There is movement in the psychology of men that proposes that men are at a crossroads in terms of their roles in society, that their is great confusion about what being a man actually means today given the gains that women have made in terms of equality, particularly in the workforce and salary. In other words, if women are equal economically, educationally, and intellectually, what actually makes a man, a man? What does this mean for men in their relationships and daily lives?
In my practice I see a lot of men, particularly men in their 20s and 30s, who present with this confusion, and to be quite frank, whose reaction to this confusion is to develop a hatred of women. And when I write "hate" I mean that they don't understand women, what women want, who women are, and what it means for their them and their relationships with women. This manifests itself in demeaning language and sexist jibes in a therapy conversation, and in their relationships usually it will play out as emotional and physical violence, because in these men's minds where men and women are equal in most every way, the only place men can usually still dominate is physically.
In a therapy session, I am never interested in judging a man for his choices in how he interacts with his partner or the significant women in his life. As I've written before, judgments of behaviour give you no therapeutic traction. Understanding is the key - an understanding of a man's behaviour, of his agenda, and what his behaviour demonstrates about his belief system, and how his choices are going to affect his relationship with his partner, his family, his children, and his friends.
When you frame all behaviour as a choice, and I would argue that in 99 out of 100 cases, it is a clear choice, the responsibility falls firmly in the lap of the man. I am a big advocate of personal responsibility and believe that if there is one thing that truly makes a man, "a man", it is the ability to own and take responsibility for behaviour. When you hear a man say things like, "She made me" or "She pushed me" you know straight off that this guy has placed the responsibility for his behaviour onto his partner, and probably in many areas of his life (e.g., work, friends) he does this to varying degrees. I would argue that in many situations there is little validity in saying someone "made you" do something, unless you are under extreme physically coercion. I always say to my clients something to the effect of, "You can't always help what you feel, but you can help what you do about those feelings." If you have some sort of cognitive impairment, I might let you off the hook, but that's about it.
Gender relations are evolving constantly, and this is no easy answer. Sure, there is no denying men and women are different in many essential ways, but last time I looked we had more in common that we had in differences. Aren't we all still humans after all? Men aren't from Mars, and Women aren't from Venus, we're all from Planet Earth. I always think that learning how to talk to each other about what's going on with an open mind and heart, and a healthy dose of humour is a great place to start. Dismissing or belittling men's or women's concerns about their place in the world is a sure fire way of creating conflict and a lazy way of thinking about an issue that affects us all.
Wednesday 25 July 2012
Tuesday 17 July 2012
Real Men Cry
I'm constantly fascinated by society and media reaction to men who cry in public, particularly when the behaviour leads to widespread condemnation.
While there are different types of tears, physiologically crying is usually brought on by strong emotionally reactions (e.g., anger, sadness), emotional stress, suffering or intense physical pain (of course, crying is not limited to "negative emotions"; many people cry when very happy).
The socialisation of men starts early. Parents, immediate family, and society in general directly or indirectly communicate messages about what constitutes appropriate male behaviour. I remember being at a childcare centre waiting for the lift when a young boy (aged about 3) started to cry as he knew his father would soon be leaving. His father's response was to pull the clinging young boy away from him and say something to the effect of, "Boys don't cry." His father's response surprised me as: a) it isn't 1953, and b) the man seemed to have no understanding that a young child doesn't have the verbal abilities to articulate distress - they often do that through crying; and the young boy doesn't yet have the cognitive abilities to mask his distress the way his father had clearly developed.
While there is no doubt that over time there has been somewhat of a softening towards male crying in public, a blanket "ban" on it seems to have been replaced by a prescriptive list of conditions that are acceptable whereby a man can shed tears and retain his status as "manly" (whatever that means). Just googling the subject, I managed to access extensive lists of when a man can cry in response to intense emotion (e.g., the birth of his child or death of a close loved one), or physical pain (e.g., if he just broke his arm). However, the existence of such lists and the listing of circumstances where it isn't "okay" to cry (e.g., if a man is scared or just really sad) clearly demonstrated that men who cry under such unacceptable circumstances are really still "unmanly".
A crying man hit the headlines again in recent weeks when Andy Murray lost the final of the Wimbledon Men's Singles to another frequent crier, Roger Federer. In the post-match trophy presentation, Murray cried a bit. The interesting part of this is that the crying got more media attention than the actual match. Opinion was divided - was Andy Murray being "unmanly" because he was crying about losing a winnable match, or was the crying an acceptable response to the immense stress placed him by a success-hungry British tennis public?
The coverage of the Murray's crying and the setting up lists of conditions under which men can acceptably cry clearly indicates that there are large section of society that is still not really alright with the image a man shedding tears under many circumstances.
So, how far have we come since 1953? My take on this, to be quite frank, is that it is unhealthy. When a boy is taught that it is inappropriate to genuinely experience and express emotions or emotional distress, he inevitably becomes a man who cannot do this. Surely, a higher risk of a range of mental and physical health problems can only follow. So while one may think that perpetuating a ridiculous cultural construct is harmless and debating the acceptable nature of men's crying is a bit of fun, consider that little boy by the lift at the childcare centre and the spoken and unspoken lessons we pass on to our children, and how that may affect them in the long term.
While there are different types of tears, physiologically crying is usually brought on by strong emotionally reactions (e.g., anger, sadness), emotional stress, suffering or intense physical pain (of course, crying is not limited to "negative emotions"; many people cry when very happy).
The socialisation of men starts early. Parents, immediate family, and society in general directly or indirectly communicate messages about what constitutes appropriate male behaviour. I remember being at a childcare centre waiting for the lift when a young boy (aged about 3) started to cry as he knew his father would soon be leaving. His father's response was to pull the clinging young boy away from him and say something to the effect of, "Boys don't cry." His father's response surprised me as: a) it isn't 1953, and b) the man seemed to have no understanding that a young child doesn't have the verbal abilities to articulate distress - they often do that through crying; and the young boy doesn't yet have the cognitive abilities to mask his distress the way his father had clearly developed.
While there is no doubt that over time there has been somewhat of a softening towards male crying in public, a blanket "ban" on it seems to have been replaced by a prescriptive list of conditions that are acceptable whereby a man can shed tears and retain his status as "manly" (whatever that means). Just googling the subject, I managed to access extensive lists of when a man can cry in response to intense emotion (e.g., the birth of his child or death of a close loved one), or physical pain (e.g., if he just broke his arm). However, the existence of such lists and the listing of circumstances where it isn't "okay" to cry (e.g., if a man is scared or just really sad) clearly demonstrated that men who cry under such unacceptable circumstances are really still "unmanly".
A crying man hit the headlines again in recent weeks when Andy Murray lost the final of the Wimbledon Men's Singles to another frequent crier, Roger Federer. In the post-match trophy presentation, Murray cried a bit. The interesting part of this is that the crying got more media attention than the actual match. Opinion was divided - was Andy Murray being "unmanly" because he was crying about losing a winnable match, or was the crying an acceptable response to the immense stress placed him by a success-hungry British tennis public?
The coverage of the Murray's crying and the setting up lists of conditions under which men can acceptably cry clearly indicates that there are large section of society that is still not really alright with the image a man shedding tears under many circumstances.
So, how far have we come since 1953? My take on this, to be quite frank, is that it is unhealthy. When a boy is taught that it is inappropriate to genuinely experience and express emotions or emotional distress, he inevitably becomes a man who cannot do this. Surely, a higher risk of a range of mental and physical health problems can only follow. So while one may think that perpetuating a ridiculous cultural construct is harmless and debating the acceptable nature of men's crying is a bit of fun, consider that little boy by the lift at the childcare centre and the spoken and unspoken lessons we pass on to our children, and how that may affect them in the long term.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)