Wednesday, June 20, 2007

Boys in Crisis?

It's come to this: beyond the de-masculinization of boys, now we have to have a conference on whether boys are in crisis...

Mixed feelings.

WSJ had a scary Op Ed piece yesterday on abortion. [ed. note: I am generally agnostic with regard to Roe v. Wade; while I personally find abortion abhorrent under most circumstances, other individuals are free to wrestle with their consciences or take it up with their Creator or What Powers That Be; abortion is killing, but the world justifies killing under many scenarios... We must each live with our own decisions, and I am not your judge.] The WSJ piece links abortion to the current state of affairs, but most signficantly (I think) to the rise of single-parent households, the single most corrosive aspect acting on society today.

According to the WSJ, it seems that, once again, the realization of certain Marxist/Feminist aims had unintended consequences that ended up hurting more women (and children) than it helped. Males, knowing that any unintended offspring could simply be aborted, are free to say "hey, it's her CHOICE to keep the baby; I'm outta here!" So, men are free to deny their responsibilities under the rubric of FREEDOM OF CHOICE. Oi.

This ties in with the other factors undermining boys. Top-down analysis: boys are no longer required to mature into men (the Nintendo-in-the-basement option); bottom-up analysis: no father in the home = no fatherly role model. So, no man to say "Son, that Axe body spray is pretty quee-, uh, smelly"; "Son, at 10, you do not need three showers a day--go get dirty!" That is, no one to point out the absurdity of modern marketing and the queering of basic boyhood.

That there is a market for a book explaining how to SKIP STONES (and engage in other DANGEROUS activities) is a cryin' shame.

Indeed, while I am deeply proud and satisfied to be the progenitor of a gaggle of girls, the one aspect of regret I suffer in not having a boy is that some boy is bereft of a stable family unafraid of proper role modeling (whether you, dear reader, agree with my outlook or not, at least I have an opinion on the matter... Children thrive on black and white--grey is confusing--and they are free, later and upon analysis, to make up their own minds, n'est ce pas?)

One other random thought about being a man: the other day, a certain men's organization to which I belong held its annual end-of-season bash. While discussing my desire for an RV, one of the Fellows said he had a friend who was selling one. The next day I got a call--the Fellow from the dinner said "my buddy wanted to get about $10k for the camper, but seeing as you're a Fellow, he's willing to take $7k..."

"Seeing as you're a Fellow..."

[The above was only one example--and a fairly lame one--better examples flow to places you would likely disbelieve...]

You see, men take this stuff seriously.

My wife asks "why don't you allow women?" My reply is that "then we would feel silly--becaus it IS silly, but it is also deadly serious; women, being generally smarter and more sensible than men, would not take it...seriously."

Random anecdotal support: my girls LOVE Mythbusters. I have noticed that when the team are exploding something (or starting some process), there must be a countdown: "3...2...1...". The men take this VERY seriously (even when the countdown is essentially meaningless), always using the same cadence and tone. The women, recognizing the non-essential nature of the countdown (because lawyers, producers, and safety examiners are likely surrounding them, just off camera), apply to it a cavalier manner, just doing it because it must be done, not because (as it is for men) WITHOUT THIS COUNTDOWN THE WORLD MIGHT END.

Hey, I said it was random and anecdotal... but pay attention next time you are watching Mythbusters.

Where was I going with this? Oh, the need for men to GROW UP, accept the yoke of responsibility (really, it's okay, you'll learn to love it), and teach your children well.

No comments: