[The phrase “be a man”] is usually connected to one man’s demand that another man be “stronger,” which is traditionally understood as the ability to suppress emotional reactions and channel that energy into controlling situations and establishing dominance.
Be a man, then, typically translates as: Surrender your humanity.
–Robert Jensen, Getting Off
Reversed stupidity is not intelligence. Jensen is wrong, epically wrong, about male sexuality, and not particularly good at critiquing porn either. However, that doesn’t mean that everything he thinks is wrong, and in this post I’d like to highlight some of the things he says that I believe are actually interesting and correct.
Jensen summarizes masculinity as having three primary traits: the avoidance of of things too closely connected to women/femininity; the struggle for supremacy in interpersonal relationships and social situations; and the repression of emotions related to womanhood/femininity. I don’t think this is entirely correct (for one thing, he’s missing the whole “men are horny beasts who are always up for it” bit, which is a really obvious omission in a book about porn), but it’s an interesting starting place.
In the most striking metaphor in the book, Jensen describes masculinity as a constant game of King of the Hill, in which men compete to be the one man who has reached the pinnacle and can be considered a Real Man. But even the one man on the top isn’t safe: he must fear someone else, younger and stronger and manlier, pulling him down. The slightest slip or misplaced foot– getting fired from your job, crying, being your girlfriend’s “bitch,” discovering your love of My Little Pony– will destroy your status as King.
One of the most tragic effects that Jensen describes is the loneliness related to conventional masculinity. “The Man Who Would Be King,” Jensen says, “is the Man Who Is Broken And Alone.” Masculinity circumscribes the emotions that are acceptable to express: sexual desire, competition, anger and, most of all, stoicism. However, in order to maintain a functional romantic relationship, you have to express your emotions and communicate openly with each other– skills men in our culture are not encouraged to develop.
If your view of the world is based around a zero-sum competition of masculinity, a macho competition, a literal dick-measuring contest, it limits your ability to engage in real relationships. And that is, fundamentally, sad.
Jensen says, “whatever the benefits of it, whatever power it gives one over others, it’s also exhausting and, in the end, unfulfilling.” The Man Box is, in essence, a cage. It’s a nice cage, don’t get me wrong. You get gilding on the bars and a pillow and nice food. But it is still a cage; the bars being made of social opprobrium instead of iron doesn’t make them any less real.
Patriarchy harms people of all genders. It’s bad to be forced to be strong when you’re weak; it’s bad to be forced to be weak if you’re strong. The latter is just easier to see.
Incidentally men who aren’t subject to MGC are about as likely to have alexithymia as women.
@AdamaKnowsBest “And I still see little evidence that supports the existence of the man box as many of the difficulties experienced by men that are attributed to it are caused by other things (e.g. poverty, lack of education, poor political representation etc).” Here’s one possible origin of the man box: “The International Journal of Men’s Health has published the first study of its kind to look at the link between the early trauma of circumcision and the personality trait disorder alexithymia. […] People suffering from alexithymia have difficulty identifying and expressing their emotions. This translates into not being able to… Read more »
@ Cheradenine I have acted on your suggestion and looked at the information you and your fellow contributors have provided and I’ve also looked up additional information from different sources. And I still see little evidence that supports the existence of the man box as many of the difficulties experienced by men that are attributed to it are caused by other things (e.g. poverty, lack of education, poor political representation etc). Also if the man box is indeed real and is so pervasive within society and it is so harmful to men then why is it that so few people… Read more »
debaser71,
I agree to a great extent- I’ve always been pretty undemonstartive, emotionally, and I like being that way. And I think that there’s a very real risk that “It’s OK for men to be openly emotional” could degenerate into “it isn’t OK for men to be emotionally reserved” if people aren’t wary. But a lot of this doesn’t really have anything to do with self-control or emotional restraint- men who refuse to submit to these sorts of “be a man” demands usually aren’t treated any better for doing it calmly.
@Typhon you are missing the entire point of what I was saying. I was saying that the man box is not gilded and does not have a pillow. I was saying that the man box sucks.
@typhon, I agree. What is the point of trying to figure out which is worse? I doubt there’s even an objective answer.
@ sugarglucose “It’s a shitty box and anyone who might care about it is distracted by the woman box next to it which is worse.” I’m confused. Are you mocking Oppression Olympics? Because if you’re not I see a big hole in your logic. If everyone is distracted by how bad the woman box is, when do they ever have time to compare it–I mean *really* compare it–to the man box to even determine the relative badness? Further who gains from this competition of ‘worse off’? If we accurately identify all the problems facing women and the problems facing men(an… Read more »
@AdamaKnowsBest: I suggest you read around this site a little bit, as we’ve posted a tonne of examples since we started up, many of them heavy with citations, statistics and other evidence. Of course, it doesn’t affect all men equally; some have lives shaped (whether by their own choice, or pure accident, or external forces) such that they never bump into the bars of the cage, so they don’t notice or care about it. Others have ways to slip between the bars — perhaps by the application of wealth. But it still exists.
F, it’s predictive enough for a huge demographic that it works as shorthand across a range of cultures until one steps out of the West and into the developing world, where Zetas, the killers, rule. And predictive enough works, whether in NYC or LA. Tastes are not diverse enough to undo the 80/20 rule as a useful approximation.
I agree with czrpbon this issue I do not see how the “man-box” (as it has been dubbed) is causing men harm. Moreover I have to say that I am sceptical of the whole concept as I see no evidence provided of its existence merely assertions. Furthermore I do not see how sexual desire, competition, anger and, stoicism are negative traits. To my way of thinking they are positive traits that promote a prosperous life.
Anyways this was interesting post thank you for posting it.
Ah never mind then. I was just trying to point out that Ozzy’s characterization of the “Man Box” was a little rough for me because it doesn’t feel gilded or with pillow.
But not all that much worse. A little worse in some areas, a little better in others. It’s only cultural perception that marks the woman box as being so shitty. In the woman box, you can have an interest in scrapbooking (dead center of the box), or you can bend the bars of the cage and take up off-road ATVing without getting much flack. I think Schala was agreeing with you – just saying that the woman box isn’t even all that bad compared to the man box. And in some ways, better.
@Schala you missed the point. The point isn’t that the woman box is the worst thing ever, it’s that the man box *is not nice.* It’s not gilded, we don’t get pillows. We don’t get to wake up every day thinking “Yeah, everyone’s going to bend over backwards to help us.” It *doesn’t work that way* and to argue that it’s a nice box to be in is inaccurate. It’s a shitty box. It’s a shitty box that never gets cleaned where no one cares about you. It’s a shitty box and anyone who might care about it is distracted… Read more »
I am so happy that I found this blog 😀 Thanks, Ozymandias. I feel like so often me are put down as being sissy, gay or girly (labels which in themselves have so many problems in that they are used to define “weakness”) that it becomes a trap.
Of course, not all male “roles” are considered negative, just like not all female roles are, but the negative roles for both are what we are trying to change here….and also to realize that no trait is ever confined to only one gender or the other!
I don’t feel like discovering my love of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic has made me somehow less of a man. Perhaps by these arbitrary Manstandards, but who needs those, anyways? MLP:FiM is awesome and I am predisposed to like anyone who is willing to admit they like a show aimed primarily at little girls.
Gender policing is stupid. Ponies are awesome.
‘The fact that you like it so much should be the first clue’
Actually not, I despise it. I tryed to draw a paralell between traditional masculinity and servitude (to protect and serve) and how to fulfill that role you had to dehumanice yourself becoming closer to terminator (the stereotype of people getting a uniform on and their personality change radically).
Surely I was not trying to illustrate a personal fetish O_o
“The flip side for women, not being gracious or flirty enough, gets you called a dyke. ”
What if your personality looks naturally flirty to others…even if you have no intention to flirt, because maybe you’re socially unaware of how and why it does what, to whom.
Totally my case there btw. I come off as very open, maybe too open for a friend. Because I don’t have social taboos and do normally self-only mental conversations, in the open.
Yes, good post… I always thought the whole phenomenon of men being “goofy” (like comedians) and “playing games all the times” (teasing, etc) was because these are some of the few emotions allowed under the strict “man laws”…. and even then, if you get TOO goofy, they will call you gay.
The flip side for women, not being gracious or flirty enough, gets you called a dyke.
They are like mirror images.
@ AB
“The fact that you like it so much should be the first clue.”
Does that go both ways?
Because, ironically, what you’ve written that follows your assertion is the exact inverse of what Kenshirot wrote.
“When the women actually tried men’s work, they discovered it wasn’t nearly as demanding at it had been made out to.’
AB, this seems to be the common experience. Men become single fathers and find out that running a house on less than half the time is not as big a deal as it’s made out to be. Women start in a home improvement projects and find out bashing down a wall doesn’t require huge shoulders and running a circular saw through some lumber s not the dark mystery they had always heard it was.
For starters, constantly being seen as ‘teh biggest VICTIMS EVAR! ALWAYSNOEXCEPTIONS!’
@ BrokenSystem “I don’t see how the “man box” is at all nicer in comparison with the “woman box”.” Yeah, I’m sort of with you. Sugarglucose is really exaggerating the negatives of the ‘woman box’ there. Particularly when you add in the pressure to look good that men feel as well; anorexia, for example, has skyrocketed among men. I mean to be honest being more attractive is not going to improve my life; it’ll only allow me to live through my vanity more by getting more attention. Considering that most women can find sexual partners (there is, statistically, a larger… Read more »
@Kenshiroit: “Yes I like the picture of the traditional man bein a “servant” for a person a nation or a cause (knight, soldier, warrior , lifesaver ect) if you focus on the dangerous side of men. They are often expected to be like robots; predefined movements, withouth though and feelings. Imagine soldiers or better the terminator; strong, ice cold, unstoppable killer (serving skynet) the agents from matrix or superman, using his superpowers to defend and protect the weak people; or the police, to protect and serve. Men basically do the “dirthy” work of the society making it functional. Again a… Read more »
“@John Gottman, I’ve had this on my mind in regards to the Army’s old and new recruiting slogans: “Be All “[The phrase “be a man”] is usually connected to one man’s demand that another man be “stronger,” This is the kind of thing that gripes me about Dr. Phil too. Women are just blameless in al this. as john pojnts out above, woemn are more than ready to resort to this as atool to extort thngs out of men, beginning with the whole provider thing. It may be fading – the image I have of this partricualr brand wimp-shaming is… Read more »
@Schala, I agree. I am also not really sure if I have to respect their empiricism; from what I’ve seen of PUA, which is admittedly not a huge sample, many of these guys seem to assert that they’ve found a formula that works for them in specific social settings, therefore women and men always relate to each other in these ways everywhere else as well. Example: a guy called Eurosaber or something told me that clearly women everywhere were only sleeping with the top 10% or so of men and were happy to be used for sex as one of… Read more »