Tuesday, September 26, 2006

The Endangered Masculine

In the evolution of the masculine in the West, particularly in America, there are two extremes now, with very little of the mean. On the one hand, many boys and young men today are fairly well feminized. We see this in schools where girls rule and go on to college in greater numbers while boys are made to adhere to emasculating behavioral norms, in the complaints of women lacking suitable dates, and in general in society, with sensitized workplaces safe from sexual harassment and full of plenty of women bosses, and homes where men share nurturing and housekeeping (too little of that though, say many wives still). This is not all bad, to be sure. Who wants a return to the previous status quo of often abusive male dominance which suppressed so much talent in women? But as the pendulum swings, there is a certain lack of vigor, of masculine drive and assertion, in the typical sensitized and sensitive guy, and young men probe in vain for approved ground to stand on in developing a differentiated, gratifying and socially acceptable inner stance of toughness, strength and noble maleness.

On the other hand, among parents and boys who adamantly refuse the feminizing influences, and particularly in our national government, we have boys and leaders whose brute assertions of maleness on the street and of American power on the world stage embarrass and shame American citizens wanting a vigorous but humane culture and strong but diplomatically astute leadership. We cringe at the brutality of hip-hop misogyny, we raise a brow and our hearts sink seeing men like Colin Powell diminished in or ousted from the councils of power. Our administration lumbers ham-fisted and arrogantly in the world, a parody of manly strength and fortitude.

Why is it so difficult to attain a balanced embodiment of the masculine, vigorous and energetic, yet kind and respectful? All virtues, Aristotle taught, require balance, an active condition of the soul which is poised as a mean between extremes. The virtue of manliness, blending mighty muscle and protective heart, neither arrogant nor bashful, seems a particularly difficult mean to attain. It is widely asserted that the feminization of the culture is the hope for the future. But we may find that a few good men, neither drained of testosterone nor given to bullying obliviousness, could help a great deal, and that many such good men will be as necessary as strong empowered women to the emergence of a more ideal state of society.

1 Comments:

At 3:21 PM, Blogger William Rogers said...

I largely agree. But why describe masculine as strong and feminine as weak? Logical and emotional, maybe, or assertive and cooperative--I think the psychological and character tendencies are complementary, and that actualizing individuals of both genders blend them. I also think, however, that boys need to be allowed to play rough without being stigmatized. Girls too, for that matter. And boys need to be allowed to acknowledge and express emotion and connection, but not to the outright exclusion of traits that were previously imposed masculine stereotypes. Sharing of domestic roles goes hand in hand with more thorough blending of traits previously regarded as the more or less exclusive domain of one gender or the other. It may be that there is a natural slight preponderance of toughness in most men and a natural slight preponderance of gentleness and communicative aptitude in most women. But a wider range of blendings ought to be regarded as natural and desirable. My initial impulse for this post was a response to what may be a too-extreme denial of the traditionally "masculine" traits in boys today. Pendulums swing, and it's hard to strike a forward-looking balance en masse without swinging a bit too far the opposite way. A more archetypally astute psychology and ethics, which acknowledges and implements the profound insights of both Aristotle and Jung, might enable us to make adjustments without pushing the pendulum too far in compensation.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home