was never afraid to say he was sorry, didn't swear around me til I was man, but NEVER took God's name in vain. ... And he could kick my tail and drink me under the table til the day he died. As far as being a man, my Father had the tiger by theb@lls, TheFlyingLemur. I am proud to be his son. I sound like a friggin country western song...
I was born male but I was not really socialized as a male. Thankfully my dad allowed me to pretty much be what I was. I don't know what being a man is like but I consider my dad to be at least what I consider, a perfect mix to being a man. He was a Marine and he's now a cop. He's very masculine and has typical guy interests. But he's also a very loving father who has never had a problem being affectionate and loving with his kids. It's sad to hear how some fathers never show their kids love. He's also secure enough in his own identity that he has never had a problem or issues with LGBT people. But he was certainly not raised to be that way. My grandpa is pretty much the opposite of my dad. If I were male I would want to be the type of guy my dad is.
The 'be a man' statement and teachings are a process of hypocrisy and a lot is based around strength. As my personal reserves of that are non-existent, thee are real tangible negative outcomes. It's also based around entitlement (the main cause of upset from the loss of so called 'men only spaces'), and the visibility that lack of seclusion has thrown on the typical challenges that are used to demonstrate how 'alpha' as a man you are, and where, therefore you fit in the power hierarchy. Be a man, curtail emotional response. That's a manly thing to do, because it relies on strength. What a man, because he showed initiative and proved his resourcefulness and independence.
But then, this is what I am not - I am omega. I believe that whilst it may appear that there is no clear direction, it is quite simply because the direction isn't any longer one way, as is often the case when there are fundamental changes in progress.
I shall now return to my planet.
Sno.
Quote from: Rachel_Christina on August 01, 2018, 01:12:27 PM
Jeez the answer to this will vary greatly with age location and even the type of father figure we had in our up bringing.
For me that was a real tough father who never shed a tear, who worked hard and showed little affection.
We where all brought up to be tough, manual hands on people. He has had a profound impact on the people we are today. My brother's find it hard to get on with him.
I think my innate feminine side aloud me to get on with him and put aside his harsh ways. Many a beating was had in our times as kids, I won't be holding it to him though.
The small things that bother me bout him was his inability to do the most simplest things like say happy birthday come birthday time., And along with my mother and my brothers we must have a collective age of some 150 years.
I have never heard him say happy birthday. So far he has never called me Rachel.
I see him most days. I don't let it get to me. It's not nice mind
I think a few situations could have changed his attitude, no. 1 being having a daughter. I'm sure he would have been nicer had we had a sister growing up.
When I was a "man" I followed the unspoken rules I seen before me, and I was a tough one, worked hard as hell. Working on farms, mechanics all sorts of "masculine" things.
I think honestly I painted the picture of a guy I would like to date. Ha
I also attended an all boys Catholic school from 13-19. I already felt female when I ended up there :(
Now to be honest I try not to resent what I learned with my strange upbringing.
Some things I luckily learned to love like mechanics and cars.
I think my love of them kept me alive when I most certainly would have perished
Anyway that's abit of a ramble really. And the perspective of rural Catholic Ireland
Something might be of use in there lol
Hi Rachel, 05 Aug 2018
You are a very beautiful lady. Spent a good bit of time in Ireland a couple of years ago, 1966 to be exact; maybe a little more than a couple.
Raised by alcoholic parents gives one a good grounding in how to become one. Fortunately, I gave up alcohol but not before consuming considerable quantities. I think I started drinking at the age of 2. I was allowed to sip the foam from glasses of beer. Almost always managed to sip some of the stuff below the suds.
To be frank, I didn't learn much from my father that was good. I learned nasty stuff because he was nasty a good part of the time. I relied on other men as my role models.
I also spent time in catholic prisons from the age of 6 - 14, grades 1 - 9. I despised every second I spent in those hell holes. My folks were evil and so were the nuns.
If it weren't for my friends and concerned adults that intervened in my life, I probably would not be here (alive) today. I had a tough time with relationships; knew there was something wrong with me, just not what. At 47 YOA, I finally found out why my life was so screwed up; it was the alcoholism of my parents.
My life turned around because of adults that took an interest in me, my high school Dean of Boys, my close friends and the US Navy.
Now that I have transitioned to female, I know I am where I belong. There are male and female things I like to do. I think there is a great advantage to being transgender; you can do anything you want to do and most people don't have a problem with it. There will always be the bigots and jerks. Both are stupid so neither one is worth bothering with; they can't be fixed because you can't fix stupid.
I prefer being a woman even though I'll never be an attractive female. I'll just travel along and accept what comes. I'm more free than I have ever been.
My only regret is that I didn't begin my transition long ago. But, had I done so, one special person in my life probably wouldn't be there. Where my life is today, makes all the bumps, detours and pit stops worth the trip.
To be clear, my folks provided me with a nice house, clean clothes. good food and stuff. They didn't provide love, proper guidance/example or a home.
If this narrative doesn't fit your thread feel free to delete it. Hope I provided some insight and or help to at least one person. If I didn't, please apply for a refund; they will be sent out the second Tuesday of last week.
Best Always, Love,
Christine