Comments on: Manliness: The Baby and the Bathwater

By: Charlie

Charlie — Mon, 26 Apr 2010 11:18:37 +0000

I disagree with the bathwater part.

Are men supposed to suppress their emotions? Yes many a time. Men do need to love and comfort their wives and family members but It is foolish to think that men should express their emotions in the way women do. That is truly for sissies. On the other hand men shouldn’t be cold to their wives and children. Suppression of emotions at times is not the elimination of emotions at all times.

Were women oppressed? No. They were protected, provided and cared for generally. The liberation of women has not been good at all. Women were liberated from being women. Women have always had a mind of their own(how could they have had someone else’s?) and did not need any liberation to acquire knowledge and become intellectual. Women did not need feminism to follow their passions in a womanly manner and truly be themselves. Women joining the military and being career minded are not freedoms which manly men should prize. Manly men need womanly women and joining the military or being career minded makes that woman less womanly. A wife having a job to support a family in financial difficulty is different from a wife aspiring for a career. Wives should be their husbands faithful helpmeet.

Are dads expected to be hands-on in child-rearing? Yes and No. Yes for being involved in their child’s life. No for being hands on ‘just like the moms’. Men should be involved as fathers but not in the same way as mothers.

Is there only one way of being a man? I’d say that men have always been men in different ways: some doctors, some carpenters, some merchants etc etc. Well this question had a hidden meaning. I think the question is “Is it ok for men to be stay at home dads”? I think not, unless he is physically or mentally unable to work outside the home. It is not manly under normal conditions.

By: dissertation samples

dissertation samples — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:55:25 +0000

Hello,
Nice blog, its great article informative post, thanks for sharing it.

By: mac

mac — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:42:57 +0000

Well said, Mr. Blake. I appreciate your reference to Kipling. If we needed any more of an insight as to how the world has changed, I, an American, last month introduced “If” to a Scotsman who had never read it. I was appalled at that omission. He said their school system never taught them anything that would induce them to take pride in their country.

Somewhere Robert Baden-Powell is spinning in his grave.

By: megscole64

megscole64 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 22:11:20 +0000

THANK YOU!!!! I LOVE this post and I forwarded it to my husband. Absolutely fantastic. :)

By: John Blake

John Blake — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 19:23:33 +0000

Through the rise and fall of empires, the coming and going of Great Plagues, voyages of adventure and discovery when some leave home while most stay put, an irreducible one-in-five (20%) maintains core values common to every place and time.

A man’s first duty is not only to reproduce, but act as steward for posterity: Bring up descendants worthy of his legacy, fitting them for principled action and self-sacrifice as circumstances warrant. One’s own survival is a personal priority, but language-speaking humans are by definition social animals, whose individual well-being depends entirely upon the health of their communities.

“Civilization and Its Discontents” pose not dilemmas but trade-offs. Only to the extent that men as husbands, fathers, providers, are recognized and rewarded –by no means materially– for essentially altruistic roles (defending and supporting home-and-family, commonly dying young) can communities prosper proudly and in peace. Now as “diversity” swamps ambition, warps group identities, promotes demographic and socio-cultural catastrophe by draining all incentive, perversely confiscating hard-earned productive gains, we reap a whirlwind sweeping naive post-Enlightenment populations to collectivist abyss.

As ethical and moral –individual vs. collective– standards dissipate, we one-in-five make classic efforts to allay the rot at home. Nothing substitutes for character: Earned appreciation, independence and responsibility, incentive risk-reward are key. Education rather than mere training acquaints us with the past, puts forebears’ efforts in personal context and perspective. May we bestow on our posterity the fruits of what ancestors labored to bequeath for us.

Transmitting love requires good examples: Kids see through phony preaching, PCBS, in milli-microseconds. So far, so good… married twenty-eight years this April, we have two Eagle Scouts and a beloved elder daughter glorying in her Biochemistry Degree. The family name dates back 1,150 years, and odds are it will be preserved– a comfortable thought, knowing we are but links in a millennial chain.

Why others differ with these theses, I neither know nor care. Meantime, each heir in our long line will stand his ground– “And what is more, you’ll be a Man, my son.”

By: SwissArmyD

SwissArmyD — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:51:22 +0000

You might find an instalanche of readers, if not writers is coming. Since so much time has passed, I’m sure all of your commenters and you have had a chance to think a little about your lists. I find them interesting, and thoughtful. Personally, I think much of this boils down to being intentional in action. Make a decision to do something, and then do it. Many, many things flow from this. Another interesting thing in all of this, is that how men and women act towards each other is interaction. Meaning that it isn’t one sided, it is both. It is difficult to lead when two people are arguing about who is to lead. Sometimes you must lead, sometimes you follow, and each is a decision that you, yourself make. This is where communication is a skill that must be learned. Leadership is often much about communication.

Excellent points all around. Thanks for the insights.

By: Les Nessman

Les Nessman — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:48:44 +0000

“Leadership. In reading Tom Brokaw’s book, The Greatest Generation, I was struck by the way the men of the past embraced, nay, relished leadership roles. They prized the chance to take on responsibility and guide something towards a lofty goal. Today young men hide from leadership positions, hoping no one will notice them so they can just hang out in the background without any work to do.”

I agree, but frankly, I don’t completely blame those who don’t volunteer for leadership positions.
Have you ever tried to get something done within a large corporation? You can’t get a definitive answer quickly, if at all. Nobody wants to take responsibility.
If you decide to take action, you get an email saying ‘You don’t have the authority to do that. We should have 6 three-hour multi-person conference calls first’ or ‘While your decision was the most logical, you did not submit it to the Diversity Sensitivity Division and open a ticket on it. Did your action take into account the ethnic carbon footprint celebration process? We’ll get back to you.’

Bah. Sometimes it’s not worth taking charge.

By: willis

willis — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:37:59 +0000

You are absolutely right on the money. Feminists have liberated men of the need to go to college or to support a family. College enrollment is now about 60% women and 40% men and the disparity is growing. Families consisting only of a female parent have been on the steady increase for some time. Women complain of a lack of eligible men for marriage, but men are learning to show their affection for other men without shame. The plan is working to perfection!

By: Walter Daniels

Walter Daniels — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:55:57 +0000

I’m going to start with an apology. I take 24mg a day of continuous release morphine to control pain from a 10 year old back injury (the lower 1/3 of my back is collapsing), so my mind is not always as clear as I’d like. Now, in my life, Manliness has gone through a number of changes. Some good, some bad, including the idea of changing.
One change that was bad was being a man of your word. Like another reply, I won’t agree to do something I don’t expect do. If i say that I will do something, especially to a child, I *will* do it, if at all possible.
Another was not being comfortable with who you are as a man. Usually shown as a fear of being identified as other than a man. Even 30 years ago, I had no problem with holding a woman’s purse. I am secure enough, as a man, to not fear being considered “unmanly.”
The biggest change that I regret is the demonization of men, as likely molesters. I am not, and I love children. I always have. Yet, today if i see a child crying, or i distress, I *dare not* try to help. I even get a strange look if I offer the use of my First Aid Kit. If I offer a hug to a child, I can be accused of being bad. It doesn’t matter if the child is a friend of mine, or of my son, or daughter. Yes, there are “bad people,” but when and why did men become “bad” as a group?
I do applaud the idea that “being the support of the Family,” is no longer just being the Major breadwinner. I can and cook (I like to), I have no problem feeding, burping and changing babies. I don’t even mind being “spit up on.” It’s something that happens, live with it. :-) All of those are part of loving a child, the right way. Having a child is not starting it, then getting involved 15-18 years later. I have a 12 YO adopted Granddaughter that I love, and who loves me. I’ve been part of her life since she was born, and she knows she is loved because I tell her, and show her by my actions. How else will she know when the man she likes, really mean what he says.
Saying “I love you” is both the easiest and the hardest thing to say. Saying and not meaning it, is easy. Saying it and meaning it, is the hardest thing a man can do. It has so much meaning when you mean it, because it is also a commitment. A promise: that you will always be there; you will always try to respect them mentally and physically; you will never stop trying to do your best to be all that you can be, so that they can do the same.
Those are the three hardest words in the world, because they can carry so much promise. To a child, they carry security. To a Lover, they mean security and support. Yet, to many “men,” they are just a way to get sex, or make a woman feel good.
Another bad change IMO, is the idea of putting on act with our clothing. We have to “dress up,” and look important, so as to be “important.” Instead of being part of who we are, they become an act. Being a “Gentleman,” is not the clothing, it is the person. I can be as much a gentleman in T-shirt and jeans, as in a Black Tie and Tails. Just as in holding a wife/girl friends purse, it is in who we are comfortable being. Yes, for marriages, funerals, and rare other occasions, we should “dress up,” but what we wear should not define us. Neither should we continue to define women by what they wear. As men, we should, and do, have a big effect on what women wear.
When either sex wears a bathing suit, we need to remember something. What is _not_ seen, is as important as what is. Just because you are one of the 1% that can wear a Speedo to the beach, doesn’t mean you should. I’m a man, but I suspect women prefer to be enticed by what doesn’t show. To me, the sexiest clothes show just enough, without showing too much. I want to imagine perfection, even if i know it isn’t there.:-)
Finally, we need to go back to the idea that Chivalry is about respect, by both sexes. Being a Man means respecting ourselves, and respecting Women. Not just while dating, but in all areas. If I open a door for a woman, because I got there first, I’m showing respect for her. Just as if she does it for me. It’s all about showing respect for each other. Except for Husband and wife, where my holding the door, says I consider you slightly more equal than I am. I’m deferring to my wife, in importance of precedence. Going back to the “lesser people,” went through after the more important ones. It’s Medieval, but I remain behind, to protect my wife and children, if necessary.It’s not the reality, but the idea that counts.
Just as teaching children to call men and women, Sir and Ma’am. It shows courtesy and respect for those older than us, or in authority over us. Plus that first time someone calls them Sir or Ma’am, will mean more to them. Being “equal” doesn’t mean that we stop showing respect, just that no one is better. I’m not superior because of my sex, my race, or education. I show my respect for you, by not acting as if I’m better. Sadly, the idea of equality was talked about in the Sixties, but it was never real. It was more about pulling people down to the lowest level, not building them up. Part of Manliness, is to build up the “lesser,” and keeping the self important from controlling others.

By: Vader

Vader — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:53:42 +0000

“The 9 manly virtues.”

I thought there were twelve?

Trustworthy
Loyal
Helpful
Friendly
Courteous
Kind
Obedient
Cheerful
Thrifty
Brave
Clean
Reverent