Yep, They're Still Attached. I Checked.

There are many things that I resent and dislike about the older generation, but none more than their insistence on trying to impose their kaleidoscope of neuroses on the the younger generation- case in point:  this article I found from the New York Post which is a fan example bemoaning the allegedly emasculated state of today's men and blaming an obscure 70s television special hosted by Marlo Thomas of all people called 'Free To Be You And Me' for doing the deed.

First of all, I've never heard of 'Free To Be You And Me' and if the clips embedded in the article are anything to go on, it must have been awesome as all-giddyup to watch stoned off your ass.  Second of all, my balls are just fine, thank you very much-  they're still attached.  I checked.

There's whole reams of paper being written about the crisis of masculinity in this country- both for and against the idea.   There's a War On Boys, apparently and, Men On Strike as well- and then you have sexist dreck that passes for something called 'men's rights' and anti-violence advocates that meet with widespread approval in various feminist corners.  I haven't delved too heavily into this debate- I've read neither of the books I linked too above and when I was offered Jackson Katz as an example of a 'men's rights/male feminist' in a Women's Studies class, I sort of yawned.

I think what I've discovered about myself is that I'm not a joiner.  I don't want to be in your club, I don't want to join your political party and I don't want to be bound by your ideology.  So I get irritated when people (usually older) start calling me an emasculated, neutered, pathetic shell of a man.  You don't know me.  I don't know you.  So, step off, all right?

The supposed state of masculinity that I'm supposed to be striving for:  antiquated as shit.  I don't want to be the 'head of the household' and I don't feel the need to be the breadwinner necessarily, because my worth as a human being is tied to neither of those things.  I believe that marriages that last are partnerships-  I want to make these decisions with The Missus, not for her.  She's a thinking, breathing human being (who is perfectly capable of kicking my ass if she so desired) so who am I to impose some antiquated power structure on her or our marriage?

I need to be strong.  I need not to cry.  I need to be able to throw a punch.  Again:  antiquated.  Maybe that works for the old school generation that bemoans today's males as 'emasculated' but it doesn't work for me.  You want me to be strong?  Fine.  But real strength isn't throwing a punch, it's turning around and walking away when all you want to do is throw that punch.  Crying?  Meh.  Once upon a time, I never cried, but then I got better and now I can cry all the damn time.  I think it's healthy, myself- holding that shit in is probably why old men get prostate cancer all the damn time.  (Oh and for the record:  I shot a BB Gun once when i was a Boy Scout.  I'm not against guns and have never shot one (though I'd like too one of these days) but have never felt the need to have one.  Just in case the whole gun thing is included in these old school constructions of masculinity.)

I might as well tack the big ones onto this rant as well:  real men don't rape.   That's not masculine.  That doesn't make you more of a man- if you think forcing yourself on a human being is any way shape or form okay, that makes you a scum-sucking piece of shit.  I may share the same biological characteristics as you, but don't you dare try and pretend you're more of a man than I am.   Ditto for intimate partner violence. Real men don't hit either.

But at the same time, I have to admit that people are writing tons about this issue precisely because there is an issue.   Try as they might, lefties/prog types can't ignore that there's a crisis of masculinity in this country- and if I could put a finger on the reason why, I wouldn't pick some television special from the 70s as being it.  To me, I think the problem is that the educational system overcorrected itself.  When I was in high school, it was the age of Reviving Ophelia and the concern was about participation rates for girls in STEM classes especially and I have no problem with that.  But somewhere along the way, teaching became dominated by women and I have a feeling (totally unsupported by any hard data, of course) that when a lot of them have boys they don't know how to handle, they get labelled with ADHD and medicated to make them less of a problem.

I think a lot about this stuff- even more now that The Cigarillo is here and I worry about it a lot. How can you raise boys to be successful men in an educational system that's spent decades reorienting itself toward the needs of girls instead of the needs of all students.  Is gender segregation the answer?  Is private school?  I don't know- but I think it bears careful thought.  There's enough out there to convince me that there's a problem, but the bigger problem is that being a massive tool isn't the answer.   Swinging back to douchebaggery won't lead us to a healthier, more beneficial form of masculinity for our boys- and attitudes like this don't help them learn how to be good men.

To some extent, all we can do is be examples for them- what kind of man they become and what kind of man they want to be is up to them.