How do we best create healing and resources for sexual violence victims on our college campuses?

With the closing of this year’s Sexual Assault Awareness Month we are engaged, inspired, and challenged to reach more students than ever before. Many campus awareness campaigns are brilliantly successful! The perfect recipe for effective outreach is specific to the school culture, media headlines, and the all-powerful budget.

But what if you do find that perfect mix of ingredients? What happens when the information does reach your target population? Does your mental health department have a higher intake rate? Do hotline numbers skyrocket? We spend so much time creating the events that we often forget about the potential impact. Making sure we have adequate resources is just as important as outreach.

Triggers are everywhere during the month of S.A.A.M. This year’s campaign also put a spotlight on Childhood Sexual Abuse and the adults dealing with its effects. For many, college is a time where we engage in new relationships and more importantly a great deal of introspection. Students are forming connections with people who may influence their current and future standing in the community and this may stir abuse reactive feelings. Undoubtedly, these new relationships can challenge any student’s learned form of communication and capacity to set and respect boundaries.

Men, well known to be silent-survivors of childhood sexual abuse, are usually just seen as supporters of female survivors. Men are asked to “Walk In their Shoes”, and to “Step-Up” as a bystander. In our understandable focus on women, sometimes we may forget that men also may be triggered and recall their own experiences with abuse. Research tells us that one in every six of our male students, faculty and staff have had unwanted or abusive sexual experiences in childhood and others have experienced abusive sexual interactions as adults. Have we missed the mark? Are we prepared to also support the men on campus who have had those unwanted or abusive sexual experiences?

Experienced in advocacy and prevention education, I am the first to admit that my work revolved primarily around the 1 in 4 females that will or have experienced sexual violence on campus. Yet, I was grateful for the opportunity to learn more about how we can better respond to other underserved populations, including men. As many of you know we found little to no resources specific to male survivors of childhood sexual abuse.

As the Community Education, Awareness & Outreach Director at 1in6, I am inspired to offer the much-requested resources to students, educators, and administrators. We invite you to be involved in an exciting and safe discussion concerning the advocacy and healing of all survivors on your campus.

- By Martha Marin, Community Education, Outreach & Awareness Director for 1in6

Martha is a Colombian native raised in L.A. and South Florida where she received a B.A. in Business Management from the University of North FL. She brings us a unique set of skills acquired from many years of for-profit management and a deep dedication to human rights. As a Program Coordinator for the Women’s Center of Jacksonville and FL Dept. of Health, she taught thousands of students on topics related to the prevention of sexual assault including cyber bullying, LGBTQ/sexual harassment and teen dating violence as well as human trafficking. Martha is a public speaker, consultant and professional trainer.

Most recently she served as the Chair of the Northeast Florida Human Trafficking Coalition. Her international projects include a large-scale bi-lingual internship for the USAID Scholarship for Economic Education and Development at FL State College at Jacksonville. Martha first identified the lack of services for male survivors while teaching at a correctional facility. The need was overwhelming. In response she developed the life skills and healing curriculum, “YOU ARE WORTHY”!

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland has taken the first step toward allowing the ordination of openly gay men and women.

A vote on Monday by the senior members of the Church of Scotland is the first step toward ending a division that has existed for years within the congregation of about 400,000. The Associated Press reports that the vote, which would allow some congregations to have openly gay ministers, is a “compromise first step that could lead to the church allowing gay clergy.”

The General Assembly voted to back a motion “affirming a traditional conservative view on homosexuality,” but they added a provision that would allow more liberal congregations to “opt out” if they so choose, allowing them to “ordain gay men or women.”

The decision on Monday came after a “lengthy debate on the issue,” and the vote itself must be approved by next year’s General Assembly and voted on by the regional presbyteries of the Church before it becomes law. The entire process is expected to take at least two years.

The assembly vote would require the approval of next year’s General Assembly, which has about 700 members and meets every May to determine church policy, as well as votes by the church’s regional presbyteries to become law. The process is expected to take at least two years.

Photo: Bizzzarro/Flickr

Ken Druck, best-selling author of a book about men, had to learn how to grieve after he lost his own daughter.

I should know a lot about how men grieve.   After all, I spent the first 15 years of my career pioneering the psychology of men.  My 1984 book, The Secrets Men Keep (Ballantine Books), mapped out previously uncharted paths to men’s hearts, souls and deepest needs.

I was featured regularly on Oprah, Larry King Live, Donahue, PBS, hundreds of network news and talk shows and countless articles on everything “male” in the nation’s largest newspapers and magazines.

For the next 12 years, I traveled the world giving talks about men, men’s workshops and training programs, consulting with leaders of Fortune 500 companies and being called upon as an expert on men. And then, my life ended abruptly.

My beloved daughter, Jenna, died violently in 1996 while studying abroad. Racked by more pain than I could possibly handle, I held on for dear life. Searching desperately for answers and for something to hold onto, I immersed myself in the world of grief and loss. I was a drowning man, trying to survive overwhelming pain. My heart, shattered into a million pieces. My life, derailed. I honestly didn’t know where to turn or if I was even going to make it.

Nothing I’d learned or been through was helping me navigate the darkness, devastation and feelings of utter helplessness I was encountering on the path of grief.  I would need to start all over. Learn to walk, breathe, think, feel, love, surrender, rage, cope and travel by the dim light of the stars.It took every ounce of raw courage, faith and patience I had to survive. Receiving support from family and friends was not easy. I was used to being the strong one. Taking care of myself was also a real challenge. I was used to powering through everything—figuring it out and fixing it. This could not be fixed. Learning to decipher between people and things that helped me, and those that drained and depleted me, enabled me to hang on. Slowly, I began to fight my way back into life. To breathe. And to find new strength. But not the way you might expect.

Did it help or hurt that I had undergone 47 years of basic training as a guy?

I’d been taught that emotions (other than anger) were a sign of weakness. Shows of sorrow, confusion, helplessness, and fear would be cause for demotion to a “lesser of a man” status. Tears would be automatic grounds for a significant drop in stature on the male scale. “Be a man!” “Suck it up,” “Get over it” and other cliché’s borrowed from sports and warfare, were not only useless—they were harmful.

What I needed more than anything was the strength, courage and permission to grieve. I needed to feel the hurt, helpless, sorrow, brokenness, outrage and confusion. The macho code of posing and posturing as strong and self-reliant would have been a formula for disaster for me. Hiding, denying, repressing my emotions would have prolonged my pain and deepened my sense of isolation. Distancing myself from my emotions and “shooting the messenger” when sorrow surfaced, would have disconnected me from my humanity. And thwarted my grieving process.

The cultural norm for being a man encourages us to shut down and shut up, less we suffer another loss, our status. Dr. Mike Freidman, the father of Type-A Behavior and one of my mentors, called this “status insecurity.” Is it any wonder that 85% of participants who seek grief support after the death of a child, spouse or parent, are women. Men who are overwhelmed by the intensity of their grief and defenseless against their own feelings of sorrow, will try to outrun, out-numb, out-busy their way over and around grief.  As I learned at one of our first support groups in New York after 9-11, they will even shout down others who are trying valiantly to work through their grief.

A disgruntled husband had come to pick up his wife from support group stuck his head in the room to see if we were done. He was invited by several group members to join in and responded, “No thanks, I know how this stuff works. Misery loves company!” After a brief silence, one of the other wives stood up, looked him in the eye and said, “No sir, you’ve got it all wrong. Hope loves company.”

Taught to hide, deny, repress and outright avoid our feelings, or fake it by telling everyone “I’m fine,” men learn to fool themselves into believing they can just hold their breath or think their way around it. These men become the dumbed down, crusty, diluted version of their former selves. But the debt comes due. Cut off from their feelings, hearts and too often, their loved ones, they wither. As if life after loss wasn’t difficult enough.

Here are a few healthy and effective ways to support a man who you care about through grief:

1. Ask open-ended questions like “What has it been like for you since losing ___?”
2. Listen and gently draw him out by asking, “What’s been helping you? Making it harder?”  “What are your options?” and “Tell me more.”
3. Men often find that “doing” some form of activity, like going for a walk, fishing, golfing, working on a project, taking a trip, etc. helps them cope.  Consider asking him about, or suggesting, an activity and joining him.
4. Gently encourage, but don’t push, him to

a)    share his feelings of sorrow, anger, confusion, fear, loneliness, etc.

b)   be patient, kind and caring with himself

c)    be honest and direct with those in his inner circle and place of work about the kind of support he needs.

Going on is never easy after the loss of a loved one. It takes a strong work ethic, bravery and a lot of faith to fight ones way back into life. It also takes courage and humility to admit that we need help and ask for it (“help” is, after all, the least utilized 4 letter word in the male vocabulary). Learning self-care, self-compassion and that it’s OK to ask for what we need are the things that not only help men grieve, but slowly transform their pain back into love and enjoy full lives in the aftermath of loss.  Making our lives an expression of love, rather than despair, is a noble quest for any “real man.”

Buy Dr. Ken Druck’s book, The Real Rules of Life, Balancing Life’s Terms with Your Own

Photo: Flickr/cauchisavona

–

Amanda Berry, a woman missing for 10 years, and two other women were rescued on May 6 by Cleveland officers; watch their emotional recounting of the rescue.

Responding to a 911 call on May 6, Cleveland Police Officers Anthony Espada, Michael Tracy, and Barbara Johnson followed the directions of Amanda Berry, a woman who had been missing for 10 years, to the house where they found three kidnapped women.

Amanda Berry, Michelle Knight, and Georgina DeJesus had been kidnapped by Ariel Castro between 2002 and 2004 and held captive ever since. The officers who found them have given a rare insight into their experiences in rescuing the three terrified women with their video recount of the events.

“It’s very overwhelming—I mean, it took everything to hold myself together,” said Officer Espada.

One of the women had run into Officer Johnson’s arms, sobbing her plea: “Please don’t let me go! Please don’t let me go!”

“It kind of seemed like an eternity, but it was so quick at the same time,” Officer Johnson said, “the way you didn’t hear anything, and then all of a sudden it was almost like the pitter-patter of feet running towards you. And the next thing I know, someone is in Officer Espada’s arms.”

“Words can’t explain what was going through our minds that day,” Officer Tracy added. “It was just an overload of information—and happiness to find those three girls and the daughter alive. It was just unbelievable.”

According to the officers, it took only 30 seconds to locate Castro at a local McDonalds. The effort of the whole police force that day led to his immediate capture and arrest.

“It was a team effort—not just for us. We just responded. It was a great team effort from everybody that was involved, from the patrolmen, supervisor, detectives, everybody that assisted. There was just a great job by everybody.”

Feature Video: Kathy Allen/YouTube

Video: CNN

Our Soldiers are being raped…by our Soldiers.

In the U.S. Military, annually, more men are being raped by men than women are being raped by men. I state this fact, articulating it in this manner, not to diminish what these women are enduring but to raise the level of awareness and discourse to fully include the men; they have been dropping through the cracks in our “system” in alarming and increasing numbers. The assertion is that this problem is as great among men and these men are not being supported. There is virtually no effective system or network of support for male victims of rape in our Military, yet more men are raped than are women.

In 2012, nearly 14,000 active military men were assaulted by men, along with over 12,000 women. All of this is despicable, all of this calls for aggressive and public reprisal and punishment. Yet, virtually no one has been talking about it.

Why is this? Why has this not been dealt with swiftly and cleanly?

Stepping back for a moment and looking at the insidious breadth of institutional man-on-man rape in this country, I have never fully appreciated nor understood why we—as a culture, as media professionals, as journalists—seem to look the other way in the face of these myriad ruined lives … being ruined right before our eyes, daily.

When I see on television or read about young men being sent to prison, I know that kid is going to be someone’s bitch within the week—possibly the property of many. In prison, he risks having his teeth knocked out for better service. It’s violent, it’s cruel and unusual, it’s unacceptable. Out of prison, it is never discussed.

In my own experience of four long days in LA County Jail, I sensed the extremely heavy tension in that place … and I sure as hell didn’t take a shower. I was already on crutches, and the weak go first. Not interested.

In our military, men who have sworn service to this country, who have committed several years if not the rest of their lives to honor that commitment, can find themselves the victims of sexual aggression and assault—then have no where to go. Afraid to be seen as weak, unwilling to deal with the implications of sexual orientation or the disparaging accusations of failed loyalty, these men don’t report the assault.

It seems redundant and even cliché to point out that male rape is rarely about sex and is rarely done by homosexuals … though homosexual guys are of the primary targets in prison, a dynamic that, when translated into mainstream society and our military, seems to affect the perception of the survivor … keeping him close-mouthed.

Men who do report, who speak up and seek justice, all too often find themselves the brunt of the pressure, the focus of relentless and uncharitable scrutiny, their own careers called into question or ruined.

Shame.

So, why are our leaders—and, by leaders, I mean block-by-block, clique by clique, posse by posse, city by city, legislature by legislature and service branch by service branch—unwilling to address this, head-on?

Is this the residual fear of the barely-latent macho culture, of which the military may be one of the last bastions? Outside the military, is it possible that this perspective will fade with the passing of the baby-boomers?

I’m hoping so. In my own experience, I don’t sense a sexual defensiveness in the current 20-somethings, amongst the thinking millennials … There seems to be, among the demographics now entering adulthood, an inherent acceptance of diversity and disparity that results in almost astonished compassion at societal dynamics that have grown out of intolerance and ignorance for decades. I’m thinking that, with a life- and worldview in this vein, our culture(s) will evolve into something less prejudicial and judgmental. It’s a Dream.

In recent months, a few brave men have stepped up to publicly speak out as survivors of sexual assault in the military. These men are exceptionally courageous, I believe, comparable to the early women—any woman, really—who took the step of testifying in court against their assailants. Exposing oneself as victim/survivor is an enormous, intimate act. For a man, the stigma is exacerbated with our own culturally insidious negative implication and ancillary effect.

In recent weeks, President Obama has given voice and direction to Pentagon Leadership, calling for immediate and aggressive change in the way in which these cases are handled, taking treatment and trial of these incidents out of the chain-of-command and handling them as Criminal Offenses. To their credit, the Military Leaders have embraced this attitude and it would seem that such aggressive reform is imminent.

I certainly hope so.

But what of society? What about us? We, as Men, must embrace responsibility for addressing the jocular, political incorrectness of rape jokes, in and out of prison, and call one another out when we slip.

Seriously, what used to “feel” okay simply is not: with enlightenment comes responsibility.

When I hear “fag” or “faggot” or “that’s so Gay” (this last of which I’m hearing less and less…), I tend generally and in a civil but strong manner to confront and correct the speaker. (I’m a big guy, the risk to my physical being is low). These words are not acceptable, so must we coach one another on the damage we’re perpetrating on ourselves by the acceptance or overlooking of words and actions that undermine human dignity.

I come from a Country (& Western!) background, raised in the mountains of Oregon. In the evolution toward City Boy and World Citizen, I still remember the day I learned what I was actually saying when using the term “jew you down,” and I became deeply ashamed of myself and my ignorance as I learned it. But I learned it. On that topic: only recently was I assisted in appreciating the genesis of “gyp,” a term now no longer in my vocabulary.

We learn as we go; we also teach what we learn.

I’m not one for political correctness for political correctness’ sake. Though, as I continue to make my way through this life and gain deeper appreciation for the disparate wonders of this world, I sometimes find I must let go of points of view that I’d never seen as wrong or inappropriate, before. We get what we get when we get it; sometimes, that with which we have been raised, thus with which we feel quite comfortable, reveals itself to be just wrong … through no one’s fault.

But, once y’know, y’gotta go with it.

Photo: Julie Jacobson/AP

Who doesn’t want to create more intimacy in our relationships? Why is this such a difficult thing in marriage? 

When couples and singles see me for private counseling sessions, intimacy is certainly one of the issues they want to work on. Intimacy begins with YOU!

The first thing I like to do is to define our terms.  When some people talk about having more intimacy, they sometimes mean more emotional intimacy.  Some people mean more sexual intimacy.  And some refer to both the emotional and physical aspects of more intimacy.

Let’s begin with the emotional aspects needed to create more intimacy:

A long time ago, I heard a clever definition of intimacy, re-languaged to Into-Me-I See.  This defines intimacy first as an inner process of self-discovery and self-knowledge.


Now let’s apply this lens in the context of an intimate partnership.  In this partnership, we begin to discover new parts of ourselves.  Or perhaps we uncover parts that are gradually revealed to us in reaction to our partner and the relationship.  We can begin to share these discoveries and insights with our partner.  Such sharing can be a very exciting process.

♦◊♦

To me, being in partnership provides the environment, the soil for me to grow, for me to discover parts of myself that I otherwise wouldn’t know.  This comes from the safety and the trust that builds over time that allows me to become more open and more vulnerable.  With more of me available, I can share more intimacy!

So my partner is the stimulus to me, allowing me to uncover parts of myself that I would never have discovered on my own.  Some of these are the so-called good parts; some are what we label the bad parts.  If we take away the labels and judgments, they are all parts of myself, parts that need to be revealed and illuminated, so that I can make choices about which parts I want to feed and water and nourish and which parts I want to let hibernate, and go dormant.

And in a loving, accepting partnership, I can allow those parts to come out as they are stimulated, and I can share them with myself and my partner.  That is true intimacy to me: discovering parts of myself I didn’t know I had and sharing them with someone.

That is certainly how we can create more intimacy and true growth.  This is how I view emotional intimacy.

◊♦◊

Sometimes we use the term “intimacy” as a polite way of speaking of sexuality and physical connection with a partner.   The sexual act, and sexual connection CAN be an extremely intimate connection.  It isn’t necessarily, yet it CAN be.  And in the context of a loving partnership, the emotional intimacy can fuel the sexual intimacy. And the sexual intimacy can fuel the emotional intimacy.  And they can feed upon each other to create an expansion and growth to the relationship, and MORE intimacy!

You know the old saying that women need love to connect to their sexuality and men need sex to connect to their love?  While I avoid generalizations, there is some truth to this statement.  Perhaps you have experienced this in some of your relationships.

I’ve spoken before about the two styles of connecting to sexuality:  the autogenic, which is more typically masculine, which is more the direct physical connection, and the psychogenic, which is more typically feminine, which is the mental, emotional connection.  For some, desire creates arousal.  For others, arousal creates desire.  Both are true when they are true.  Both work.  Both are valid.

♦◊♦

To bring more sexual intimacy to your relationship, I think it is good to take both routes.  Sometimes it is good to surrender to the physical and let the pure arousal take you over.  Sometimes it is good to create desire, and build up to that arousal.

Again, sexual intimacy, like emotional intimacy is about discovering new parts of yourself and sharing them with your partner.  So stretch and try on new attitudes, new ways of being together sexually.

I’m a believer in what I’ve called “all day foreplay.”  Start in the morning by telling your partner how you feel about them, and what you’d like to be doing with them when you come home from work.  Perhaps leave them a little note with more of your thoughts.  Maybe later, send them a text or even a picture!  Sexting (sexy texting) can be a VERY effective form of foreplay.  Next, maybe an email or a sexy telephone message.  Stretch yourself beyond your comfort zone here, maybe just a little bit.

And when you get home, set the stage even more, whether it’s with the traditional flowers and candy or an erotic gift (or toy) or maybe another card or an original poem.  Building the anticipation and tension is always so nice, especially when you know you’ll be relieving that tension later on.

This article originally appeared, in slightly different format, at The Passion Doctor. 

Photo by Miss Turner

If we want men to talk about men’s issues then we have to stop dressing them up in feminist clothing says Glen Poole, our international men’s movement editor. 

Masculinity has been making headlines in the UK this week. The word on the street is that masculinity is in crisis and men won’t talk about it.

Actually, that’s not true, the word on the street is that the international sporting superstar David Beckham is retiring from football (or soccer if you prefer). This news has been trumpeted from news stands on street corners in every corner of the globe.

Meanwhile, journalists in the UK have been talking about masculinity because a self-declared “card-carrying feminist and single mother” happened to mention that it appears to be in crisis.

This isn’t any feminist, single mother by the way. This is Diane Abbot, Britain’s first black woman Member of Parliament who, as things stand, would be in charge of the nation’s Public Health if the Labour Party wins the next election.

So when Diane Abbot MP makes a speech about “masculinity in crisis” the nation’s political commentators listen – even if people on the street are more interested in an international football star retiring.

♦◊♦

According to Abbott “it’s all become a bit like the film Fight Club—the first rule of being a man in modern Britain is that you’re not allowed to talk about it”.

“Too many British men and boys who need the space and support to talk about manhood….from an early age….will remain silent,” she said.

While women have a life-affirming grassroots political movement, “our men have little movement politics to speak of (and) many British men have no authentic voice”.

It’s time, she said, to “move away from adversarial gender politics”.

Now I’m not generally a fan of Abbot’s left-wing, feminist perspectives on men’s issues but when a woman of her standing comes waving a white flag and calls truce in the Gender Wars, I’m happy to listen.

I turned off the sports report—as there is a limit to the number of interesting angles you can view David Beckham’s retirement from in one day—and took a sneak preview of Abbot’s speech to find out why she thinks we have a “crisis of masculinity”.

It turned out that Abbot is concerned about the crudely individualistic, homophobic, hyper-masculine, porn-obsessed, celebration of heartlessness fuelled by Viagra and Jack Daniels that passes for modern manhood in Britain these days.

Damn it! She lured me away from the football and into gender peace talks with a mention of Fight Club and then comes out with this? And to think I could have been listening to an in depth analysis of how Beckham’s different hairstyles affected his sporting performance instead.

♦◊♦

I’ll be honest with you , I was a bit annoyed and so was Tony Parsons, author of Man and Boy, who wrote in GQ:

“When Diane Abbott asserts that Britain is facing a crisis of masculinity, she is barking up the wrong trouser leg.

“The truth is exactly the opposite—men have never been more in touch with their emotions, and more honest about expressing them. Just because they are not crying in their lap of the Shadow Public Health Minister doesn’t mean they are not doing it.

“Men, I would suggest, have never been better than they are today. More involved in bringing up their children. More genuinely supportive of their partners. More willing to discuss their fears with those closest to them. Diane Abbott appears to know nothing about British men.”

Parsons, an ex-husband of the prominent feminist commentator Julie Burchill, concluded his GQ article by proposing that boxing  should be made compulsory in all schools—which I translated to mean that he prefers Fight Club to feminism.

♦◊♦

For my part, I wrote a comment piece for the left-wing Guardian newspaper saying—in the spirit of Abbott’s proposed gender armistice—that while she is right to say that there aren’t enough men engaged in conversations about manhood, it is little wonder when modern British men are described in such negative terms as being hyper-masculine, homophobic, misogynistic and obsessed with pornography.

More men charged into the gender peace talks to wage war.

Ally Fogg wrote an open letter to Abbott warning against politicians  who ”unfairly and inaccurately portray modern young men and boys as violent, abusive, feral and destructive” and Amol Rajan, who used to be a Sports News Correspondent so probably prefers football to feminism, wrote in The Independent:

“Taking lectures from Abbott on masculinity is a bit like taking lectures from bin Laden on tall buildings. Can you imagine if a bloke gave a speech on a “crisis of femininity”? He’d be slaughtered. Whole queues of haters would form. Online, the abuse would be horrendous. And who do you think would lead the charge? That’s right—Diane Abbott.”

Then in the same newspaper, proving how independent The Independent tries to be, Matt Hill wrote:

“So what’s the answer to the malaise of the modern man? One word: feminism. This may sound odd; after all, we’re often told it’s the rise of women that has left us insecure and bewildered. But female empowerment isn’t a zero-sum game. The fact is, men have much more to gain from feminism than they have to lose – and it’s time we started talking about it.”

And with that I turned back to the sports reports and wondered whether I should watch Fight Club again this weekend—it’s been a while.

♦◊♦

If men like me who are obsessed by men’s issues get turned off by this conversation is it any wonder most men don’t talk about it?

The problem here isn’t that men won’t talk about gender. The problem is that people like Abbott say they want men to talk about gender issues when what they actually mean is that they want men to talk about gender issues from a feminist perspective.

But this is short-sighted approach because there are only two types of people who are really passionate about talking about feminism and that’s feminists and anti-feminists.

And this is why I’m passionate about people having non-feminist conversations about men’s issues because whilst feminism will rarely be as interesting to men as Fight Club or football, men’s issues can be.

♦◊♦

When you dismantle the left-wing, feminist context of Abbott’s speech you start to see we have some great content to work with. Check out these extracts:

“The problems we face as a country are huge. Many men are paying heavy costs, in shallow relationships, poor health and early death. In 2012, the Office for National Statistics gave average male life expectancy as 78.2 years and average female life expectancy as 82.3 years.

“Suicide, substance misuse, anti-social behaviour, “disappearing” from home, homelessness and a variety of behavioural problems are all markedly more common in men and boys. Men are also more likely to exhibit personality disorders.

“An analysis of the cancers that men and women ‘share’ by Cancer Research shows that men are 56% more likely to develop one of these cancers and 67% more likely to die.

“Men have measurably lower access to the social support of friends, relatives and community. Suicide is the single most common cause of death in men under 35. Credible evidence [suggests] that the suicide rate in England is linked to the current recession.

“The centrality of money in the lives of many men means that the loss of cultural certainty associated with unemployment can be more damaging for men than women.

“And our young boys are often behind in school, and increasingly have low self-esteem about their body image. Young men are failing to reach mature adulthood in massive numbers, mostly for lack of role-models and reasonable paths toward success.

“We have lots of boys who at an early age start to think of education as being not macho enough. Nearly one in five boys is being taught in a primary school without a single male teacher on the staff.”

“The radio silence around these issues cannot continue any longer.”

There are many issues highlighted in Abbott’s speech that even the staunchest anti-feminist would agree are problems for men and boys. There’s enough raw material there to make men’s issues as interesting as football and Fight Club, but you can’t do it by insisting that the conversation has to held within a feminist framework.

♦◊♦

Abbot says that “we must allow men and boys” to talk and then lays down the law by saying that those conversations must be about men and boys exploring “sensitivity, emotions, sexuality, boundaries, communication, and family life”.

What if those aren’t the conversations that men and boys want to have? If Men’s Rights Activists began laying down the law on what conversations women and girls should be allowed to have, you can imagine the response.

The irony in all of this is that getting men interested in men’s issues from a political perspective is exactly the same as getting people interested in black issues or women’s issues—as pioneers like Abbott have been doing for decades.

Getting people interested in men’s issues starts with a few positive advocates for men and boys—just like we began with a handful of positive advocates for women’s issues and black issues.

Once we have enough positive advocates in place all we need to do is inform men of all the inequality and disadvantage and discrimination they face as men and boys—just like we have done for women and black people.

I know from experience that once men and boys get interested in the undeniable inequalities that men and boys face, they start to get really interested in finding political solutions to these personal problems.

As Diane Abbott said: “All the while, where the barren soil of inequality has sprung crucial and life-affirming grassroots politics for women, our men have little movement politics to speak of. Many British men have no authentic voice.”

Abbott may want to be careful what she wishes for. If we want to hear men’s authentic voices then show them the barren soil of inequalities that men and boys face and allow a crucial, life-affirming grassroots politics for men to spring up.

If we allow men and boys the space to talk about the issues men face then we will create a political movement—but it won’t be a movement that’s only filled with left-wing, feminist men. It will be as hairy and scary; as innovative and inspiring; as world-changing and life-affirming; as assertive and nurturing as men and boys in all our diversity authentically are.

This type of movement will be more interesting to men than feminism and it might even be more interesting than Fight Club and football.

♦◊♦

Image: Flickr/stroopsmma

Further Reading:

• The Crisis of Masculinity in Britain
• We’ve Got to Learn to Talk About Men International Men’s Movement
• It’s Time to Stop Discriminating About Men

Justin Cascio talks to T Cooper, author of Real Man Adventures, about writing, crying, and being a real man.

As I read Real Man Adventures, I took notes. Early on, I fill pages with my annoyances: with its insensitivity and self centeredness, its makeup of essays and letters that did not progress a narrative so much as enmesh its protagonist in a place and time: the world of things white people like, of trans rights and Unitarian style inclusion. As it progressed, I began to read this in a more “meta” way: as the evolution of a trans man’s consciousness, because we all seem to go through this second adolescence, full of discovery and change, but also agitation and righteousness, that makes us hard to be around except to others going through their own second adolescences. The letters we write to our parents, with the good news and bad news—good news, we know who we are now, and bad news, it’s not who you thought it would be—are the same, and yet different.

In addition to his own essays and letters, he interviews his wife, other trans men, his brother, the parents of other trans men, gender pioneer Kate Bornstein, and a male erotic dancer named ReDickulous.Through these perspectives, the progression takes on shape: this is the new bildungsroman, the transition novel.

I spoke to T Cooper by Skype, and we both reveled in the opportunity to talk to another trans man about our experiences discovering who we were, and how we were able to arrive there.

Cascio: First of all, your book cover is the best ever. Kitschy, old school boys’ adventure book, housing a book that is anything but. It doesn’t follow a typical narrative format, being composed of letters, interviews, essays, artwork, lists, diagrams, poems, and six-word memoirs, and reaching outward to encompass other people’s perspectives, and inward, where boys’ adventure books rarely go, into identity, emotion, and felt experience. There’s not much “T strides into the men’s room,” but there is quite a lot of discussion about the fears you and your wife have about you striding in.

How do you feel about your own book cover… as a child, did you feel that looking like a tomboy was important? What about how you look now: would you say the cover matches the contents?

Cooper: The idea for this book’s design and cover came from a pulp magazine survey book that my wife bought me. I knew that McSweeney’s considers the whole package when conceiving of a book’s design—even how it feels in your hands, considering reading a print book is such a tactile experience. I liked the idea of playing with that quintessential boys’ journey—man vs. beast, man vs. society—those tropes we learned in school. We looked at a lot of images before deciding on this one. The guy on the cover is half naked, and totally gay looking, which I love, because the book isn’t gay at all. The pulps from that era, the coverlines hinted at certain themes. It was very much “How to Be a Man,” “How To Please Your Wife like a Real Man,” “How to Protect Yourself from Prostitutes and Disease”—seriously. These were the stories in there. There were also “real-life” tales that read like fiction, you know, military adventures—a lot of, “How I Single-handedly Killed 20 Nazis”, or, “I survived being bit by a giant snake and losing my arm” adventures. So, I like playing with the epic hero’s journey, and visually the guy fighting the shark on the cover evokes that. My last book was about a polar bear who has to migrate to Hollywood because his native habitat is disappearing, and he, too, has to embark on the death-defying adventure of becoming a man.

Cascio: When did you first learn of the existence of trans men? How long until you applied this knowledge to yourself? Until transitioning?

Cooper: I’m forty. If I was doing it now I’d find out when I was twelve. But not til my early, mid twenties. How did you find out?

Cascio: In high school, I briefly considered becoming a therapist who counsels transgender people going through transition, but I thought of it without any consciousness. I felt very strongly sympathetic. And I felt that way too when I met my first trans man. I’m going to call her “she” because that’s how she lived. I was young and just trying to come out as lesbian, putting on vests and showing up at the bars and expecting something to happen, but nothing did. I was working as a secretary in a hospital and knew this woman who worked in another department, and I thought she was a butch lesbian. She seemed to like me and I wanted to talk to her. She was a lot older than me, close to fifty, but she said she’d never had sex and never would, not in that body, but that she was waiting for her parents to die before she could transition, that she could never bring that shame on her parents. And I felt terrible for her, but I thought that to show her that too much would be disrespectful, somehow.

It wasn’t until my grandmother died, and it hit me really hard, that I investigated the resources I had. I was best friends with and living with a man who studied gender performance. He had a whole shelf full of books—I could have started with Kate Bornstein and worked my way through to Judith Butler, if I wanted to—but I never touched them until after my grandmother died. I took a lot of time off work and smoked a lot of cigarettes and just read. I started with Stone Butch Blues, and even though the book ends differently for Jess, by the time I finished the book, I knew what I wanted and needed to do. I got on the internet and started searching.

Cooper:  I was about 25 and doing I guess what was considered performance art in a troupe called the Backdoor Boys. It was a boy band. We toured a bunch and were written about by gender theorists. So that’s probably how I was introduced to the world. There was a German guy we performed with one time, and he made an impression on me. He was the first person who I knew who was taking testosterone.

But there was just a dearth of information when I was coming up. I have a younger friend who at age 13 or something was on the internet and had access to all this info, pictures of surgery results, chat rooms, all sorts of support. I met him and he was pretty much transitioned and not even out of high school. I was like, “Fucker.”

But my path is just my path. I maybe could have figured shit out earlier, but then I wouldn’t be me, and I like who I am. Sometimes I’m still like, “You little fucker.” These young kids’ parents are like, “Are you comfortable in your skin, dear? Can we get you some testosterone, or perhaps somebody you can talk to about your feelings?” I do resent him a little for that.

Cascio: You talk about your voice in this book. First, there is your physical voice. How do you feel about the way you sound? And as far as your interior voice, do you think that you managed to convey that well in your book? Is that you in there, in other words?

Cooper: As far as my literal voice goes, I don’t think about it that much. I don’t think about it, and then a moment will happen where I suppose I’m speaking differently. I’ll be on the phone with a credit card company, and later my kids will tell me, “You’re talking so mean.” I guess I talk lower and sound angrier when I’m trying to get my business handled. So those are the times when I notice it. I guess I don’t sweat it too much. I was never one to obsess over taking selfies every two weeks, showing them to friends or strangers on the internet. That’s probably generational because I have a deep distrust of the blast of no privacy on the internet. It’s not as though I had a goal in mind of what I wanted to sound or look like. I wanted to just look and sound how I would. We all have our own paths, including transition. Everyone is unique, everybody is going to respond differently if they’re taking hormones. I mean, sure, I wish I sounded like Barry White sometimes.

Cascio: Don’t we all.

Cooper: Don’t we all. Whatever, I feel comfortable being in the world. When it was higher though, I was definitely uncomfortable, but I’m fortunate not to be there anymore.

Metaphorical voice? I’ve been at writing for a while, coming up with characters, telling stories or conceiving of these so-called heroes’ journeys. This time the character just happened to be me, but I don’t think of it as my story, necessarily. There are, by design, many more voices in the book than just my own. I don’t think I could have told this story if it was just me, all the time.This is also why I put out  the CD that came out with the book. I wanted a lot of people weighing in on the subject of masculinity in different mediums. I’m lucky to know a lot of musicians, and I asked them choose different chapters of the book and write songs in response to them. Artists like Dynasty Handbag, Geo Wyeth, Kathleen Hanna and The Julie Ruin. Uh, nothing? Who else, have you heard of the writer Rick Moody?

Cascio: I’m sorry, no. I’m sorry I don’t know anyone… I just live in this little valley where I bike to the farm for vegetables, and walk my dog along the river. I have this internet job but other than that, I could go days, weeks, without seeing the news. I don’t have a TV. I don’t listen to the radio.

Cooper: [Rick Moody] is an author, and he also writes and plays music. He contributed an original song to the CD and also played with his band [The Wingdale Community Singers] at one of my events for the book. Uh, since you live in a cave, have you heard of a little TV show called American Idol? Do you know Clay Aiken?

Cascio: My husband watches it, so yeah. Again, I’m sorry that the only one I know is the American Idol.

Cooper: Yay, there you go. [Clay Aiken] didn’t write a song for the CD, but he performed one at another book event, and also read from the book with me. He played the part of my wife, and also the part of the US Department of State when I was trying to get my Passport with the correct gender marker on it. And he played ReDickulous, which was awesome to hear him talking about how big his dick is (in ReDickulous’ voice of course). All throughout the tour I asked different guests to read with me, a lot of them literally taking the words out of my mouth in prose and music.

There, I talked about voice.

[Continue reading]

The Style Gent reflects on the differences between two of the most famous alter-egos.

I’ve been contemplating this post for quite sometime. Mostly because of my fascination with male archetypes, a fellow blogger’s post and some Twitter conversations that I’ve been having lately. It began with a post by @GentlemanRedux called “Don’t Expect A Superman If You Won’t Be a Wonder Woman” - a really good read. I had talked with @WarrenLiao and @ImageGranted on the style and clothing choices of Mr. Wayne and Mr. Kent. The question was asked who you would like to be and why. Then I begin to think about personality, lifestyle and began to wonder which one would I prefer. My choice? Clark.

What’s Your Choice?

Take Our Poll

You may laugh, but I’ll explain my reasons about why I think he’s a better choice. It’s not because of his Kryptonian heritage. I’ll go into that a little later. @QuentinMcCall tweeted on the virtues of a good woman bringing out the “Superman” in her man by giving her his encouraging support.

He said:

“A good woman will help transform a man from Clark Kent into Superman.”

I responded:

“Most of us have Bruce Wayne tendencies and need to develop Clark Kent habits.”

I believe that for some or most of us we tend to gravitate toward Bruce Wayne, rather than Clark Kent. Why? Well, because he’s wealthy, successful, a ladies man, has impeccable taste in clothing, Heck, even Gorgio Armani advertised himself as being Bruce’s designer of choice.

Now I won’t knock the pull toward Mr. Wayne. There was a time when I really liked the enigmatic duality that he represents. I think that most guys would agree that he definitely has the swag, cool influence, power and sophistication that we’d like to attain. However, like most male archetypal heroes he comes with a slew of  emotional baggage. His motivations and methods are questionable and he’s never truly attains any real happiness. We all know his story: Young, rich trust fund baby who witnesses his parents murder, searing him severely psychologically, causing him to become a vigilante who continues to punish those who prey on the weak or innocent. He lives two lives…one of  luxury and one of guilt and anger that plays out each night he puts on that cowl. It’s a lonely existence. His relationships are filled with women that are either trophies for his arm, those who try to heal him, or a latex-wearing, emotionally scarred sexpot with a penchant for stealing and men in bat suits. Not a good look. Ultimately, Bruce’s life to the outside looks perfect but we know better.

Personally, I now gravitate toward Mr. Kent. Kal-El son of Jor-El but not because of his Sun induced, Kryptonian powers or his Christian origin overtones or even that perfect hair and cowlick that he’s famous for. It’s because of the unassuming power and meekness he posses as Clark Kent. I’ve always been fascinated with motive and intent. Bruce and Clark are perfect examples. Both are heroes, both had tragic pasts but each took a different route to their lives. Sure, Clark lives a life of duality but his reasons are completely different from Bruce’s and this plays out even when they interact with each other either as their caped or secret identities.

Clark’s a hero because he understands the proper use of Power, the balance view of Justice, he knows how to give and receive Love and is Wise enough to know when those qualities are out of sync. Bruce’s guilt and sense of powerlessness drives him to put on the cowl. Sure he has the cars, the parties, random women and cool gadgets, but his life is constantly filled with frustration, failed relationships and emptiness. In contrast, Clark lives a relatively simple life, with a good job and a stable relationship with a woman that sees something in him that drew her to in. Was it the hair? the chiseled pecs, arms and chest? Was it the physical power that he possesses? Possibly, but not likely. If you are familiar with the timeline, you know that there was a time when Clark willingly gave up those powers to live a normal life with Lois. Turns out she loved him anyway. The powers were a bonus. Clark is by no means perfect, he struggles with his own issues. Yet, it doesn’t plague his life day-to-day like a millstone around his neck.

Now I’m not trying to get philosophical, but I  believe that there is a lesson to be learned:

1. We can’t run from our past, we can only make peace with it, learn from it and move on.
2. In everything there is choice. No matter what our background may be: wealthy or poor, disadvantaged or privileged, sordid or stable, we all can use that as a reason to justify our actions. If we have a tragic past will we squander that experience on destructive behavior or use it to help someone avoid making those same mistakes we may have made?
3. Having money and wealth doesn’t make you happy, neither does having a regular 9 to 5. Having purpose does. Not just purpose centered around self, but purpose centered around helping others.
4. Purpose needs to be motivated by pure intent. Purpose motivated by guilt, fear, greed, arrogance and self righteousness won’t last and won’t ultimately make a lasting impact on your life or the lives of others.

I admire Clark because of his meekness, his kindness and tenderness. He knows he can leap tall buildings in a single bound, fly faster than a speeding bullet, has unquestionable super human strength but his healthy self-esteem gives him the ability to not take it too seriously, to display those abilities only when absolutely necessary and to be ok with wearing those geeky glasses, play the awkward reporter and even be second fiddle to his alter ego so that he and Lois can have a life of purpose together. Can we do that? Do you have the strength not to be first, to display meekness, kindness and to put others before yourself?

 ”A man’s power is in his mental, emotional, mental  & spiritual strength, the ability to refrain when necessary & act when called upon.” - TSG

Originally appeared at The Style Gent

Sean Beaudoin has one hundred words on love.

♦◊♦

I. Love.

John Coltrane. Almonds. Saul Bellow. My Grandmother Irene. Mexico. Shostakovitch. James Salter. Malbec. Robert Mitchum. Blueberries. My wife’s laugh. Phoebe Cates. Diet Ginger Ale. My Bloody Valentine. Madrid. Diane Arbus. Mean Streets. Anne Sexton. The Replacements. Cezanne. Tossing around a football in bare feet. Johnny Hodges. Michele Obama. Weddings. Stanley Kubrick. Roxy Music. Tacos with nothing but meat, onion, and cilantro. A good waiter. A surly waitress. Infomercials. Tesla. Mike James Kirkland. The Sweet Smell of Success. Jim Carroll. Body surfing. Edie Sedgewick. Florence. People singing on porches. Son House. Really well made shoes. The James Gang. Billie Holiday. My daughter’s knees. Old vinyl. Vladimir Nabakov.

 ♦◊♦

Read Sean Beaudoin’s novel The Infects

Read more 100 Words from Men on Love on The Good Life.

D. T. Brown didn’t quit owning things. He quit materialism.

For years I had heard stories of people simplifying their life. I saw people making changes, from deciding not to buy any new shoes for a year to going full-bore minimalist. I saw pictures of uncluttered cottages, trash-free garbage cans, and pristine white countertops graced with only one white coffee cup.

While I knew the real minimalist life most likely was not that simple, I felt the weight of my too-big house and boat and cars and furniture and toys I rarely used. And I would hear these stories and something inside me ached for a simpler, less-cluttered life like that.

But, I figured, I had to provide a “full” life for myself and my wife, and stock up on life for our future kids. I would later come to realize that part of me also wanted to maintain an image of success, to show that I had my life together, that I was a hard-working, upwardly mobile, blessed American man.

Then came the anxiety attacks. After suffering for more than a year of not being to fall asleep because I thought I was going insane, and frequently waking up my wife for her to talk me down from my panicked spirals, I finally started talking to a therapist. And I soon realized that I was living for other people and not being really true to myself.

Fortunately, my wife had also been re-evaluating her life, and we were on the same page as far as a desire to adjust our life. We wanted to start living more in line with who we really were instead of who we thought we were supposed to be. We wanted to focus on what we wanted instead of comparing ourselves to some American Dream ideal. So over the course of a few years, we began to slowly eliminate the things that felt like extra weight.

And we lived happily ever after, and simplified, and lived a minimalist life with trash-free garbage cans, right? Wrong. We got a divorce. Then three months later, with the divorce still in process, I lost my job.

Out of habit, I began applying for corporate jobs, just like I had been doing for the past 15 years. Even though they were jobs I really didn’t want, I needed a job to pay for my house and car and possessions. It’s just what you do. The idea is that I’m irresponsible if I don’t. There’s the tape that played in the back of my mind that if I don’t continue with the same pattern of life, everything would fall apart. But it had fallen apart anyway.

I remember one point, face in my palms, I reflected on all that had happened up to that point. Images of all the major events of the past few years rushed through my mind in a fast-forward montage. Proudly owning the big house. Self-discovery. Selling the big house and buying the smaller one. The divorce. The job loss. I felt like crying, but something deeper took over.

I experienced awareness, deep inside, that this was exactly how it should be. And it was okay, and even good. So much of my life had been stripped down by that point, and all that was left was the real me. No more to lose. And no need to surround myself with stuff.

I realized that the main reason I would be going back into Cubicle Land was so I could stay surrounded with proof of my success. So I could maintain the American Dream, complete with all the cool modern furniture, clothing and toys. Nothing wrong with those things, but I just wanted a truly fresh start. A life I could live wherever I wanted and how I wanted, without having to worry about where I would keep things if I wanted to travel somewhere. My thinking boiled it all down to the fact that it was really just a simple trade-off:

“If I keep all these things, I will need to pay for somewhere to keep them,” I thought. “I could buy keep the house or rent someplace to keep them, but I just don’t want to be weighed down with that cost. Because that cost will require me to have a certain type of job, and that type of job will limit my freedom. So which do I value more? These possessions or freedom?” I chose freedom.

Many will read that and think, “But it’s not that simple. It’s not that dualistic. You can have possessions and have freedom.” Of course.

But I didn’t quit possessions, I quit materialism, which for me is the idea that more possessions are proof that one is following the prescribed model for what freedom should look like. My old thinking (even if it was subconscious) was that the American Dream means freedom to accumulate wealth, which is made visible with possessions, the amount and quality of which may vary by user.

I wanted to take tangible action to get out of that system. And I had an opportunity, thanks to divorce and job loss, to take big, bold action, so I did.

I sold my house. Gave the furniture to my ex-wife. Sold my car. Gave away many of my clothes. Sold almost all my books. Got rid of a lot of stuff I had held onto just because I didn’t want to let it go. And I left, with just a backpack of necessities. And I felt the easiest way to start over with this cleaner, smaller slate, was to do something I’d been wanting to try for some time: move to another country.

I’ve been living in a one-room cabin in a remote jungle village in Central America. I write for a living, and can work from anywhere in the world that has Internet. I don’t have much money, or a permanent home. I don’t know exactly how long I will be here, or where I’ll end up, even in the next few months. But I do know that I am free.

Read more on Quitting on The Good Life.

Image credit: Number Six (bill lapp)/Flickr

On Sunday, two Dorian Joyners donned their caps and gowns to graduate from Morehouse College in Georgia, where the commencement speech was given by President Obama.

In 1988, Dorian Joyner Sr. was a student at Morehouse College in Atlanta. When he took some time off, he didn’t think it would be 22 years.

But after becoing a senior analyst in data and finance for several major corporations, including a law firm, he decided that enough time had passed and it was time to return, so in 2010 he approached his son, who was currently a student at Morehouse, about his plans to finish his degree.

“I just told him to repeat the question one more time and repeat the answer one more time because I thought I heard a different answer,” Dorian Joyner Jr. told ABCNews.com with a laugh. “I thought he was coming to visit friends. He was coming back as a student.”

Joyner Sr. had already gone back to school in 2006 to get an associate’s degree in paralegal studies to make sure that he wanted to invest time and money into law school. When he went back to Morehouse, even though he dressed “younger” and carried a backpack to fit in with the other students, he was largely avoided—until his first group project when his classmates, who were the same age as his son, realized how good he was at giving presentations thanks to his 20-plus years of business experience. After that, he was just another one of the guys.

On campus, Joyner Jr. took to keeping an eye on his dad and looking out for him. “He acts like he’s my father on campus,” Joyner Sr. said. “He’ll say, ‘Did you get your class? Did you register?’ He makes sure to check up on everything.”

“When we saw each other, we’d greet each other, talk to each other and see how the other was doing in classes,” Joyner Jr. said. “Sometimes, people would walk past us when we were talking and say, ‘Wow, you two look just alike.’”

Their familial resemblance and big age difference certainly shocked some professors. Though the two never had a class together, they did share some of the same teachers, who would do a double-take when they saw that they had a different Dorian Joyner in their class than they had previously taught.

They took care of each other in school, and at Sunday’s graduation ceremony, where President Obama gave an incredibly personal speech to the historically black, all-male campus, they were both very proud of each other.

“It’s just going to be an exciting time all around,” Joyner Sr. said. “It makes me proud. I watched him struggle through school and he’s my firstborn, so it really makes me proud.”

“I’m definitely proud of him,” Joyner Jr. said in turn. “I’m proud of him as a man to go back and fulfill a degree. A lot of people his age have a family, have a career and really don’t have the time or finance to go back to school. The fact that he took the opportunity to find financing and time to go back to school while maintaining a social life and a family is very astounding. That’s hard to do.”

Photo: Carolyn Kaster/AP

A lot of the trials of college life can be mitigated by some simple conversations.

My car was loaded and I was ready to hit the road. Eighteen years old and college bound. Mom gave me a hug and asked whether I had told my dad goodbye.

I went back into the house, shook my dad’s hand and told him I was leaving.

“Where are you going?” he asked. My dad, though wonderful in most every way, has always had a certain detachment when it came to situations such as this. So I couldn’t tell whether he was joking or serious. I’m still not sure.

“Headed to college,” I said. I walked to the car and he followed me half way to the drive.


My mom looked at my dad and wondered whether he had any last minute words of wisdom.

“Don’t be a dipshit.”

“Um. Okay. Thanks.”

And off I went. I chuckled at my dad’s seemingly trite admonition, then spent the next three months failing to heed it. I was a colossal dipshit. I made horrible grades and ended up transferring schools.

Looking back, I doubt anything my dad said could have saved me from myself. I was insecure, immature and ill-equipped to handle my new and sudden independence.

♦◊♦

When my son went to college two years ago, I wrote a list of “50 Rules for Sons” in an effort to summarize the lessons I had hoped, but likely failed, to impart during his first 18 years. I did the same for my daughter who is graduating this month. They have served as the starting point for some interesting conversations.

There is no primer on how to have a conversation with our own children, especially when they are young adults. The transition from parent to peer can be awkward and uncomfortable. Here are a few basic ground rules.

-       Don’t force it

-       Listen

-       Don’t interrupt

-       Don’t use your conversation as a “teaching moment”

-       Don’t judge

They are adults now and should be treated as such. With those ground rules in mind, I have identified three conversations you might want to have with your child who is about to leave home for the first time.

What (and who) must they leave behind?

No matter how independent your child, leaving home is a daunting ordeal. There is an emotional bond with home that transcends reason or rational thinking. Are you making it easier or harder?  What (or who) are they holding onto? Do you make them feel guilty? Are you unfairly dependent on them? Are they too dependent on you?

Ask them. Then listen. There may even be an unintended tether that is holding them back.

I am always surprised at the things that I have said to my kids over the years that have been misinterpreted or misunderstood. I took my daughter on a college visit last year. She was filling out a questionnaire which asked about her desired area of study. She turned to me and asked what to put down.

“I don’t know what I want to study but I have to put something down.”

Trying to be helpful I told her to just put down something general in nature.

“Just write down ‘business’,” I suggested.

A few months later she was trying to narrow down her list of schools and she was in tears. I wondered what was wrong.

“I just don’t want to be a business major,” she said. I had to explain that I never intended to convey a desire for her to major in business. She was visibly relieved.

After accumulating 18 plus years of conversation, instruction, nuance, and manipulation, it’s no wonder our sons and daughters feel conflicted. So it wouldn’t hurt to clear the air.

There is not a more beautiful gift you can give your child than unconditional permission to leave and to be themselves.

How will they define success?

I love the story of the party goers who were on a large boat, eating lobster, drinking wine, having the time of their lives. It was a perfect evening and they could not have desired anything more…until an even bigger yacht pulled in right beside them.

Oftentimes our only reference point for our own success is the relative success of others. But it’s even less than that. It’s what we perceive to be the relative success of others. Here’s the huge flaw in buying into that success matrix: it only counts wealth and status as success benchmarks.

When I left for college I couldn’t see farther into the future than the next weekend. I defined success as a good party, and a good party was the next party. I had no concept of a larger picture of success. I majored in the minors.

When I graduated, I wasn’t much better. I used to believe that people who were not wealthy were unhappy. It was a long time before I realized that usually the opposite is true.

Ask your kids how they would define success. If they answer money or power, you still have some work to do.

How will they stay engaged and motivated?

Successful people share a number of traits. They are typically smart, ambitious, articulate and hard working. But I believe they share an often overlooked attribute- curiosity.

They are interested in and inspired by the world around them. They ask difficult questions. They want to know how things work. They read. They investigate. They want to disrupt the status quo. They aren’t afraid of divergent or conflicting opinions. In fact, they seek them out. They aren’t afraid to be wrong.

Ask your kids what they will do to get out of their comfort zone. How will they find new challenges? How will they overcome the insecurity that accompanies original thoughts and ideas? How will they resist distractions? How will they avoid destructive behaviors?

I regret my failure to seek opportunities to try new things when I was young. I joined a fraternity with guys who were mirror images of me. As my daughter likes to say: “Sameness is lameness.” Instead of filling my time with new people and new ideas, I filled it with happy hours and hall parties.

Vices and bad habits are often the by-products of boredom, complacency and insecurity. Arming your son or daughter with the confidence to seek new challenges will give them a significant head start in life.

◊♦◊

Disclaimer: The aforementioned advice is subject to almost constant revision depending on circumstances, mood, dynamics and relationships. In case of emergency, simply resort to the following advice, likely to prove just as effective: “Don’t be a dipshit.”

 Photo by Brosner

–

Dr. Vibe asks: Why are so many good Black men still single?

Victory Unlimited is the codename of the man who hosts The Victory Unlimited Show. The fans of the show call it the greatest rating, Relationship, and life strategy show for men in the world. It’s the headquarters for nice guys, good guys, and gutsy guys who want to better their lives. We go through his article The Top Twelve Reasons Why So Many Good Black Men Are Still Single as well as what kind of responses he is getting from men and women about the article. He also gives some words of advice for single Black men and women.

–Photo: rprathap/Flickr

Any response other than “a couple of weeks” and you’re at risk.

Once upon a time, jobs were fairly secure. We like to pretend they still are, but they’re not. You are one merger / acquisition, one departmental reorganization, or one crazy boss away from being let go, even if you performing well and haven’t done anything wrong. I’m not saying this is good or bad, but these are the times we live in.

So, it’s Monday. If you were to walk into the office and find an email directing you to report to Conference Room 1, where your boss and an HR representative were waiting for you, looking uncomfortable, and they gave you the news that your job has been eliminated, and you get a few weeks of severance, plus one additional week for each year of service…How long would it take you to get a new job?

This is not an academic exercise. It is a statistical probability over the course of your career. The question is not “if it happens…” but “when it happens, how prepared are you?” How long would it take you to find work? Ponder that for a moment. Would you even know where to start in looking for a new job? (Hint: if you think it involves carpet-bombing all of the companies in your industry with  resumes, you are grossly mistaken.)

You may be tempted to play the victim here, and assert that this sort of thing is out of your control. It is not. There are larger macroeconomic forces at play, and you can make them work to your advantage, but it boils down to two factors, which will be discussed in subsequent posts: 1.) How valuable are your skills? 2.) How well connected are you to people who need your services?

image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

For Thomas Saenz, no risk was too great to get the education he wanted.

On May 24, Thomas Saenz graduated from the University of Southern California with a master’s degree in engineering—while he was commanding a top security team in Afghanistan.

At one point, he needed armed guard and an armored car to get to an exam site. A deadly bomb attack near his camp made it impossible for him to attend a class, which was transmitted live at 5 a.m. online. The camp was locked down, but he immediately contacted his professor when he was able to get online.

“I was worried because it was early in the semester and I was afraid it would affect my grade,” Saenz said. “But they were real supportive.”

And it is no wonder: “Not only was he out there living on the edge, but he had to get his homework done,” USC professor Frank Alvidrez said. “”I told my class if Thomas can get his homework done on time then I don’t think there are any excuses for the rest of you all. And he pulled an ‘A.’ He was one of the top 10 percent.”

Although the exact number of others like Saenz who earn their degrees while in combat is not known, there is a commencement ceremony for 100 war-zone graduates from various universities planned in late May in Kandahar.

“They really are multi-tasking in the extreme,” said Bob Ludwig, spokesman for the University of Maryland University College. UMUC has about 30,000 active-duty service members among its students and was one of the first schools to actually send faculty to Iraq to teach troops in 2008. It also has adjunct professors giving classes out of tents in remote outposts of Afghanistan.

Ludwig believes that the coursework, rather than providing extra stress, can actually provide relief from the mental turmoil of war.

“It really is an opportunity to step away from the battlefield and have the sort of the safety of being in a classroom,” he said.

Saenz, a 33-year-old father of two, used the GI Bill to enroll at USC, but midway through his studies the Navy pilot was called to be deployed to Afghanistan. It did not deter him, though. Saenz said he was determined to finish his advanced degree—the second person in his extended family to do so—knowing his 10-year Navy career was ending in June.

An essay he wrote for one of his classes was on WWII veterans going on to lead top companies after returning home. With today’s technology, he sees opportunities for veterans to follow in those footsteps more easily than ever.

“I think we’re in that period again, with the post 9/11 GI Bill and all these kids coming back with their experience overseas,” Saenz said. “Hopefully we can come back and do great things for our country outside of our uniform.”

Photo: Thomas Saenz/AP

This is a comment by Lars Fisher on the post “I’d Benefit From a Traditional Wife“.

Lars Fisher said:

Great post – loved the tone and the imagery.

While I’m not living with a writer, I *am* living with a techie geek who will disappear into whatever project is current – work or non-work – and forget time, place, husband, and children. So, yeah – I recognize the hey-you-need-this-warm-cuppa-tea and the making sure dinner is put on the table and laundry is done and children cared for. All while having my own bit-more-that-full-time job.

But then, I get to benefit from some of these projects (even if don’t much of a say in what they are), and we all benefit from having two solid incomes in the family. And I benefit from her sometimes looking at *me* when I’m spending all night editing a strategy paper or preparing a talk and bringing me that cup of coffee I needed, or nudging me up and out on the terrace for a joint break with the kids.

So, well – can’t say I need a wife. I have one, and I kinda enjoy doing most household chores anyway. But I’m happy I have a wife, and I do think being two, both contributing across the board, go a long, long way. Especially if you can learn to accept that it’s not a fairness game and that contributions don’t have to be measured and don’t have to be the same and so you shouldn’t feel bad at the times you’re the one doing the disappearance act. Being a couple should be all about supporting each other, not about getting in each other’s way.

—

Like this Comment of the Day? Here are more.

Want to nominate a comment of the day? Email the comment and the post it was on to deanna.m.ogle@gmail.com.

–

Photo credit: Flickr / OakleyOriginals

Patterns, colors, proportions, oh my!

If you’re looking for a good rule of thumb on how to be a little bit bolder with your shirt and tie choices, or get tripped up when it comes to mixing patterns, look no further. Lifehacker and Beckett and Simonon have your back. Check out this infographic for an easy guide to making your clothing pairings look great.

[Via: Lifehacker and Beckett and Simonon]

A city ordinance requiring all heads of household to own both a firearm and ammunition has many advocates of gun control up in arms.

Nelson, Georgia, a tiny town of about 1,300 residents, is facing a legal battle over a city ordinance passed in early April that requires “every head of household to have a gun and ammunition.” According to CNN, The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence “filed a federal lawsuit” on Thursday, claiming the new law is “unconstitutional.”

The suit says the law violates the First Amendment to the Constitution because requiring people to purchase a firearm when they don’t want to own one violates their freedom of speech and their “freedom to act or not to act.” The law violates the 14th Amendment because it creates two classes of individuals: heads of households and non-heads of households, the suit says.

The suit also says the law violates the Second Amendment, because that amendment does not require, or permit the government to require, owning a firearm.

A spokesman for The Brady Center said in a statement:

In this lawsuit we seek to establish that the government does not have the authority to compel Americans to buy guns or bring them into their homes … Forcing residents to buy guns they do not want or need won’t make the City of Nelson or its people any safer, and only serves to increase gun sales and gun industry profits.  A gun brought into your home is far more likely to be used to injure or kill a family member, than to ward off an intruder.

Local officials and town leaders insist the ordinance is “largely symbolic, is not actually being enforced, and anyone who opposes gun ownership on moral or religious grounds can opt out.” They also point out that citizens who ”suffer from a physical or mental disability,” felons, “paupers” or people who “conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine,” can opt out of purchasing a fire arm. Advocates also argue that the new law is a “protest against the push toward stricter gun control at a federal level.”

But as The Brady Center points out, the ordinance actually states that there is a $1,000 fine for any “head of household” who does not meet the exemption requirements and still refuses to purchase a gun and ammunition.

The case has yet to be scheduled to go before a federal judge.

Baby feet are, allegedly, like catnip.

s.e.smith insists that if everyone could just mind their own damned business when it came to who has kids and who doesn’t, we’d all be happier people.

This society seems to take a very “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” stance when it comes to children and whether or not you’re going to have them.

If you have children, you’re doing your part to uphold traditional gender roles, raising the next generation, obeying biological imperative — but your children should be seen and not heard, and preferably not really seen, either. And you shouldn’t expect any help with them, like funds to help educate, feed, and clothe your child. And no matter which parenting technique you use, you will be judged by someone, somewhere. For example, if you don’t or can’t breastfeed, you’re a monster. But if you do breastfeed, you’re gross and shouldn’t do it in public. There is literally no way to win when you are a parent.

If you don’t have children and you appear to be a lady, though, you’re highly suspect. You’re selfish and gross for not wanting to have kids. You’ll change your mind eventually — assuming you aren’t trapped in tragic spinsterhood forever, never knowing the fulfillment that comes with having children of your very own. You’ll never be a real woman, let alone a real adult, if you don’t have kids, you know.

If everyone could just mind their own damned business when it came to who has kids and who doesn’t, we’d all be happier people. Trust me on this one, people.

Look at this happy baby! Photo credit: shanelkaricharan.

NO BABIES, THANKS

Here’s the thing: I’m childfree. I emphatically do not want children and have known this from a very young age. I’m so secure in not wanting children that I had a tubal ligation to ensure that no baby would ever emerge from my body, barring some pretty extreme circumstances. Namely: a statistically low chance of procedure failure PLUS implantation in the uterus and not my fallopian tube PLUS me deciding not to get an abortion, OR a successful tubal reversal and pregnancy. And, of course, getting a tubal doesn’t mean I can’t have kids — if my life changes radically and I do, I can foster, adopt, or enter a number of different arrangements to be a parent.

But that seems unlikely. I straight up do not want to be a parent. I have tremendous respect for parents; raising kids is HARD, you guys, SERIOUSLY, and parents are awesome. They provide care to sensitive, fragile human beings who need support and nurturing for, like, a long time. I don’t have what it takes to be one — but I also don’t see the point of calling parents “breeders” and sneering at people who want kids.

Because, hey, your decision to be a parent doesn’t infringe on my decision to not be one, unless you decide to make a big deal out of it, and vice versa. Yes, your kids and my life may intersect at some point, but I don’t need to be a jerk about it. We both want the same thing for children, which is happy, safe lives with access to housing, food, education, love, and support. I want to promote policy that benefits children and support parents, even though I’m not one, and you want to live in a world that welcomes and supports your children. Everybody wins here.

Babies are really small and fragile, y’all. Photo credit: SanShoot

DESPERATELY SEEKING BABY

But not everyone who doesn’t have kids is childfree. Some of us are actually childless and that is an important distinction. There are some people who really want children and can’t have them, for a whole variety of reasons: infertility, unstable relationships, problems with medications, and other factors. For them, not having children is not a matter of rejoicing and happiness, a consciously chosen decision that affirms their desires. It’s heartbreak. It’s tragedy.

And for them, probing questions about why they don’t have children are just as hurtful as they are for us childfree folks, but in different ways. We’re tired of being judged and constantly challenged, backed into corners where we lash out and say ridiculous things because we feel so trapped that we want to say something, anything, to get the conversation to end, even if it’s blatantly not true; so we say something like, “I don’t want kids because I hate children,” just to get people to shut the fuck up already. Childless people, though, are tired of having this wound constantly probed and reopened, tired of being forced to either reveal very personal information or make something up or simply refuse to answer.

These terms, childfree and childless, are not interchangeable, and can’t be used as blanket descriptions for all people without children. For childfree folks, not having children doesn’t represent a lack, a loss, something missing — it also doesn’t mean we don’t have kids in our lives. In fact, some of us are very involved with kids, we just don’t want our own; I, for example, love hanging out with my partner’s awesome foster kid. For childless people, though, not having children isn’t something to celebrate and defiantly proclaim to the world as a choice.

MISS MANNERS SAYS: DON’T ASK RUDE QUESTIONS

Everyone loses when people insist on asking personal questions about why other people do or do not have children. When you strike up a casual conversation in the airport with someone and ask about kids, you have no idea if that person, say, just had her fourth miscarriage. Or is tired of being raked over the coals for not having kids. Or has a whole passel of kids and grandkids and would love nothing more than whipping out her wallet to show you some pictures.

This baby is up to no good, obviously. Photo credit: Michael Glasgow

I am, as we know, a huge fan of Miss Manners, and one of the things she really stresses is that privacy actually is a right in social interactions. Having someone approach you with invasive questions doesn’t give you the right to be rude, of course, but you are welcome to pull out a “pardon me” and change the subject — of course, people should also learn that invasive questions are rude and stop asking them. And especially to stop with the invasive followup.

When you ask, “Hey, do you have kids?” and the answer is a short, “No,” that’s not your cue to ask why, talk about your own children, and demand explanations. You have no idea where that person is coming from, or what that person is going through; and people shouldn’t have to justify their decisions, or lay bare their souls, in order to satisfy your curiosity.

And when someone in your life approaches you to say kids are not in the plans, hey, try respecting that, instead of trying to win over a convert.

By s.e. smith

Originally appeared at xoJane

More from our partners at xoJane.com:

An Easy Guide to Casual Sex that Everyone Feels Good About in the Morning

Men and Women CAN Just Be Friends, and I Know for a Fact That My Best Friend Brian Does Not Want to F*@k Me

Eating in Restaurants Alone