Adam, I agree with your ending statement that a nation that loses its men, fails. All adults, men and women alike, feeling hopeful about their lives and their future, are necessary to support a thriving society. It’s the balance that is so important. Neither should feel subservient to the other nor be afforded less of everything this country has to offer. I also would add your name to your list of men who show real strength and integrity. You offer some very practical ideas that could be implemented to begin to address these issues. I think the most pivotal is the education aspect. However, that would probably require funding which in this present administration that is highly unlikely. Instead, they’re spending our taxpayer dollars on hiring an additional 10,000 ICE agents, many of whom will be those broken men you speak of. So, how’s that going to work out? I see disaster on the horizon.
If I didn’t know better, this piece sounds a little like a plank in your platform for future “throwing your hat in the ring”. I urge you to consider where you can be most effective for your family and this country. We desperately need you in office somewhere. Keep speaking truth, we’re listening.
I had exactly the same thought! And I'd certainly be thrilled to see it!
This is such a heartbreaking picture of what's happening-- not just to young men-- in this economy of endless greed. Perhaps women's traditional support groups make it easier to handle the hopelessness. We need to build a better world for everyone out of the ashes of this administration.
As for your second paragraph...Adam is a grown man and he will do what's best for him and his family. I hope people will not get on a band wagon and shout that he NEEDS to do this or that! I love his writing as it is.
I don’t think I was shouting that he “needs to do this or that” as you wrote in your comment. I was merely encouraging him to think about how he can continue to serve, while putting his and his family’s needs first. I have been encouraging him to do this for over two years as well as have many others. Don’t know why you felt the need to defend him. I know he is a grown man.
It’s all good Vivian. I just couldn’t quite get where you were coming from and felt I needed to clarify my thoughts. I get it about the coffee. My brain is mush until my first cup too. Have a good day.
A lot of wisdom in that. Recalling Simone de Beauvoir -- there are two types of persons in existence -- men and human beings. And when women start behaving like human beings, they're always accused of just wanting to be men.
Probably not the exact quote but something close to it.
I love Atwood and am a solid feminist, but generalized statements like this are unfair and divisive. My sons are not those men. They are loving, supportive partners to the strong women in their lives.
That does not matter. Any woman walking alone on a dark street will be afraid of any strange man in the immediate vicinity. He might be a saint, but from her perspective, any man could be dangerous.
I don’t fear a man just because I don’t know him. The data shows that about 2,400 women a year are murdered by men, and 76% of those killings are committed by men they already know. By comparison, more than 15,000 women die each year in car accidents. Statistically, women should be far more afraid of getting into a car than of encountering an unfamiliar man. Spreading alarmist fears about men sews division and fuels a fractured society.
When you're walking alone at night, in an underground garage, for example, you're not thinking about statistics. You're wondering if that guy behind you is going to attack you. You hurry to your car, slam the door and lock it. Don't tell me you don't.
When you say, “Alone at night in a dark garage… guy behind you,” you’re adding a lot of specific context to the original statement. In that situation, everyone should probably have their guard up. My advice: Avoid dark garages.
In case you’ve been a victim, I would never want to minimize your feelings or what you've experienced. But I think that viewing every man first as a potential predator overlooks their humanity and stigmatizes half the population.
It IS in specific contexts that any man can be seen as potentially a predator.
I don't mean that every man is a predator; what I mean is that IN CERTAIN CITCUMSTANCES, a woman alone is going to view ANY STRANGE MAN as potentially dangerous. The example I gave is one of those circumstances.
Listen. I don't mean to sound callous but about the men in the world having an issue and looking to Trump as their savior tough. It's time that women and men are both treated equally. Women do so much in a day. We're expected so much out of us and we're expected to stay beautiful. Youthful sexy and valid and I'm tired of it. The men in this world thinking Trump is their answer is absolutely ridiculous. He talks down about women all the time and has zero respect for them. He also has zero respect for anybody but himself and the billionaires in the world.
I think these are not men equal to debating you, with your obvious intellect and fiery disposition. Your idea of what a man is, sort of “in a state of nature,” before or without socialization, “men in the abstract,” is absurd.
Not to mention the way in which your analysis of what men ought to be is further undercut by intersectionality - poor men, men of color, native culture men, rich men, white men, urban men, rural men, suburban men, sexually unsure men, sexually experienced men, and so on and on and on.
Men are not a monolith. Nor are women, although I’m not qualified to say I speak for women.
Although I agree with a lot of this, I get tired of trying to define masculinity as if there's a definition for all men. The fact that young men are looking for an answer from someone else, is already a really bad start. Each person should have their own definition and try to own up to it. I think a father that is attentive, equal partner, and raising his kids to be successful, independent adults, is what I would aspire to be. To those that don't/won't have kids, supporting those less-advantaged than you, would be masculine. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter how other people view you if you meet your genuine guidelines. If you act the part, people will see the value.
Hi Brandon, I don’t want to go into the saga of my 80 years on this planet, I’ll try to sum up how I raised my two children, perhaps because of my own experiences.
At 35 I was divorced, this was in 1982. I had two small children and a high school education. Although my husband could well afford to pay what the court ordered, he did not. The courts did nothing and I learned the only one I would count on was myself. So at 35 I was living with my mother(thank God for her). I was working 4-12’s at a residential psychiatric facility and going to school full time. It took five years to get my degree. I qualified for Pell Grants, academic scholarships, and student loans, which I paid off. Thus, my son and daughter were raised to get an education so they could be independent.
Today would have been my son’s 54th birthday, he was killed by a drunk driver on his was home from work, he was 27. He was a kind and gentle man, and was secure in who he was. My daughter married at 26 and did not have her first child until she was 29, this was her choice. He husband is a great guy and is secure in his masculinity. He too was raised to get an education and count on himself. My daughter has been married 20 years, and as in any marriage they have had their struggles. She and her husband count on each other and are raising their three daughters, to be independent women. I feel like I have been blessed. Oh, I just finished paying off my Masters last year :).
Thanks for sharing, Phyllis. Your kids sound like great people and you sound like an excellent parent. Very sorry to hear about your late son. The opposite happened to me - lost my mom at around that age, and I still think about all the memories we will never share. I don't think it compares to losing a child, but I hope the opportunity to share his stories continues to bring you comfort as you continue to be a kick-ass grandma. Congratulations on your continued education and, I assume, loan free life!
Women can also teach such good stuff to boys and young men. Sometimes the man is just not so great at it. Though I had thought many were doing better at it.
For sure! Women can be great at it as well and have loads to offer. Some can be better than men and some can be worse than men. When it comes to defining masculinity, though, I think most of these young men are going to want that defined by someone they are convinced is masculine - and that is traditionally a male-oriented theme.
A lot of men actually need a definition “for all men.” Human capacities for strength of character being variable, each man cannot have his own definition and at the same time function with pride and self-assurance. The idea that each man is an island, entire of itself, is I think false. For many of us, self-assertion is a difficult, threatening, life-long struggle.
As the world stands, the men we’re talking about seek a definition of manhood - they find it in Republican posturing. You want to tell them, No, No, No: You must be a rugged individualist!
It’s not bad that men seek a pattern for manhood because many men need such a roadmap in order to find their way through life without despair.
So yes, I disagree with you at the same time I admire your Utopian idealism about manhood. It’s great sci-fi, very “Star Trek, The Final Generation, The End of History."
I appreciate the response, thanks! But didn't you just define what masculinity is for you and select others? I don't need a definition for all men, but I'm sure there are plenty that do. To me, it sounds as if they view "Republican posturing" as a roadmap to manhood. If that works for them, I wouldn't disagree with your statement. I still think it's unfortunate these men need to find an in-group that tells them how to behave, rather than defining it and then finding like-minded individuals that support that ideology. I prefer the individualism, myself, but I certainly don't think that needs to be a requirement.
Also, I know this can be unpopular, but I much prefer to be compared to Star Trek: TNG :P
Thanks for the answer. I don’t think I defined masculinity for anyone; I tried not to, and if I did, it wasn’t intended. I think some boys have seen the path set forth by Conservatives as a roadmap to manhood. I do not think it is an accurate map, or a healthy or productive one. I do, however, think that it is inferior to the “old man” rule book that existed prior to the revolution of the 1960s and following. For me personally, it was always easy to adapt the “new man” rules. I’m saying that is not the case for all persons. I’m saying the “new man” rules have been rejected by many men as falsified and debilitating. They are left with no alternative buy tRumpery. We ought to give them a new alternative.
Is it unfortunate that men need to find men like themselves to help them get established? I think the question is strange. Is the existence of college fraternities unfortunate? What about a circle of friends? What about professional organizations like the MLA? Or labor unions? Even the Elks Club (If you read David Brooks, that’s his idea, and it pains me to say he might have a small point). What about singing in a choir? Hanging out with fellow hobbyists? Volunteering with a group to feed the homeless? The Society of Friends? Church?
Human beings form such groups, and that fact isn’t of itself unfortunate, or fortunate. It’s an observed phenomenon that cuts across human life and history.
I don’t know why boys chose Conservative alternatives to the “new man” of 20th century's "equality for all" doctrine. I wish we had come up with a set of rules for the “new man” that was superior to what we got. Also, I wish we had taken early signs of rejection of the “new man” seriously.
Not everyone needs such rules, but DNA being what it is, many do.
If you look at the lives of those who have struggled with the meaning of manhood - William Faulkner springs to mind, as does Theodore Roosevelt, as does James Baldwin, as do so many exceptionally driven men, then you might suspect that the independent road is not for everyone. Society owes it to the lost men to give them a road map to a positive sense of self and a positive place within a pluralistic society.
Whew Adam that was a long article that enlarged on a post I had written to you earlier this week. I said that while myself, my daughter and my granddaughter had all convinced my 19 yo almost 20 yo grandson to vote for Harris I wasn’t sure if we could keep him away from the far right macho stuff. And it isn’t even macho as it used to be defined in my day. It’s what your article describes, a kind of male self pity, blame it on someone else, women, immigrants, whoever.
What has kept my grandson engaged and kind is a loving home life with both mom and dad providing a balance. Yes, grandson still lives at home post high school graduation but there’s a plan, crafted with the parents. He obtained a well paying job with “just” a high school diploma but because he had a good record of high school student council and sports engagement. He still plays sports with the town pick-up league. Parents have helped him set up a savings plan so he can move out in a year, possibly to an apartment share with some sports buddies. He had his heart broken post high school graduation so he’s leery of dating but not anti women. He has loving and strong grandmothers, mom and two sisters, he’s been brought up to respect women as co-equals. His two years younger brother is also pursuing his own future goals in the same environment. They’re quite different but both seem to be navigating this new male world in a healthy way.
Do I, as a grandma in my mid 70s worry about my grandsons? Yes of course I do. I worry about my two granddaughters too. I have read all of the literature, the articles, I’ve been in schools and seen the behaviors. I hate to sound old fashioned though but a lot can be accomplished by love, caring and above all communication, communication, communication. Meeting them at their levels. I am on their Instagram accounts, I send supportive notes, follow what they are interested in. As with the rest of the political and social sphere these days, we, the elders, cannot opt out. We know a whole lot, have seen a whole lot. We may not feel appreciated, we may feel tired, but we just can’t stop keeping our doors and hearts open because, while our children and grandchildren are the future, we are the ones who represent both the triumphs and the mistakes of the past. We are the ones they can learn from. (And of course I include grandfathers and fathers!!)
I never expressed myself on this issue before, largely because I didn’t want to tell my daughters and wife that I thought they were wrong; I didn’t want them thinking I was opposed to their choices. Today, I am no longer in that position. Everything has changed. They’er grown up girls, now, growing old, in fact. They’ve established lives and marriages and families. My wife and I are more honest than we ever were. But more important, the world has read your “New rules for men” and many have found it to be merely a text, and in need of revision.
It’s clear that long ago you adopted your position, and even though today your position is showing its age, its leakiness, and its shortfalls, you stick to it. You’ve “got a plan.” Good for you.
The facts are this: Men are not being churned out in the image of man you believed to be comprehensive when you set off on the women's crusade to capture the holy land of equality.
You’re almost there, or you’re already there, yet still you complain about the men who have not “seen the light” and become the ideal you dreamed up years ago. Could you be wrong? It’s a real question.
You may think yourself a liberal, but such an idealized “model” of men is the coinage of radical absolutism, not liberal willingness to seek and accept reform with its imperfections.
No woman is as women describe women; no man is as women describe men. And visa versa. You tore up the rule book for men and substituted your own text. But men were told to accept the new rules, so you could be “equal.” Many of them were and are unable to accept the new model as one which defines them. The alternative (tRump) is ugly, but you have prevented men from introducing anything that might combat it, insisting on your old “new” rules for men.
That men are finally rewriting the rules that define us, on our own, for ourselves is a positive step. It’s the only hope I see of turning off tRump’s spigot…of demystifying tRump for boys and men.
If any comic had mocked my wife in the same way, I would have felt justified in taking a swing at him, and I’m not Will Smith. Meaning, I have my own strengths and weaknesses. But I think any man has that right, if not that obligation, when a bigoted outsider attacks his family/wife, etc. Taking a swing at a cruel, bigoted, snarky bastard who mocks your loved ones should be spelled out in the Bill of Rights for Men.
Plus, if you saw it, it was a bitch slap.
Have you never been in a fight to hold up your reputation, even? I have. I lost, of course, because I don’t know jack about pugilism, but it was worth it to get knocked to the ground, because I knew I’d kept my self respect, even if I had failed to teach the snarky bastard a lesson. My willingness to be struck was my victory. His was hitting another wimpy kid.
I worked for GM. I watched how they off-shored our manufacturing to cheaper labor markets. The systemic view of losing the middle class and having a opportunity to move up based on working for the big three was smothered. It took years to create a global supply chain that left out auto workers out in the cold. The big three knew better but the put profits over people.
The big three were also pushed by the GOP!! I will NEVER FORGET BUSH talking about our auto workers “gold plated healthcare benefits”!! F- the GOP and their destruction of the American middle class!!!
Now these same Republicans bastards are STILL trying to KILL us by denying us our earned healthcare and stealing our EARNED social security!!
I agree! My parents were so proud of our home that I grew up in. In the 50s and 60s, a 3 bedroom ranch home was the American dream. It was absolutely not fancy in any way and the neighborhood consisted of the same model of house up and down the block. But we had everything we needed. This is now a broken dream for many people. The Middle Class is an endangered species. I feel bad for my kids who cannot afford the things we could in the 80s and 90s. They are stressed about money and providing for their children. Struggling to stay in the middle class when health care costs take a quarter of their combined incomes. I just don’t get the greed of the billionaires. It is inhumane to treat people this way.
Hmm, it’s always someone else’s fault isn’t it … try growing up as a gay man in rural SD — where the system IS rigged against you, and still with effort, focus and will you can still become whatever you want to be! My Sister IS smarter than I am AND deserved every opportunity her brain, diligence, education and efforts - including Motherhood — offered her. Maybe if the boer is successful to move us back” to this alleged glorious age, they will experience what those generation’s men did — being drafted to fight in horrifying foreign wars… understand the concepts, but … it’s still all about individual responsibility!
You seem to see a clear picture of the obvious problem and real solutions . If only you could consider a run for president. Surely there are like minded men and women you could start to gather around to support this idea. Men being understood by a leader who isn’t damaged would be promising.
Adam, this is a profound post that will undergo much discussion and scrutiny in coming days and weeks, and it should. Even if every point might not resonate with all readers, an enormous amount will. I am particularly struck by Professor Galloway's phrase of an "underclass" of young men out there, wandering America, "economically and emotionally stunted." Much to ponder, indeed.
I'm an old, white gay guy, who -- even though I did not fit the 'straight' mold of the times I was born and first grew up under -- worked hard in school, pursued avocations, had broad interests, achieved goals of higher education and then enjoyed success and recognition in my professional life. And I also did not grow up inside a silicon world where computer games, cell phones, anonymous chat rooms and other forms of mass distraction and lack of focus abounded. I am convinced that saved MANY of us who are older. Yes, we had TV, but it was not the same thing (I can't quite specify why, but I think others will agree).
When I see many young 'bro' types today, what strikes me is their immaturity, psychological weakness and lack of coping skills. As a former teacher from years ago, I remember even then being struck by my high school students' fear of loneliness, amplified by social media that never allows them to be alone -- or to "fail." I can remember feeling loneliness myself, but it just did not feel like a weapon the way so many young people seem to feel it today. They literally cannot stand to be 'unplugged' from anything, even for a moment.
The young men in particular seem exactly the type demagogues have always preyed upon, just as strongly as child molesters prey upon children. Hitler's Brownshirts came first from from the "lumpenproletariat" class of under-achievers, those most terrified of the new democracy, those most unable to cope with the socio-economic and political changes of the era, those waiting in the wings for a strongman to give them the space to 'get back' at others to compensate for their own weaknesses.
Thank you for making all of us think very hard about this. In light of yet another murder of innocents inside a Church, it is important just how hard we do think about what makes some young men (for this murderer was once a young man) simply snap like that.
That was a great reply. Your comment about “we had TV” has me thinking. A lot of my views and dreams were influenced by 1960s and 1970s TV series, for good but also for ill. It was the same thing, at least for women, as the rise of the romance novel. Instead of reading good literature, I got sidetracked by books that spoke about men in really toxic ways—dominating saviors comes to mind. Found out to my cost that THAT was a hoax.
You say that TV wasn’t the same thing as social media and you’re right. TV was one way, we received the transmission and then we had to process what we saw on our own. Sure, we might talk with our friends the next day about what we saw, if they had seen it, but it was usually in an arm’s length context. And there were still many in our generation who could remind us that what we saw on TV wasn’t reality, they were other people, complete strangers, yea ACTORS, pretending to live lives. I think many nowadays think social media IS reality. Well, heck, here we are two strangers talking as if we’re sitting together in Starbucks, as if we understand what’s driven each other to post? Hmmm.
Maybe the difference really is primarily age-related. Growing up in a non-virtual world helps you discern what's real and what's not. And we READ. Increasingly, they don't. Even in the virtual world, I don't listen to podcasts (perhaps once in a blue moon), don't play weird games involving zombies or aliens, just read articles and sometimes comment on them. I'm convinced we're using different neurons in the process.
Oh I listen to podcasts while walking the dog or while driving. There are some excellent podcasts on the subjects I like such as spirituality and history. The political ones are hit or miss for me but I am not tied to them, I still know where the off or fast forward buttons are :) I also listen to audiobooks. But yeah I read. A lot.
When the 70s swung around, my female friends and I were so glad that someone started talking about males and females being friends. Being objectified repeatedly was constantly a struggle for me as a young girl. I didn't understand why guys were not getting the message. I quit 2 jobs due to actual physical harassment by bosses. I learned to be clear at the beginning of relationships what my stake in it was. I quickly left relationships with any hint of toxicity (male OR female!). Unfortunately, now we deal with a whole WH and their fellow politicians (generally, not all of them) who purport toxic Christian Nationalism (not Christian by the way). I'm guessing they would stand on the side of the Pharisees who targeted Jesus who supported at least one prostitute, women, foreigners, and the excluded ill (lepers). Fortunately, there are a whole lot of men out there who are not toxic and who truly get it. Thank you, real men!
Blaming others like this administration does helps to add to the problem. Everyone needs to take accountability for their actions. No one can blame someone else for what they fail to do. Everyone needs to take the bull by the horn and invest in what is right for them. We need to support each other and quit tearing each other down. We need a government that will invest in our future for all people, not just a few. We need to teach love, not hate. We need to know that we are all worthwhile.
“Schools need to stop ignoring isolated or angry boys who fail academically and cause trouble socially.” Most schools don’t. As a veteran elementary school teacher of 28 years (now retired), I can assure you that teachers are not ignoring angry boys. At the elementary level, we nurture, redirect, and support all of our students. What people fail to realize is that children come to school with the values and observations they learn at home.
It’s a SOCIETAL problem.
Of course, schools can help with the problems boys face, but the expectations begin at home.
As for “ignoring” angry boys, sometimes steps have to be taken to remove any angry child temporarily from a classroom when the learning of 25 other kids is being affected, but they aren’t being ignored.
I loved everything you wrote (except Will Smith??) but PLEASE stop perpetuating the myth that schools are a) part of the problem and
b) should be the solution to every societal ill in America.
At some point, society as a whole has to take responsibility. PARENTS have to take responsibility for what they teach and model for their children.
Just speaking to my own experience here. It seems that many boys are now receiving better mental healthcare if the parents are able to advocate for them. ADHD is sometimes the culprit that leads to anger in boys. I don’t know as much about girls . But my grandson is receiving special aid and it is helping. I wonder how many young men and girls still go undiagnosed. And ADHD is more complicated than a lot of people know. Mental health is definitely a crisis for kids and adults now. So many stressors!
I have dealt with multiple men who have dropped out of school. One in particular was so disruptive that he was shuttled to 2 elementary schools during the day and finished the day in the principal’s office. Yet, he still fondly remembers a certain teacher who took an interest in him and would take him to get his hair cut once in awhile. Little things like that. He and several others told me how much school lunches meant to them because there wasn’t any food at home. The very disruptive kid said he and his siblings would go to school so they could get food!! (Now the government is taking away school lunches!!)
All of the people (men) I dealt with were from homes with violent men in the family. Usually, generational alcoholism. In addition, most of these people were either ADHD or obviously, PTSD as a result of the family violence they witnessed or experienced.
The local police kept an eye on my place with my wholehearted blessing.
Our schools need funding and programs to help with children who are neurodiverse and come from violence prone homes. The particularly disruptive young man had been hit in the head repeatedly. He was still relatively intelligent but who knows what that did to his brain wiring. This is part of our school to prison pipeline.
The current administration is not only ignoring the problem but it seems to be determined to “kill off” these low income people.
Like the comment I made about Will Smith, they were raised with violence. We have flooded our country with guns.
The Supreme Court has acted irresponsibly by allowing bump stocks etc. Guess who is picking them up, because they look “badass”!!!
Recognize what we are facing. These are US citizens. They have lots of guns. They have few avenues for jobs, in part because they are “anti-social”.
They may be able-bodied, but they keep losing jobs. Duh
In fact, “normal” friends used to suggest that they apply for “disability” because they could qualify mentally. But now that won’t work.
SNAP is being pulled. Medicaid is being pulled. Suicide lines are being defunded. But they have guns and they have the propaganda machine telling them that everything is unfair.
The police are trained to deal with them. They know how to calm them down - without a war.
Fund the cops and specialized education - get combat ready troops away from civilian populations.
Be smart about what is happening out here.
And get the F...king lawyer out of the Health and Human Services Position - he’s practicing medicine without a license.
Thanks for such a thorough view. If there is a silver lining in this awful mess we are in it is making us look harder at the things that led us here and addressing them. There are many. The challenges men face , young men in particular, is one. Seems it's one to focus on. Bottom line is people need dignity to feel good about themselves and enjoy being part of society.
Adam, I agree with your ending statement that a nation that loses its men, fails. All adults, men and women alike, feeling hopeful about their lives and their future, are necessary to support a thriving society. It’s the balance that is so important. Neither should feel subservient to the other nor be afforded less of everything this country has to offer. I also would add your name to your list of men who show real strength and integrity. You offer some very practical ideas that could be implemented to begin to address these issues. I think the most pivotal is the education aspect. However, that would probably require funding which in this present administration that is highly unlikely. Instead, they’re spending our taxpayer dollars on hiring an additional 10,000 ICE agents, many of whom will be those broken men you speak of. So, how’s that going to work out? I see disaster on the horizon.
If I didn’t know better, this piece sounds a little like a plank in your platform for future “throwing your hat in the ring”. I urge you to consider where you can be most effective for your family and this country. We desperately need you in office somewhere. Keep speaking truth, we’re listening.
I had exactly the same thought! And I'd certainly be thrilled to see it!
This is such a heartbreaking picture of what's happening-- not just to young men-- in this economy of endless greed. Perhaps women's traditional support groups make it easier to handle the hopelessness. We need to build a better world for everyone out of the ashes of this administration.
I agree wholeheartedly with your first paragraph!
As for your second paragraph...Adam is a grown man and he will do what's best for him and his family. I hope people will not get on a band wagon and shout that he NEEDS to do this or that! I love his writing as it is.
I don’t think I was shouting that he “needs to do this or that” as you wrote in your comment. I was merely encouraging him to think about how he can continue to serve, while putting his and his family’s needs first. I have been encouraging him to do this for over two years as well as have many others. Don’t know why you felt the need to defend him. I know he is a grown man.
Sorry, didn't mean to come across as shouting...probably shouldn't have posted at all as I hadn't had coffee...
It’s all good Vivian. I just couldn’t quite get where you were coming from and felt I needed to clarify my thoughts. I get it about the coffee. My brain is mush until my first cup too. Have a good day.
Trump has been the worst role model for young men and young people in general. And he has pulled many men in midlife crisis to the wrong direction.
“Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.”
(— Margaret Atwood)
A lot of wisdom in that. Recalling Simone de Beauvoir -- there are two types of persons in existence -- men and human beings. And when women start behaving like human beings, they're always accused of just wanting to be men.
Probably not the exact quote but something close to it.
I love Atwood and am a solid feminist, but generalized statements like this are unfair and divisive. My sons are not those men. They are loving, supportive partners to the strong women in their lives.
That does not matter. Any woman walking alone on a dark street will be afraid of any strange man in the immediate vicinity. He might be a saint, but from her perspective, any man could be dangerous.
I don’t fear a man just because I don’t know him. The data shows that about 2,400 women a year are murdered by men, and 76% of those killings are committed by men they already know. By comparison, more than 15,000 women die each year in car accidents. Statistically, women should be far more afraid of getting into a car than of encountering an unfamiliar man. Spreading alarmist fears about men sews division and fuels a fractured society.
When you're walking alone at night, in an underground garage, for example, you're not thinking about statistics. You're wondering if that guy behind you is going to attack you. You hurry to your car, slam the door and lock it. Don't tell me you don't.
When you say, “Alone at night in a dark garage… guy behind you,” you’re adding a lot of specific context to the original statement. In that situation, everyone should probably have their guard up. My advice: Avoid dark garages.
In case you’ve been a victim, I would never want to minimize your feelings or what you've experienced. But I think that viewing every man first as a potential predator overlooks their humanity and stigmatizes half the population.
You are misunderstanding me.
It IS in specific contexts that any man can be seen as potentially a predator.
I don't mean that every man is a predator; what I mean is that IN CERTAIN CITCUMSTANCES, a woman alone is going to view ANY STRANGE MAN as potentially dangerous. The example I gave is one of those circumstances.
This. 100%
💯
Listen. I don't mean to sound callous but about the men in the world having an issue and looking to Trump as their savior tough. It's time that women and men are both treated equally. Women do so much in a day. We're expected so much out of us and we're expected to stay beautiful. Youthful sexy and valid and I'm tired of it. The men in this world thinking Trump is their answer is absolutely ridiculous. He talks down about women all the time and has zero respect for them. He also has zero respect for anybody but himself and the billionaires in the world.
I think these are not men equal to debating you, with your obvious intellect and fiery disposition. Your idea of what a man is, sort of “in a state of nature,” before or without socialization, “men in the abstract,” is absurd.
Not to mention the way in which your analysis of what men ought to be is further undercut by intersectionality - poor men, men of color, native culture men, rich men, white men, urban men, rural men, suburban men, sexually unsure men, sexually experienced men, and so on and on and on.
Men are not a monolith. Nor are women, although I’m not qualified to say I speak for women.
Although I agree with a lot of this, I get tired of trying to define masculinity as if there's a definition for all men. The fact that young men are looking for an answer from someone else, is already a really bad start. Each person should have their own definition and try to own up to it. I think a father that is attentive, equal partner, and raising his kids to be successful, independent adults, is what I would aspire to be. To those that don't/won't have kids, supporting those less-advantaged than you, would be masculine. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter how other people view you if you meet your genuine guidelines. If you act the part, people will see the value.
Hi Brandon, I don’t want to go into the saga of my 80 years on this planet, I’ll try to sum up how I raised my two children, perhaps because of my own experiences.
At 35 I was divorced, this was in 1982. I had two small children and a high school education. Although my husband could well afford to pay what the court ordered, he did not. The courts did nothing and I learned the only one I would count on was myself. So at 35 I was living with my mother(thank God for her). I was working 4-12’s at a residential psychiatric facility and going to school full time. It took five years to get my degree. I qualified for Pell Grants, academic scholarships, and student loans, which I paid off. Thus, my son and daughter were raised to get an education so they could be independent.
Today would have been my son’s 54th birthday, he was killed by a drunk driver on his was home from work, he was 27. He was a kind and gentle man, and was secure in who he was. My daughter married at 26 and did not have her first child until she was 29, this was her choice. He husband is a great guy and is secure in his masculinity. He too was raised to get an education and count on himself. My daughter has been married 20 years, and as in any marriage they have had their struggles. She and her husband count on each other and are raising their three daughters, to be independent women. I feel like I have been blessed. Oh, I just finished paying off my Masters last year :).
Thanks for sharing, Phyllis. Your kids sound like great people and you sound like an excellent parent. Very sorry to hear about your late son. The opposite happened to me - lost my mom at around that age, and I still think about all the memories we will never share. I don't think it compares to losing a child, but I hope the opportunity to share his stories continues to bring you comfort as you continue to be a kick-ass grandma. Congratulations on your continued education and, I assume, loan free life!
Women can also teach such good stuff to boys and young men. Sometimes the man is just not so great at it. Though I had thought many were doing better at it.
For sure! Women can be great at it as well and have loads to offer. Some can be better than men and some can be worse than men. When it comes to defining masculinity, though, I think most of these young men are going to want that defined by someone they are convinced is masculine - and that is traditionally a male-oriented theme.
A lot of men actually need a definition “for all men.” Human capacities for strength of character being variable, each man cannot have his own definition and at the same time function with pride and self-assurance. The idea that each man is an island, entire of itself, is I think false. For many of us, self-assertion is a difficult, threatening, life-long struggle.
As the world stands, the men we’re talking about seek a definition of manhood - they find it in Republican posturing. You want to tell them, No, No, No: You must be a rugged individualist!
It’s not bad that men seek a pattern for manhood because many men need such a roadmap in order to find their way through life without despair.
So yes, I disagree with you at the same time I admire your Utopian idealism about manhood. It’s great sci-fi, very “Star Trek, The Final Generation, The End of History."
I appreciate the response, thanks! But didn't you just define what masculinity is for you and select others? I don't need a definition for all men, but I'm sure there are plenty that do. To me, it sounds as if they view "Republican posturing" as a roadmap to manhood. If that works for them, I wouldn't disagree with your statement. I still think it's unfortunate these men need to find an in-group that tells them how to behave, rather than defining it and then finding like-minded individuals that support that ideology. I prefer the individualism, myself, but I certainly don't think that needs to be a requirement.
Also, I know this can be unpopular, but I much prefer to be compared to Star Trek: TNG :P
Thanks for the answer. I don’t think I defined masculinity for anyone; I tried not to, and if I did, it wasn’t intended. I think some boys have seen the path set forth by Conservatives as a roadmap to manhood. I do not think it is an accurate map, or a healthy or productive one. I do, however, think that it is inferior to the “old man” rule book that existed prior to the revolution of the 1960s and following. For me personally, it was always easy to adapt the “new man” rules. I’m saying that is not the case for all persons. I’m saying the “new man” rules have been rejected by many men as falsified and debilitating. They are left with no alternative buy tRumpery. We ought to give them a new alternative.
Is it unfortunate that men need to find men like themselves to help them get established? I think the question is strange. Is the existence of college fraternities unfortunate? What about a circle of friends? What about professional organizations like the MLA? Or labor unions? Even the Elks Club (If you read David Brooks, that’s his idea, and it pains me to say he might have a small point). What about singing in a choir? Hanging out with fellow hobbyists? Volunteering with a group to feed the homeless? The Society of Friends? Church?
Human beings form such groups, and that fact isn’t of itself unfortunate, or fortunate. It’s an observed phenomenon that cuts across human life and history.
I don’t know why boys chose Conservative alternatives to the “new man” of 20th century's "equality for all" doctrine. I wish we had come up with a set of rules for the “new man” that was superior to what we got. Also, I wish we had taken early signs of rejection of the “new man” seriously.
Not everyone needs such rules, but DNA being what it is, many do.
If you look at the lives of those who have struggled with the meaning of manhood - William Faulkner springs to mind, as does Theodore Roosevelt, as does James Baldwin, as do so many exceptionally driven men, then you might suspect that the independent road is not for everyone. Society owes it to the lost men to give them a road map to a positive sense of self and a positive place within a pluralistic society.
Whew Adam that was a long article that enlarged on a post I had written to you earlier this week. I said that while myself, my daughter and my granddaughter had all convinced my 19 yo almost 20 yo grandson to vote for Harris I wasn’t sure if we could keep him away from the far right macho stuff. And it isn’t even macho as it used to be defined in my day. It’s what your article describes, a kind of male self pity, blame it on someone else, women, immigrants, whoever.
What has kept my grandson engaged and kind is a loving home life with both mom and dad providing a balance. Yes, grandson still lives at home post high school graduation but there’s a plan, crafted with the parents. He obtained a well paying job with “just” a high school diploma but because he had a good record of high school student council and sports engagement. He still plays sports with the town pick-up league. Parents have helped him set up a savings plan so he can move out in a year, possibly to an apartment share with some sports buddies. He had his heart broken post high school graduation so he’s leery of dating but not anti women. He has loving and strong grandmothers, mom and two sisters, he’s been brought up to respect women as co-equals. His two years younger brother is also pursuing his own future goals in the same environment. They’re quite different but both seem to be navigating this new male world in a healthy way.
Do I, as a grandma in my mid 70s worry about my grandsons? Yes of course I do. I worry about my two granddaughters too. I have read all of the literature, the articles, I’ve been in schools and seen the behaviors. I hate to sound old fashioned though but a lot can be accomplished by love, caring and above all communication, communication, communication. Meeting them at their levels. I am on their Instagram accounts, I send supportive notes, follow what they are interested in. As with the rest of the political and social sphere these days, we, the elders, cannot opt out. We know a whole lot, have seen a whole lot. We may not feel appreciated, we may feel tired, but we just can’t stop keeping our doors and hearts open because, while our children and grandchildren are the future, we are the ones who represent both the triumphs and the mistakes of the past. We are the ones they can learn from. (And of course I include grandfathers and fathers!!)
I never expressed myself on this issue before, largely because I didn’t want to tell my daughters and wife that I thought they were wrong; I didn’t want them thinking I was opposed to their choices. Today, I am no longer in that position. Everything has changed. They’er grown up girls, now, growing old, in fact. They’ve established lives and marriages and families. My wife and I are more honest than we ever were. But more important, the world has read your “New rules for men” and many have found it to be merely a text, and in need of revision.
It’s clear that long ago you adopted your position, and even though today your position is showing its age, its leakiness, and its shortfalls, you stick to it. You’ve “got a plan.” Good for you.
The facts are this: Men are not being churned out in the image of man you believed to be comprehensive when you set off on the women's crusade to capture the holy land of equality.
You’re almost there, or you’re already there, yet still you complain about the men who have not “seen the light” and become the ideal you dreamed up years ago. Could you be wrong? It’s a real question.
You may think yourself a liberal, but such an idealized “model” of men is the coinage of radical absolutism, not liberal willingness to seek and accept reform with its imperfections.
No woman is as women describe women; no man is as women describe men. And visa versa. You tore up the rule book for men and substituted your own text. But men were told to accept the new rules, so you could be “equal.” Many of them were and are unable to accept the new model as one which defines them. The alternative (tRump) is ugly, but you have prevented men from introducing anything that might combat it, insisting on your old “new” rules for men.
That men are finally rewriting the rules that define us, on our own, for ourselves is a positive step. It’s the only hope I see of turning off tRump’s spigot…of demystifying tRump for boys and men.
I agree ... Wait a minute ... Will Smith?
This! I was thinking WTH????
I questioned that one, too.
If any comic had mocked my wife in the same way, I would have felt justified in taking a swing at him, and I’m not Will Smith. Meaning, I have my own strengths and weaknesses. But I think any man has that right, if not that obligation, when a bigoted outsider attacks his family/wife, etc. Taking a swing at a cruel, bigoted, snarky bastard who mocks your loved ones should be spelled out in the Bill of Rights for Men.
Plus, if you saw it, it was a bitch slap.
Have you never been in a fight to hold up your reputation, even? I have. I lost, of course, because I don’t know jack about pugilism, but it was worth it to get knocked to the ground, because I knew I’d kept my self respect, even if I had failed to teach the snarky bastard a lesson. My willingness to be struck was my victory. His was hitting another wimpy kid.
Agreed - make fun of her alopecia in front of an international audience - We laughed when Will Smith slapped him.
Everyone makes mistakes and deserves grace.
I worked for GM. I watched how they off-shored our manufacturing to cheaper labor markets. The systemic view of losing the middle class and having a opportunity to move up based on working for the big three was smothered. It took years to create a global supply chain that left out auto workers out in the cold. The big three knew better but the put profits over people.
The big three were also pushed by the GOP!! I will NEVER FORGET BUSH talking about our auto workers “gold plated healthcare benefits”!! F- the GOP and their destruction of the American middle class!!!
Now these same Republicans bastards are STILL trying to KILL us by denying us our earned healthcare and stealing our EARNED social security!!
I agree! My parents were so proud of our home that I grew up in. In the 50s and 60s, a 3 bedroom ranch home was the American dream. It was absolutely not fancy in any way and the neighborhood consisted of the same model of house up and down the block. But we had everything we needed. This is now a broken dream for many people. The Middle Class is an endangered species. I feel bad for my kids who cannot afford the things we could in the 80s and 90s. They are stressed about money and providing for their children. Struggling to stay in the middle class when health care costs take a quarter of their combined incomes. I just don’t get the greed of the billionaires. It is inhumane to treat people this way.
Hmm, it’s always someone else’s fault isn’t it … try growing up as a gay man in rural SD — where the system IS rigged against you, and still with effort, focus and will you can still become whatever you want to be! My Sister IS smarter than I am AND deserved every opportunity her brain, diligence, education and efforts - including Motherhood — offered her. Maybe if the boer is successful to move us back” to this alleged glorious age, they will experience what those generation’s men did — being drafted to fight in horrifying foreign wars… understand the concepts, but … it’s still all about individual responsibility!
You seem to see a clear picture of the obvious problem and real solutions . If only you could consider a run for president. Surely there are like minded men and women you could start to gather around to support this idea. Men being understood by a leader who isn’t damaged would be promising.
Totally agree, Theresa. An important point you made, “Men being understood by a leader…” is spot on.
Adam, this is a profound post that will undergo much discussion and scrutiny in coming days and weeks, and it should. Even if every point might not resonate with all readers, an enormous amount will. I am particularly struck by Professor Galloway's phrase of an "underclass" of young men out there, wandering America, "economically and emotionally stunted." Much to ponder, indeed.
I'm an old, white gay guy, who -- even though I did not fit the 'straight' mold of the times I was born and first grew up under -- worked hard in school, pursued avocations, had broad interests, achieved goals of higher education and then enjoyed success and recognition in my professional life. And I also did not grow up inside a silicon world where computer games, cell phones, anonymous chat rooms and other forms of mass distraction and lack of focus abounded. I am convinced that saved MANY of us who are older. Yes, we had TV, but it was not the same thing (I can't quite specify why, but I think others will agree).
When I see many young 'bro' types today, what strikes me is their immaturity, psychological weakness and lack of coping skills. As a former teacher from years ago, I remember even then being struck by my high school students' fear of loneliness, amplified by social media that never allows them to be alone -- or to "fail." I can remember feeling loneliness myself, but it just did not feel like a weapon the way so many young people seem to feel it today. They literally cannot stand to be 'unplugged' from anything, even for a moment.
The young men in particular seem exactly the type demagogues have always preyed upon, just as strongly as child molesters prey upon children. Hitler's Brownshirts came first from from the "lumpenproletariat" class of under-achievers, those most terrified of the new democracy, those most unable to cope with the socio-economic and political changes of the era, those waiting in the wings for a strongman to give them the space to 'get back' at others to compensate for their own weaknesses.
Thank you for making all of us think very hard about this. In light of yet another murder of innocents inside a Church, it is important just how hard we do think about what makes some young men (for this murderer was once a young man) simply snap like that.
That was a great reply. Your comment about “we had TV” has me thinking. A lot of my views and dreams were influenced by 1960s and 1970s TV series, for good but also for ill. It was the same thing, at least for women, as the rise of the romance novel. Instead of reading good literature, I got sidetracked by books that spoke about men in really toxic ways—dominating saviors comes to mind. Found out to my cost that THAT was a hoax.
You say that TV wasn’t the same thing as social media and you’re right. TV was one way, we received the transmission and then we had to process what we saw on our own. Sure, we might talk with our friends the next day about what we saw, if they had seen it, but it was usually in an arm’s length context. And there were still many in our generation who could remind us that what we saw on TV wasn’t reality, they were other people, complete strangers, yea ACTORS, pretending to live lives. I think many nowadays think social media IS reality. Well, heck, here we are two strangers talking as if we’re sitting together in Starbucks, as if we understand what’s driven each other to post? Hmmm.
Maybe the difference really is primarily age-related. Growing up in a non-virtual world helps you discern what's real and what's not. And we READ. Increasingly, they don't. Even in the virtual world, I don't listen to podcasts (perhaps once in a blue moon), don't play weird games involving zombies or aliens, just read articles and sometimes comment on them. I'm convinced we're using different neurons in the process.
Oh I listen to podcasts while walking the dog or while driving. There are some excellent podcasts on the subjects I like such as spirituality and history. The political ones are hit or miss for me but I am not tied to them, I still know where the off or fast forward buttons are :) I also listen to audiobooks. But yeah I read. A lot.
When the 70s swung around, my female friends and I were so glad that someone started talking about males and females being friends. Being objectified repeatedly was constantly a struggle for me as a young girl. I didn't understand why guys were not getting the message. I quit 2 jobs due to actual physical harassment by bosses. I learned to be clear at the beginning of relationships what my stake in it was. I quickly left relationships with any hint of toxicity (male OR female!). Unfortunately, now we deal with a whole WH and their fellow politicians (generally, not all of them) who purport toxic Christian Nationalism (not Christian by the way). I'm guessing they would stand on the side of the Pharisees who targeted Jesus who supported at least one prostitute, women, foreigners, and the excluded ill (lepers). Fortunately, there are a whole lot of men out there who are not toxic and who truly get it. Thank you, real men!
99.9% Agree. Will Smith? Nope!
Thank you Adam. This was an excellent article and offered some interesting insights about how to tackle this issue. I’m so grateful for your work!
Blaming others like this administration does helps to add to the problem. Everyone needs to take accountability for their actions. No one can blame someone else for what they fail to do. Everyone needs to take the bull by the horn and invest in what is right for them. We need to support each other and quit tearing each other down. We need a government that will invest in our future for all people, not just a few. We need to teach love, not hate. We need to know that we are all worthwhile.
“Schools need to stop ignoring isolated or angry boys who fail academically and cause trouble socially.” Most schools don’t. As a veteran elementary school teacher of 28 years (now retired), I can assure you that teachers are not ignoring angry boys. At the elementary level, we nurture, redirect, and support all of our students. What people fail to realize is that children come to school with the values and observations they learn at home.
It’s a SOCIETAL problem.
Of course, schools can help with the problems boys face, but the expectations begin at home.
As for “ignoring” angry boys, sometimes steps have to be taken to remove any angry child temporarily from a classroom when the learning of 25 other kids is being affected, but they aren’t being ignored.
I loved everything you wrote (except Will Smith??) but PLEASE stop perpetuating the myth that schools are a) part of the problem and
b) should be the solution to every societal ill in America.
At some point, society as a whole has to take responsibility. PARENTS have to take responsibility for what they teach and model for their children.
Just speaking to my own experience here. It seems that many boys are now receiving better mental healthcare if the parents are able to advocate for them. ADHD is sometimes the culprit that leads to anger in boys. I don’t know as much about girls . But my grandson is receiving special aid and it is helping. I wonder how many young men and girls still go undiagnosed. And ADHD is more complicated than a lot of people know. Mental health is definitely a crisis for kids and adults now. So many stressors!
I have dealt with multiple men who have dropped out of school. One in particular was so disruptive that he was shuttled to 2 elementary schools during the day and finished the day in the principal’s office. Yet, he still fondly remembers a certain teacher who took an interest in him and would take him to get his hair cut once in awhile. Little things like that. He and several others told me how much school lunches meant to them because there wasn’t any food at home. The very disruptive kid said he and his siblings would go to school so they could get food!! (Now the government is taking away school lunches!!)
All of the people (men) I dealt with were from homes with violent men in the family. Usually, generational alcoholism. In addition, most of these people were either ADHD or obviously, PTSD as a result of the family violence they witnessed or experienced.
The local police kept an eye on my place with my wholehearted blessing.
Our schools need funding and programs to help with children who are neurodiverse and come from violence prone homes. The particularly disruptive young man had been hit in the head repeatedly. He was still relatively intelligent but who knows what that did to his brain wiring. This is part of our school to prison pipeline.
The current administration is not only ignoring the problem but it seems to be determined to “kill off” these low income people.
Like the comment I made about Will Smith, they were raised with violence. We have flooded our country with guns.
The Supreme Court has acted irresponsibly by allowing bump stocks etc. Guess who is picking them up, because they look “badass”!!!
Recognize what we are facing. These are US citizens. They have lots of guns. They have few avenues for jobs, in part because they are “anti-social”.
They may be able-bodied, but they keep losing jobs. Duh
In fact, “normal” friends used to suggest that they apply for “disability” because they could qualify mentally. But now that won’t work.
SNAP is being pulled. Medicaid is being pulled. Suicide lines are being defunded. But they have guns and they have the propaganda machine telling them that everything is unfair.
The police are trained to deal with them. They know how to calm them down - without a war.
Fund the cops and specialized education - get combat ready troops away from civilian populations.
Be smart about what is happening out here.
And get the F...king lawyer out of the Health and Human Services Position - he’s practicing medicine without a license.
Thanks for such a thorough view. If there is a silver lining in this awful mess we are in it is making us look harder at the things that led us here and addressing them. There are many. The challenges men face , young men in particular, is one. Seems it's one to focus on. Bottom line is people need dignity to feel good about themselves and enjoy being part of society.