Are boys 'broken'? Another mass shooting renews debate on toxic masculinity

[LauraTXNM]

Actually I have noticed just the opposite about what is happening to boys and men too. When I was in my late teens and was injured I was told by a nurse to "stop being a man about it", with my son and now my grandson I see teachers and others guilt them for not crying or being over emotional, they are in effect saying don't be a male. I have no problem with girls being tomboys, my daughter could with the best of them but she knew she was a girl and was and is capable of being very feminine. Now they punish boys if they God forbid behave like boys rough housing, competing, keeping score or sin of all sins take interest in guns or the military.

That's interesting. I think it is possible for teachers et al to go "too far" in letting boys know it's okay to cry if they're hurt, let people know when they're sad, etc.

[LauraTXNM]

With proof that  you are correct current conservative superstar Prof. Jordan Peterson likes to relate the situation in Scandinavia. Most Scandinavian countries were the world leaders in eliminating laws and customs that supposedly held back women from attaining the positions and jobs  of what were considered mostly male.
So what happened after the Scandinavian countries equalized just about everything and both sexes were free to choose whatever occupation they wanted? What happened was the preferences for certain jobs became even more pronounced.
Men still mostly preferred what were considered male occupations and women still chose professions that were mostly thought to be for females.
Scandinavia proved that the sexes are wired differently, and no matter how hard people try to make the outcomes the same, they will never be the same because of hard-wired differences between the sexes.
Left to their own devices, without being forced by law or society, males and females do different things.
It's just very difficult for radical feminists to accept that fact.

All of this makes perfect sense.  It is simply important for individuals to be able to make their own choices.  (I do NOT mean that physical strengths and limitations shouldn't be part of the calculation -- 4'11" me is not going to be a heavyweight boxer or firefighter.)

[roamer_1]

In the same manner, I believe that boys should be instructed not to use their fists to solve problems, regardless of their "feelings," i.e. nature.

You will regret that idea when the time comes for men to rise up to defend. Having been indoctrinated to believe that fighting is bad, they will have no inclination, and certainly no ability.

[LauraTXNM]

You will regret that idea when the time comes for men to rise up to defend. Having been indoctrinated to believe that fighting is bad, they will have no inclination, and certainly no ability.

Well, I think all kids should learn how to defend themselves, with words or if necessary physically.  But we did not make a point of telling our son, "Don't hit girls." We taught him not to hit -anyone- unless he was defending himself or someone else.  Diplomacy first; war at last.

[truth_seeker]

Well, I think all kids should learn how to defend themselves, with words or if necessary physically.  But we did not make a point of telling our son, "Don't hit girls." We taught him not to hit -anyone- unless he was defending himself or someone else.  Diplomacy first; war at last.

Don't hit girls. Yes.
Don't hit anybody. No. That is a ridiculous naïve idealistic idea in a REAL world among male humans.

[musiclady]

You will regret that idea when the time comes for men to rise up to defend. Having been indoctrinated to believe that fighting is bad, they will have no inclination, and certainly no ability.

Do you think that I regret that our son, who was taught not to fight indiscriminately, chose to join the military at the age of 17, and served two tours in Iraq, being awarded a Bronze Star?

Your idea that boys have to be encouraged to fight each other to prove they're brave is pure bunk.  My son has more courage in his pinkie than most macho men have in their entire bodies.

Maybe you should read the words of Jesus instead of relying on your traditional cultural feelings, and stop telling people what they will "regret" after having raised four strong, intelligent, independent, caring, polite and decent children, two male and two female.

You don't know what you're talking about.

[musiclady]

That's interesting. I think it is possible for teachers et al to go "too far" in letting boys know it's okay to cry if they're hurt, let people know when they're sad, etc.

What teachers are doing if they tell boys they MUST cry is the same as telling them they must never cry.

They are not allowing boys to be who they are.  Some cry.  Some don't.

It's not feminine to cry.  It's not masculine to cry.   Why is there a need (clearly on BOTH sides) to put boys and girls in boxes whether they fit or not?

Actually, I have a thought about that.  It takes more intellect and more work to deal with people as individuals, and not put them in little slots marked boy or girl.   Just as legalism is the easier route than making good ethical choices based on theology and morality,  forcing all people to fit in a simple-minded role is easier than the work it takes to treat them as individual human beings.

Stereotypical gender roles are for the lazy.

[roamer_1]

Well, I think all kids should learn how to defend themselves, with words or if necessary physically.  But we did not make a point of telling our son, "Don't hit girls." We taught him not to hit -anyone- unless he was defending himself or someone else.  Diplomacy first; war at last.

I largely agree with what you said.
But defense falls almost entirely upon the man.
It's fine to pontificate in hallowed halls and all, but it is true without a doubt that a woman will be safer hanging onto the arm of a man, and the bigger and badder the man, the more that applies... If for no other reason than the bare fact that his presence discourages the opportunist inclinations of criminals (almost always men themselves). The risk v reward ratio plummets.

So it is that men are encouraged to fight. So it is that women instinctively look for protective ability in a man. It's all instinctive.  And beyond all the feminist  rhetoric, instinct remains, even yet. And yes, the sexes are profoundly different.

Maybe it's the cowboy way that has so effected me. I was raised up not to hit girls, to help girls as the weaker sex, to treat men squarely,  and to rise to defend those that can't defend themselves (which invariably and primarily includes women).

And that big Bailey hat, big silver buckle, and shitkickers turns me into a walking billboard for women. It's been that way all my life.  Whenever a woman has need, she comes arunnin to find a big, strong, redneck boy. Whether to tote something heavy, or get directions, or get her car fixed, or stand directly in the way of whatever is scaring her, she knows that boy will do. Many's the time I have stood in the way of it for a woman... A woman I don't even know.

The conversation on this page and in this forum generally since the Moore debacle makes me regret that profoundly...

[roamer_1]

Don't hit girls. Yes.
Don't hit anybody. No. That is a ridiculous naïve idealistic idea in a REAL world among male humans.

EXACTLY true.

[roamer_1]

You don't know what you're talking about.

The hell I don't.

[musiclady]

The hell I don't.

You don't.   Boys raised to be polite and decent, without slugging each other, can be as courageous as anyone alive.  (I gave our son as an example, which you conveniently ignored).

I know scores of brave men who didn't get into brawls to prove their masculinity.  SOME boys understand that masculinity has nothing to do with fighting.  SOME boys know that being a man doesn't mean hitting other people.

You want all men and all women to be the way YOU want them to be.

My husband and my two sons are some of the bravest men I know, who would protect anyone in need, and NONE of them have gotten into fist fights....... even as boys.

They're too secure in their masculinity to need such a primitive way to prove they're somebody.

It's possible to raise sons to be brave without being gorillas, and that is proven over and over again in the Christian world.

I say again, look to Jesus.

Then you will start to know what you're talking about.

As of now............ you don't.

[roamer_1]

Think what you will. Rough, primitive men spilled their blood to give you a society where that is possible.
And since men are no longer taught to stand up to bad men, soon enough, rough, primitive men will take it away from you again.

[DB]

@musiclady

I don't believe anyone here is advocating teaching their sons to be violent. But... Boys often have to face a bully that is threatening violence if they don't do what they demand. That making peace is not always the best option. Learning to stand your ground and not avoiding violence at the cost of basic principle is also important. It is fundamental to how many boys learn to grow up and be protectors of their future families.

I have no doubt that you raised an honorable son. It is unlikely you know whether he got in any fights at school or elsewhere as part of growing up. I certainly didn't tell my parents about the fights I got into unless there was too much evidence to avoid it...

[GtHawk]

You will regret that idea when the time comes for men to rise up to defend. Having been indoctrinated to believe that fighting is bad, they will have no inclination, and certainly no ability.

My SIL has one rule for my grandson, you don't start fights but if someone attacks you physically, you defend yourself. He's told my grandson that as long as he follows the rule he will defend him in the school office.

[GtHawk]

Don't hit girls. Yes.
Don't hit anybody. No. That is a ridiculous naïve idealistic idea in a REAL world among male humans.

Don't hit girls? Even back when I was in junior high that was obsolete, there were Hispanic girls that were every bit as violent and prone to group attacks as their male counter parts and they didn't stick to fighting other girls. If you are attacked you defend yourself with as much force as necessary, the only rule is don't start it.

[musiclady]

@musiclady

I don't believe anyone here is advocating teaching their sons to be violent. But... Boys often have to face a bully that is threatening violence if they don't do what they demand. That making peace is not always the best option. Learning to stand your ground and not avoiding violence at the cost of basic principle is also important. It is fundamental to how many boys learn to grow up and be protectors of their future families.

I have no doubt that you raised an honorable son. It is unlikely you know whether he got in any fights at school or elsewhere as part of growing up. I certainly didn't tell my parents about the fights I got into unless there was too much evidence to avoid it...

I disagree.  There are some here who DO advocate violence for boys with the excuse that it's just the way boys are.  It's just part of being male...... or so they say. That's an excuse for bad behavior.

As I have said before, I am NOT talking about defending yourself, nor knowing how to fight.  I am talking about the idea that in order to be a male, one must be a fighter, or not be truly male.  That's poppycock.

As for my son's hiding being in fights, again......... you need to have spent time with him as a child to know that he was honest, almost to a fault.  He was a kid who never needed to be punished because he cried if we raised our voices.  He was a compliant child (which actually helped him be a good soldier, and he was as courageous as they come....thus, the Bronze Star).

Sports is a great way to get out aggression, and all four of our kids were involved in sports (the most aggressive among them is our youngest...... a girl).  Rough housing is another way to get out aggression, and our sons AND our youngest loved doing that.  But they did not fight at school.  (I was an involved Mom and spent much time at school and talked with teachers a lot).

The bottom line for me here is, stop forcing boys into a stereotype and stop allowing them to do things that are inappropriate just because they're boys.  Again, I am NOT talking about allowing them to be bullied, nor not teaching them to defend themselves.  I am talking about teaching them about the Fruits of the Spirit........ kindness, gentleness, self-control.

Teaching boys about how to be Christ-like is not making them sissies.  It's making them real men.

It takes a lot more courage to NOT throw a punch than to throw it.

@DB

[musiclady]

Think what you will. Rough, primitive men spilled their blood to give you a society where that is possible.
And since men are no longer taught to stand up to bad men, soon enough, rough, primitive men will take it away from you again.

And my son was a soldier who helped keep YOU free.

But he was raised to be like Christ (who DID stand up to bad men, if you know your Scripture).

You are conflating your own (very ingrained) cultural stereotype with the way things ought to be and it doesn't work.

Sorry that I kind of lost my temper in my last post.

If I were 11 and we were in the same room, I probably would have thrown a punch.

You can be glad I'm 68 now, and we're thousands of miles apart, because it spared you some physical pain that you wouldn't be enjoying right now, Mr. Macho Man. 

[DB]

Okay,

Who here is advocating that?

Why don't you ask your son sometime instead of assume? The results might be interesting.

[DB]

And my son was a soldier who helped keep YOU free.

But he was raised to be like Christ (who DID stand up to bad men, if you know your Scripture).

You are conflating your own (very ingrained) cultural stereotype with the way things ought to be and it doesn't work.

Sorry that I kind of lost my temper in my last post.

If I were 11 and we were in the same room, I probably would have thrown a punch.

You can be glad I'm 68 now, and we're thousands of miles apart, because it spared you some physical pain that you wouldn't be enjoying right now, Mr. Macho Man. 

You are jumping to conclusions regarding things said here not in evidence. You are going way to far with your assumptions. It isn't a binary choice.

[musiclady]

Okay,

Who here is advocating that?

Why don't you ask your son sometime instead of assume? The results might be interesting.

The poster above is.

Actually, I'm not assuming anything.  Why do you want him to have been in fights when he wasn't?

My husband never got in fights either (and don't you dare imply he's lying about that, or this very polite conversation will end), and our younger son's personality is a lot like his in most ways.  Competitive, VERY strong physically, totally masculine, but caring and self-controlled.

You don't think men like this exist?  Seriously???

[musiclady]

You are jumping to conclusions regarding things said here not in evidence. You are going way to far with your assumptions. It isn't a binary choice.

I haven't jumped to a single conclusion.  I've read the words on the page.

Now I'm beginning to wonder if you're trying to pick a fight, because until your last two posts I thought this was a polite conversation....   

You're free to disagree with me all you want, but there's been a whole lot of assuming on your part based on your last two posts....

[DB]

I haven't jumped to a single conclusion.  I've read the words on the page.

Now I'm beginning to wonder if you're trying to pick a fight, because until your last two posts I thought this was a polite conversation....   

You're free to disagree with me all you want, but there's been a whole lot of assuming on your part based on your last two posts....

I was polite.

Could it be you that is trying to apply your view of what a perfect male is on others? Just maybe?

You are going off the deep end - yes, assuming things not evidence. Including me "trying to pick a fight with you". You are free to assume whatever you like. It is pretty clear we can't discuss this without you being emotional about it going far beyond what was said.

So I'll let it be.

[musiclady]

I was polite.

Could it be you that is trying to apply your view of what a perfect male is on others? Just maybe?

You are going off the deep end - yes, assuming things not evidence. Including me "trying to pick a fight with you". You are free to assume whatever you like. It is pretty clear we can't discuss this without you being emotional about it going far beyond what was said.

So I'll let it be.

I appreciate that, and enjoy your jab that I was being "emotional" after you implied that my son had to be hiding the truth about his fighting as a young boy because my position couldn't possibly be right.  (Cute ploy to make me look bad).

But I do understand that in order for you to win the debate here, given that I am giving truthful information about my family, that you have to imply that either they are not truthful, or that I am mistaken.  You have forced yourself into arguing this from a position of weakness and not strength.

You could have said that we just disagree, but you had to accuse......... and as I said, I understand that, given the untenable position you put yourself in.

As for that "perfect male" thing....... that's pretty imaginative on your part.  What I've been trying to communicate here is that there IS no such thing as a "perfect male" (if you had read my posts, you would know that).  Boys, just like girls, are unique creations of God, made in His image, but with differing personalities.  The position I have been arguing against is the traditional (again, not conservative, but merely traditional) view that boys are aggressive and they have to fight because that's what boys do (scroll back and you will see that voiced here).

I understand that much of what is being said is reactionary (you boys are so emotional!  ^-^) against the evil left, which has distorted gender and tried to remove all masculinity entirely.  But what I am saying here is that just because the left has destroyed an issue (as it has race), doesn't mean that we have to swing back to "primitive" masculinity.

How about we do what I have suggested, and look at human behavior based on Scriptural guidelines and the example of Jesus?  HE was the only perfect male.  (And he didn't get in any fights, even as a boy).

Now I will leave this with saying that the men in my family are extremely masculine (my husband was a terrific defensive back and a HS wrestler, one son a soldier, and the other a highly successful ultra marathoner who has run 100 mile races through mountains), and none of them got into fights because they knew how to behave themselves from a young age.  The idea that a male has to fight is a weak attempt to prove some "perfect male" myth that the other side of this argument is making.  NOT me.

So as I swim in the shallow end, I shall throw you a life preserver in your deep end, and call it a day. 

Peace. 

@DB

[DB]

"But I do understand that in order for you to win the debate here, given that I am giving truthful information about my family, that you have to imply that either they are not truthful, or that I am mistaken.  You have forced yourself into arguing this from a position of weakness and not strength."

Just more assumptions. I didn't imply your son wasn't truthful, you obviously took it that way and keep expanding on it. You assume you know everything about your son. You don't. Just because you don't know everything about him doesn't mean anyone was being dishonest or dishonorable. All I said was to ask him and find out. I didn't imply or even slightly suggest he would lie about it. Simply to ask and find out what you may not know. But you took it way beyond what I said - making it an emotional response that you are certain is implying this and that - which was never said. It isn't even possible in your mind that you don't know everything about your son. And that's putting it very kindly. And in addition you not knowing everything doesn't make you a liar nor did I ever suggest that. Your responses are filled with assumptions all the way to including your husband's character and me attacking it some how. You are simply looking at whatever is said on this subject in the worst possible light and lashing out.

[Mod1]

Let's try not to make this personal, and return to discussing the article itself. Thanks.