It is going on six years since my dad passed away, and in that time Father's Day has increasingly become a time not only where I have the expected overall feeling of missing him, but thinking very specifically of the things I miss about him. That, along with the ongoing cultural perturbations of what is referred to as toxic masculinity, presents broader questions about what masculinity is, what "makes" a "man" recognized as such, which characteristics and traits are identified with "men" and why.
(I'm not going to get into a digression about gender theory or deconstructing heteronormative tropes, or any of that sort of thing. It doesn't bother me, but it doesn't interest me either. I don't know enough about it, and it's orthogonal to the point anyway. I'm going by the usual definitions of all those words and ideas, but putting some of them in quotes just to get people thinking about the definitions all the same.)
There are two additional recent events (for me personally) that bring such questions into sharp relief for me, and I believe are worth considering for everyone. One was watching the movie A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, in which Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) helps a magazine interviewer (Matthew Rhys) deal with the self-destructive relationship with his own father (Chris Cooper).
As a kid of that era, of course I watched Mr. Rogers, and then as a teen watched his style lampooned by comedians like Eddie Murphy and Robin Williams. It's one of those little formative things you forget about, but ultimately take seed and bear fruit in many people, in the form of a rather acidic cynicism about everything and everyone. Only later in life, certainly once you have kids of your own, do you start to see the real value in what Fred Rogers was trying to convey not only to children, but to their parents as well: Kindness. Sincerity. Compassion. Empathy. Patience. Grace.
In a world where we are all routinely conditioned from an early age to reject those things, in favor of a smug, knowing, cynical outlook, those traits become burdens that identify suckers and weigh them down with reluctance to do the expedient things in life.
If you're in, say, the 45-55 age bracket, there are a couple of interesting tests you can run on yourself and on your Facebook friends, regarding two cultural touchstones that people of that demographic would know -- Mr. Rogers and N.W.A. (yes, the gangsta rap group).
Remember the N.W.A. movie that came out a few years ago, and all those people like Yay, cool, I remember when!, right? Think about the people you knew who reacted positively to the movie, went and saw it, relived that era of their lives, and how those particular people now express themselves about the "blue lives matter" movement, or the co-opted national flag they use. There's a cognitive dissonance, a contradiction in declared values.
You cannot align yourself with a group whose signature song and slogan was "Fuck the police," and then turn your back on the hundreds of videos just in the past month, of irrefutable evidence of thugs and bullies abusing their uniform and the public's trust. Pepper-spraying little kids and taking the prosthetic legs of amputees. Not all heroes wear capes, I guess.
Many of those same people in that age bracket also identify as having enjoyed Mr. Rogers when they were kids, yet again, somehow without internalizing those traits which were his entire reason for doing the show to begin with. If you pointed out that Martin Gugino was basically doing what Fred Rogers would have done if he were still alive -- peacefully resisting, and trying to approach his aggressors in a spirit of kindness and kinship -- they wouldn't believe you. They like the cheesy, memorable sure you could slogans that the comedians parodied. As far as the actual values that he tried to impart, he was just a christian hippie with a sweater, as far as they're concerned.
This juxtaposition of personally-held with culturally-inculcated values is key, and it is perhaps the most stark in people who identify rather vocally and emphatically as "christian," while routinely indulging in personal behavior is at odds with the teachings of Christ, and of course loudly endorsing politicians who behave like rutting pigs at a trough. But of course there are countless examples, large and small, subtle and obvious, everywhere you look.
The second recent event for me was a close elderly relative passing away. Despite the ongoing plague, we managed to have a nice service with good, if strategically spaced, attendance. As you might imagine, I am not one for the cliché of "role models," but this particular relative was certainly someone who was cut from that jib, almost effortlessly -- someone who didn't have to show you how decent he was, because he was decent.
So what comes to mind for most of us when we talk about "masculine" "virtues"? Strength (whether physical or moral fortitude), self-reliance, competence, skill, loyalty, honesty. Usually somewhere between the Stoics and the Boy Scouts.
But really, most of those things (maybe not necessarily physical strength) are just as easily applied to women. If you were raised by a single mother or just have ever known one, you know that they have to have most or all of those traits, and more. So they're not "masculine" traits or values, they're just values then, aren't they?
But that's a difficult conditioning to look past in this culture, and the fact is that there are a lot of men who take advantage of the assumptions of those traits, without even pretending to try to possess or attain them.
It annoys me that my relative -- who was kind, patient, funny, strong, competent, decent, and so much more -- went ahead and did the work required to be those things, right up to the very end and with a genuine spirit of joy in the undertaking, while so many in power, and many of those who follow them, don't feel the need to indulge in such silliness.
Many of your "dark web" types, your Jordan Peterson "conservative thinkamator" thought leaders, bullshit people with the notion that if they just made their bed and developed lifehack routines, the rest takes care of itself. But it doesn't. It takes self-reflection to see that you cannot be in conflict at that deep of a personal level. You can't pretend to be one thing while being its diametric opposite. Some misalignment is natural, but either you are kind and patient and reasonable and treat people well until they give you a reason not to, or you're not and don't.
Not just on Father's Day, but every day, fathers in particular owe it to themselves and their children to really think about the values and goals they are imparting to their kids. I mean, I can be a high-toned, vengeful s.o.b. in here, but the fact is that I have taught my child to be generous and decent and kind and tolerant. And that's really the only measure of parental success worth striving for.
(I'm not going to get into a digression about gender theory or deconstructing heteronormative tropes, or any of that sort of thing. It doesn't bother me, but it doesn't interest me either. I don't know enough about it, and it's orthogonal to the point anyway. I'm going by the usual definitions of all those words and ideas, but putting some of them in quotes just to get people thinking about the definitions all the same.)
There are two additional recent events (for me personally) that bring such questions into sharp relief for me, and I believe are worth considering for everyone. One was watching the movie A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood, in which Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks) helps a magazine interviewer (Matthew Rhys) deal with the self-destructive relationship with his own father (Chris Cooper).
As a kid of that era, of course I watched Mr. Rogers, and then as a teen watched his style lampooned by comedians like Eddie Murphy and Robin Williams. It's one of those little formative things you forget about, but ultimately take seed and bear fruit in many people, in the form of a rather acidic cynicism about everything and everyone. Only later in life, certainly once you have kids of your own, do you start to see the real value in what Fred Rogers was trying to convey not only to children, but to their parents as well: Kindness. Sincerity. Compassion. Empathy. Patience. Grace.
In a world where we are all routinely conditioned from an early age to reject those things, in favor of a smug, knowing, cynical outlook, those traits become burdens that identify suckers and weigh them down with reluctance to do the expedient things in life.
If you're in, say, the 45-55 age bracket, there are a couple of interesting tests you can run on yourself and on your Facebook friends, regarding two cultural touchstones that people of that demographic would know -- Mr. Rogers and N.W.A. (yes, the gangsta rap group).
Remember the N.W.A. movie that came out a few years ago, and all those people like Yay, cool, I remember when!, right? Think about the people you knew who reacted positively to the movie, went and saw it, relived that era of their lives, and how those particular people now express themselves about the "blue lives matter" movement, or the co-opted national flag they use. There's a cognitive dissonance, a contradiction in declared values.
You cannot align yourself with a group whose signature song and slogan was "Fuck the police," and then turn your back on the hundreds of videos just in the past month, of irrefutable evidence of thugs and bullies abusing their uniform and the public's trust. Pepper-spraying little kids and taking the prosthetic legs of amputees. Not all heroes wear capes, I guess.
Many of those same people in that age bracket also identify as having enjoyed Mr. Rogers when they were kids, yet again, somehow without internalizing those traits which were his entire reason for doing the show to begin with. If you pointed out that Martin Gugino was basically doing what Fred Rogers would have done if he were still alive -- peacefully resisting, and trying to approach his aggressors in a spirit of kindness and kinship -- they wouldn't believe you. They like the cheesy, memorable sure you could slogans that the comedians parodied. As far as the actual values that he tried to impart, he was just a christian hippie with a sweater, as far as they're concerned.
This juxtaposition of personally-held with culturally-inculcated values is key, and it is perhaps the most stark in people who identify rather vocally and emphatically as "christian," while routinely indulging in personal behavior is at odds with the teachings of Christ, and of course loudly endorsing politicians who behave like rutting pigs at a trough. But of course there are countless examples, large and small, subtle and obvious, everywhere you look.
The second recent event for me was a close elderly relative passing away. Despite the ongoing plague, we managed to have a nice service with good, if strategically spaced, attendance. As you might imagine, I am not one for the cliché of "role models," but this particular relative was certainly someone who was cut from that jib, almost effortlessly -- someone who didn't have to show you how decent he was, because he was decent.
So what comes to mind for most of us when we talk about "masculine" "virtues"? Strength (whether physical or moral fortitude), self-reliance, competence, skill, loyalty, honesty. Usually somewhere between the Stoics and the Boy Scouts.
But really, most of those things (maybe not necessarily physical strength) are just as easily applied to women. If you were raised by a single mother or just have ever known one, you know that they have to have most or all of those traits, and more. So they're not "masculine" traits or values, they're just values then, aren't they?
But that's a difficult conditioning to look past in this culture, and the fact is that there are a lot of men who take advantage of the assumptions of those traits, without even pretending to try to possess or attain them.
It annoys me that my relative -- who was kind, patient, funny, strong, competent, decent, and so much more -- went ahead and did the work required to be those things, right up to the very end and with a genuine spirit of joy in the undertaking, while so many in power, and many of those who follow them, don't feel the need to indulge in such silliness.
Many of your "dark web" types, your Jordan Peterson "conservative thinkamator" thought leaders, bullshit people with the notion that if they just made their bed and developed lifehack routines, the rest takes care of itself. But it doesn't. It takes self-reflection to see that you cannot be in conflict at that deep of a personal level. You can't pretend to be one thing while being its diametric opposite. Some misalignment is natural, but either you are kind and patient and reasonable and treat people well until they give you a reason not to, or you're not and don't.
Not just on Father's Day, but every day, fathers in particular owe it to themselves and their children to really think about the values and goals they are imparting to their kids. I mean, I can be a high-toned, vengeful s.o.b. in here, but the fact is that I have taught my child to be generous and decent and kind and tolerant. And that's really the only measure of parental success worth striving for.
