Bias against masculinity can be so unmasculine

In addition to teaching, my wife does editing projects for a to-remain-unnamed textbook company. She edits and sometimes creates questions for tests. For some projects where my wife is tasked with creating questions, she is required to come up with a theme that involves a fake website, bibliography, and labeled schematic drawing, with a series of questions based on the information found therein. For instance, she once created one of these with sharks being the theme. She came up with a list of fake websites about sharks, a bibliography of imaginary books that were all about sharks, and a drawing of a shark with its major body parts highlighted and labeled.

Recently, my wife was tasked with creating another of these test-taking themes. She was tired of animals, so she came up with the idea of basing it on military vehicles. Same thing: list of military vehicle websites and books, and a labeled drawing of a tank that points out the turret, tracks, hatch, main gun, etc. After completing the theme, my wife got an uneasy feeling about the acceptability of her creation, and checked with her editor just in case. Sure enough, her editor nixed the idea of using military vehicles, because they can't "depict guns" or show any "bias." OK, I get the whole showing guns thing - I don't agree with it, but I get it. But what exactly did the editor mean by "bias"? Bias toward boys instead of girls, since the theme was military in nature? Bias toward our country because the military vehicles were American? In both cases, what is wrong with that?

I am becoming very weary of the bias that many people have against anything masculine. Being the father of a son who is approaching the age of five, opportunities for me to experience this bias abound. For instance, I was in the military and I like guns; I own a few, and I shoot them when the opportunity arises. Naturally, my son is therefore fascinated by the military and guns as well. In today's culture, that simple statement I just made would cause many people to get the vapors and be shocked at the fact that my four-year-old son would be exposed to such horrible things. That's a crying shame, because once upon a time, the way I raise my son was nothing unusual. In some parts of the country, it still isn't. However, the overall culture of our country is one that frowns upon certain expressions of masculinity, and often seeks to extinguish it. Not allowing the depiction of a tank on a test is a prime example.

Pundits and authors are taking notice of this trend. Not long ago, columnist Ilana Mercer lamented that there are not more "Sully" Sullenbergers out there; referencing the take-charge manliness of the pilot who successfully crash-landed his airliner into the Hudson River and saved every soul on board. Said Mercer:

...Missed by the perennial purveyors of pop culture and political correctness was a story about the value of an endangered, and vital, virtue: manliness.

Witnessed in that cockpit was old-fashioned manliness. The feminization and regulation of American society over the last 20 to 30 years has meant that life-saving manliness is increasingly confined to corners where women are less likely to encroach: like the cockpit....

This "feminization" of our culture has been ongoing since the late 1960s when women became more militant, and the ideal man became more "sensitive." This change in the outlook of what makes a man became especially apparent at the movie theater. To the dustbin went the masculine actors like William Holden, Robert Ryan, and John Wayne. Instead, the ideal male leads started going to wimpier, more sensitive fellas like Dustin Hoffman and Warren Beatty. If the masculine actors were still used, it was often in telling roles like Holden and Ryan in "The Wild Bunch" or John Wayne in "The Shootist" where they played men past their prime who were hanging on to a way of life that was no longer tenable. In the case of Clint Eastwood in 1971's "Dirty Harry", the whole point of the movie was that his masculine character was no longer the norm, and that he was hopelessly out synch with the rest of his more sensitive San Francisco police department.

In our world today, we need look no further than the Oval Office for an example of what is considered the ideal man. I mean, seriously, can you think of many men who are less manly than Barack Obama? For another prime example, check out Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs. To me, he is the epitome of the pasty-faced anti-male persona that permeates our society:



In his book Tender Warrior, author and minister Stu Weber talks about masculinity and what it is that makes a man. He identifies four pillars: King, Warrior, Mentor, and Friend. In today's society, Weber recognizes that only some of these pillars are still respected:

Unfortunately, the King and Warrior qualities of manhood are suspect today. Of the four pillars, they are the most tarnished and eroded in our culture. Few object to a man being a mentor or a friend. Many resist the King and the Warrior. Authority and strength seem to be questionable virtues in our day. But we miss them in this turbulent, rootless culture of ours. Oh, how we miss them! Without them, we are hollow men. We are men without chests.

It's a sad time in this country when boys cannot act like boys without looks of concern from the general public who are uncomfortable with outward displays of masculinity. On the other hand, to a certain degree, I don't totally blame the general public's attitude. If you further read Weber's book, he speaks of keeping your commitments as being one of the ultimate signs of masculinity. A father walking out on his children and leaving those children to be raised without a father is a definite violation of the commitments of which Mr. Weber speaks. These fatherless children are often left to develop on their own or with their friends - who are also often fatherless - a twisted and grotesque form of what they believe to be masculinity, which menaces society rather than protects it.

These social pathologies aside, we must change course in this country in how we treat our young males. Instead of guiding and channeling their natural aggressive tendencies into something positive, too often these tendencies are treated as some sort of disease that must be purged from our midst. This must stop.

Good Day to You, Sir