More Active Posts
Front Page
Can a good father be a real man?
 |
 20 Comments |
Time Magazine recently asked: “Does being more of a father make you less of a man?” Responses from the man on the street were mixed, with some dads noting that women are attracted to a man who spends time with his children, and others saying that they feel emasculated by taking on more of the childcare responsibilities. Of particular interest to me was this quote, from University of Texas psychologist Andrew Rochen:
“Masculinity has traditionally been associated with work and work-related success, with competition, power, prestige, dominance over women, restrictive emotionality. . . But a good parent needs to be expressive, patient, emotional, not money oriented. Basically, masculinity is bad for you.”
I found myself nodding at the first two sentences, and growling at the third. Many of us have seen how men in modern America measure themselves — by their wealth, their authority in the company, the success of their children in sports. Those of us who have seen good fathering, likewise, know that Rochen is right about the necessity of patience and expressiveness.
But is masculinity inherently the opposite of these things? Guys, do we have to abandon our manhood in order to be the fathers our children need?
With all due respect to the good professor, that’s hogwash. Consider Teddy Roosevelt, the epitome of a man’s man. Accomplished hunter, soldier, and leader of men, if Roosevelt doesn’t qualify for the label “masculine,” then I’m not sure who does. But consider his hundreds of letters to his children, imparting encouragement, admonition, advice, and above all, affection. His diaries reflect a similar concern with shepherding each of his children into adulthood. He spent time with them, he taught them on his knee, he made sure each son and daughter understood a father’s love.
But he also once hunted down a mountain lion and stabbed it in the heart with his knife. When I read about men like Roosevelt, I don’t find myself wondering if I have to be less of a man to be more of a father; instead I find myself thinking that I need to work on being more of a man and more of a father.
The problem with ideas like masculinity and manhood is not that they are bundles of bad behavior. The problem is that they’ve been hijacked by half-men. The droves of males we see advancing themselves in their careers by neglecting their children should not rightly be called real men. They are boys playing at the game of man. It is a man-boy who thinks money is his measure. It is a man-boy who works long hours so he can win the approval of his CEO. It is the man-boy who thinks he is something because he can get women to do his bidding.
A real man, on the other hand, protects and provides for his family, and partners with his wife to train up his children in the way they should go. He isn’t necessarily gabby, but his children know in their souls that he loves them. He is patient and kind. He lays down his life for his family every day.
Fifty years ago, we all knew these things. Today, however, we are beset by a host of intellectuals who haven’t the sense to recognize that fewer and fewer males know how to become real men. The problem is not that masculinity is rotten. It is that so few men live up to it.
 |
Topic: Front Page, Odds & Ends |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: children, family, manhood, masculinity |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Soul searching
Not every man or woman should be a parent. Not every man or woman should live up to some stereotype of what their sex role behavior and feelings should be.
While the definition of “real man” seems fluid, I think we’d all coalesce easily around a definition for “good father”.
I read a great book by Dr Meg Meeker “Strong Fathers Strong Daughters” and can only hope to influence my own daughters as well as Dr Meeker’s did her.
I would also refer one and all to dadsanddaughters dot org
“The … males we see… neglecting their children should not rightly be called real men.”
Agreed. To be a good father is impossible without being a “real man.” And I would say to be a good father would be the most difficult, but most rewarding, job of all.
Another excellent and thought-provoking essay from Woodlief. I was delighted to read he’s going to be one of your regulars now!
#1 I agree, but once you become a parent you have a responsibility to live up to it or find someone else who will. (adoption)
One wonders what the good professor’s problem is if he can write that third sentence: “Basically, masculinity is bad for you.” Here’s news for him: there’s nothing wrong with being a masculine man, and instead of perpetuating the anti-man feminism we’ve been subjected to for the past few decades, we should be seeing men for the strengths they have, not trying to turn them into women. They are half our population, and I for one, am tired of seeing them put down all the time. I wonder about this professor’s relationship with his own father.
“The problem with ideas like masculinity and manhood is not that they are bundles of bad behavior. The problem is that they’ve been hijacked by half-men.”
Hooray for masculine men AND loving dads. I liked his example of Teddy Roosevelt.
We have three sons. A long time ago, I wrote in a columm “Boys need a father to protect them from their mother.” We’ve laughed about that line many times over the years, but have agreed it’s true.
This woman’s boys would not have played football on the lawn, would not have hiked in snow without decent boots, always would have eaten a balanced meal, would never have shot any sort of gun–including water pistols-and would have sat quietly in the house reading books and listening to classical music. And I’m sure I would have tried (unsuccessfully) to micro-manage the Boy Scouts into insanity.
Fortunately, my boys had a father who led them away from mom’s cocoon into a more rugged world and taught them things I was incapable of understanding. And the Boy Scouts finished the job when they produced our three Eagle scouts.
Perhaps another good line from my good man was, “do not protect your sons from their father’s discipline.” He had things to teach them that this more sensitive adult couldn’t do. Not eat dinner because they didn’t do their chores? They learned to do their chores, even if mom had to hide in the bedroom from their hungry faces.
I’m going to type this again and hope it doesn’t show up later. If so, it’s the program gremlins, not me, repeating myself.
We have three sons. A long time ago, I wrote a column in which I said, “Every boy needs a father to protect him from his mother.” We’ve found this to be true over the years.
This woman’s boys would not have played wild football on the lawn, would not have hiked in the snow without boots, always would have eaten balanced meals and never would have shot any sort of gun–including squirt guns; they would have spent their time inside reading and listening to classical music. And I probably would have (unsuccessfully) driven the Boy Scouts insane trying to micromanage Mother-sanctioned safety into all their endeavors.
Fortunately, my good man had other ideas. He led his sons out of their mother’s cocoon into a world of fix it, deal with it and have fun.
He also admonished me, “not to shield my sons from their father’s discipline.” If the punishment for not doing their chores was no dinner, so be it. This weaker parent had to hide in the bedroom rather than see those hungry faces.
They’re wonderful young men. And despite their mother’s efforts, the Boy Scouts made them all Eagles. They’re also excellent readers, good musicians and only the youngest one ever broke a bone–when the two older boys “accidentally” shoved him into the piano.
Let’s see, Time Magazine, “men on the street,” some university psychologist, members of the feminist movement, all giving advice on being a father and being a man. No wonder there is confusion as this babble of diverse views spills out in all directions.
God the Father, as found in the Bible, gives us the only reliable, the only tested, the only proven counsel. He created us and knows our designed roles better than anyone. If I want to know how to change the oil in my car I go to the owners’ manual provided by the manufactuer, not some other source. This Bible, this owners’ manual, also give my wife proven counsel on how to be a woman and a mother.
Time Magazine, university professors, modern feminists, mixed opinions from the street — they all may be interesting reading, but what I’m going to realy read and heed is the Bible.
I’m going to type this again and hope it doesn’t show up later. If so, it’s the program gremlins, not me, repeating myself.
We have three sons. A long time ago, I wrote a column in which I said, “Every boy needs a father to protect him from his mother.” We’ve found this to be true over the years.
This woman’s boys would not have played wild football on the lawn, would not have hiked in the snow without boots, always would have eaten balanced meals and never would have shot any sort of gun–including squirt guns; they would have spent their time inside reading and listening to classical music. And I probably would have (unsuccessfully) driven the Boy Scouts insane trying to micromanage Mother-sanctioned safety into all their endeavors.
Fortunately, my good man had other ideas. He led his sons out of their mother’s cocoon into a world of fix it, deal with it and have fun.
He also admonished me, “not to shield my sons from their father’s discipline.” If the punishment for not doing their chores was no dinner, so be it. This weaker parent had to hide in the bedroom rather than see those hungry faces.
They’re wonderful young men. And despite their mother’s efforts, the Boy Scouts made them all Eagles. They’re also excellent readers, good musicians and only the youngest one ever broke a bone–when the two older boys “accidentally” shoved him into the piano.
The comments above show that part of the problem lies with the Christians. The feminist deconstruction of traditional and Biblical notions of masculinity and femininity have not been met by Christians articulating in a coherent way just what those traditional and Biblical notions of sexuality amount to - whether metaphysically or practically.
When Arius challenged in Christology implicit in the New Testament and in the worship of the Church, the Church answered with a clear theological critique of Arianism, and a creedal statement of orthodox belief (i.e. the Nicene Creed).
Something similar is required today to answer the feminist deconstruction of Biblical anthropology implicit in the Bible and in the worship of the Church for the past 2000 years. Admitted, it will be more difficult to do this, given the fractured state of Christendom. Still, until this project goes forward, the Church is left to cherry-picking its way through fundamentally anti-Christian culture to articulate what it thinks a man is, what a woman is.
Masculinity is simply the degree to which one exhibits sociocultural stereotypes of maleness. Was Teddy Roosevelt a better person for stabbing a mountain lion? If the hunting and stabbing of the mountain lion was a thing which had to be done, then his willingness to do the deed is a demonstration of fine character, but it would be no less a fine demonstration were it done by a woman. Masculinity is irrelevant to the question of moral character.
Woodlief says: “The problem with ideas like masculinity and manhood is not that they are bundles of bad behavior.”
Masculinity and manhood are not bundles of good behavior either. Like femininity and womanhood, they’re bad ideas. They’re trivial, confusing, and corrupting ideas, and they displace much better ideas about temperament, skill, and virtue. Masculinity and femininity are attractive physical traits, like green eyes or dark skin or silky hair, but they are terrible ideas.
Good parents try to teach a wide range of skills in order to give their children the capacity to engage in diverse behavior and acquire emotional balance and versatility. What children like or dislike is far less important than what they can do and can’t do.
NJLawyer: Without getting paid about $100,000, nobody in reality tries to turn men into women. And no, I don’t care any more about your relationship with your mother than you do about the professor’s relationship with his father.
The Time piece comes off poorly because the writer does not understand masculinity. It isn’t all about out of the home work and shirking on housework or interaction with the kids.
No one was more masculine than my father. And despite having no good male role models in his life, he was a great father.
Being a good father is not anything like being another mother. They are different roles.
I think Fr. Bill (#11) has a good idea: a clearly defined creedal statement from the church. For him I assume it would be a statement by the Catholic Church.
For me, it might be a section added to the Westminster Confession of Faith.
In both cases it would be a formal public statement from the church regarding such issues as the family, marriage, homosexuality, etc. It would strongly combat efforts from some quarters to redefine the Bible according to the agenda of certain groups such as homosexuals. It would also serve notice of strong church opposition to lawmakers who attempt to force the church to conform to increasingly perverse cultural trends.
I am encouraged at Michael Martin’s endorsement of a way forward for the Church. In my case, I am Anglican, not Roman Catholic.
I was overly optimistic to say that an ecumenical statement would be difficult to achieve. It is, in fact, impossible to achieve in the current divided state of Christendom. The only options left are what Martin suggests with the Westminster Confession — an addendum addressing the current sexual heresies coursing through all the Christian communions.
But, still, it would be so helpful, if orthodox theologians in all the communions would begin to formulate what might pass for an ecumenical understanding of sexuality, based on the Scriptures and the worship of the Church for the past two millennia. With such source materials, surely this project could go forward.
This is the kind of tripe that comes out on a slow news week.
Being a good father has got to lower your testosterone. You can’t talk like a drill sergeant to marine recruits without making yourself foolish, much less to your kids. You can’t hold babies without kissing them and playing with their toes or sticking something in their mouths. You’ve got to be perpetually bored, attentive, interested, and adaptive.
“The Time piece comes off poorly because the writer does not understand masculinity.”
This is the heart of the matter. Too many people in our society do not understand masculinity and we all suffer for it. Without true masculinity, we cannot have true femininity either. Machismo has taken the place of masculinity in many of our minds. Teddy Roosevelt is an excellent example of masculinity: he was confident and strong, he had a passion for life, he did everything as excellently as he could, and he was not afraid to be a compassionate father. Machismo is afraid of not fitting a stereotype, of being seen as “weak.” Masculinity knows that living rightly, excellently and with passion is never weak–even when it is telling your children that you love them, playing games with them, crying with them.