Good Men...Gone?

     Where have all the good men gone? What has happened to the male species? These were questions which I remember hearing some years ago among conservative, religious, and family centered circles. The members of such circles were wondering what had become of the quintessential man:  one who had convictions and stood by them; who protected the weak and assisted the less fortunate; who was faithful to his God, wife, and family; who would work hard and honestly for what he wanted; who was not afraid to be gentle and kind, but would not let emotion cloud his judgement. They had seen the definition of manhood swing from one extreme to another - from the tough-talking, hard-hitting, no crying, emotions are weakness, "I don't need anyone anyway" macho-masculinity of the '70s to the ultra-sensitive, dare not to offend anyone, effeminate masculinity of the '90s. Speculation abounded among the different circles as to the causes behind this, and the general consensus was that there was an appalling lack of father-figures in our society due to the growing rates of divorce and bastard births. Some even went so far as to posit the liberal feminist movement as the original source undermining the common understanding of what it is to be a man.
     
     Now, from my general observations, the conclusions drawn have a great deal of truth to them. The liberal feminist movement, in spite of the claims of elevating women, really does no such thing. They desire to have what men have, and if a woman cannot get to it by virtue of herself, they rip it away from the man that does. If a woman wants to be 'X' but does not actually have the ability and consequently is turned down, then the feminists become outraged such "discrimination", demand that the standards be changed to allow for the woman to become 'X'. The rules change, and woman is now 'X', but there is no equality - she still does not have the ability that is required for 'X' and the position is now weakened. The liberal feminists desire to tear down men and lower them to a level below that of women, but doing so actually does nothing to raise women to a higher status. This degradation of men seeps from corporate life to the home life. A woman is told that unless she has the freedom to walk away, she is oppressed; that reliance upon a man in any way is repression; that she is fully capable of being both father and mother to a child because men don't stick around anyway. Such thinking leads to increases in divorce and the number of children born out of wedlock, and a lack of father figures in society.  

 What does a lack of father-figures have to do with a lack of good men? Much. There are two basic ways of learning:  observation and doing. Most of what children learn is derived from watching their parents - how to walk; how to talk; snakes and spiders are scary; caterpillars are nice; blacks/whites/Muslims/Jews are evil; everyone is good and deserving of respect; etc. If there is no constant example of a good man for a little boy to observe and imitate, it would therefore follow that he would have a difficult time trying to be one, especially with so many definitions of manhood out there.  

     However, many families do have steady father-figures, and yet there is still what the circles have labeled a crisis in men. Why would this be? I would posit family size as a reason. Observation is one part of learning; doing is the other - children from larger families have more opportunities to practice what they observe. The average family now only has 1 or 2 kids, reduced by nearly half since 1850. Only children often exclusively have their own well-being to be concerned about, and few responsibilities. Some may have a pet to take care of, which takes some of the focus away from themselves and is a way to teach children responsibility and compassion. Children from a larger family, however, have not only themselves to look after, but their siblings as well. It is in such a situation that the character of a man is made. A boy who protects his sister from spiders; comforts his brother, bandaging his wounds when a stunt goes awry; stands up against bullies who pick on his siblings; treats his sisters with respect as his father shows respect to his mother; gives his truck to his brother who lost his, as he has seen his father give to others who have lost; such a boy has the makings of a man. An only child does have the potential to act in such a manner, but the boy from a large family has more opportunity to do so. An only child may go to school, practice sharing and caring , but once they return home they don't have to concern themselves with anyone else. A child with siblings always has someone else depending upon them - home does not give relief from responsibility; the opportunity to develop character is always present. The decreasing number of large families in our society may very well be an overlooked contributing factor in the lack of good men.   
     Just a thought.

Comments

  1. I completely agree. We women, (or at least our fore bearers in recent generations) have made our bed...and I'm not sure it is particularly comfortable... for us, or for the men and children in our lives. We must reclaim our rightful roles. We are better suited for (and derive more power from) the roles for which we were designed, than for any other role that we might choose to grab on to, in some futile attempt to gain power by emulating men.
    I hope that you will consider linking you Good Men...Gone? posts, or another, to my current link-up. Merry Christmas!

    ReplyDelete