Monday, October 25, 2010

Coach Michael Taylor - Why are men so resistant to personal coaching and transformation?

Nice discussion.

Why are men so resistant to personal coaching and transformation?

Date/Length: 10/24/2010 - 1 hr

Is it really possible for a man to live a rewarding and fulfilling life? Can a man have a great career, great relationships, dynamic health and a sense of purpose and passion in his life? The answer is YES! Join Coach Michael Taylor as he interviews life coach Jeremy Kalan and learn why some men resist coaching and what they can do to move past their fears and embrace a life that is truly worth living.

Listen to internet radio with Coach Michael Taylor on Blog Talk Radio

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Failing Boys: Part 3 of 6 - Are we medicating a disorder or treating boyhood as a disease?

This is part three of six in the excellent series from Canada's Globe and Mail on the many, many ways we are failing our boys. This installment looks at the over-diagnosis of ADHD in boys (as high as 4:1 in relationship to the diagnosis in girls - in fact, in the Southern US, some areas are 10:1 boys vs girls). In essence, the female-centric school systems are medicating boys to make them more like girls in the classroom.

As an alternate view, Thomas Armstrong's Neurodiversity: Discovering the Extraordinary Gifts of Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia, and Other Brain Differences argues that there may actually be an adaptive advantage to the ADHD brain. You can read a nice excerpt from the book at Ode Magazine.

I suspect there is a more complex etiology to the increase in ADHD diagnoses, one that is more environmental. New research out the University of Arizona suggests that children (4-9 month old infants in particular) learn language better with a few examples to focus on, rather than a larger and more varied series of examples. I think this translates to other forms of learning as well, not only to language. Here is a quote from an article reviewing the findings:

In her evaluation, Dr. LouAnn Gerken found that the children ages 4 to 9 months required a "surprisingly low" number of examples to detect a pattern.

"I was looking across the data, and it started to seem like you could give babies too much information. We found they were learning with fewer examples," said Gerken, who directs the Tweety Lab at the UA.

"This observation makes us think they are more like scientists than sponges," she added.

While the "sponge" theory - popularized during the 1940s and 1950s - suggests that young people need a tremendous amount of information or a large number of examples to learn, "innate domain theory" suggests they are "highly sensitive" to their surrounding environments and require very little information.
Now here is the environmental part - have you ever noticed kids in strollers or baby carriers these days? There are a multitude of objects, lights, sounds, and other gadgets for them to focus on - serious over-stimulation. The infant brain is not designed for that level of complexity. It does not make the children smarter, it makes them unable to focus on one thing for any length of time, or what we now call attention deficit disorder.

[In a 2005 book, The Development of the Person: The Minnesota Study of Risk and Adaptation from Birth to Adulthood by Sroufe, Egeland, Carlson, and Collins, they found that parental intrusion and boundary violations (over-stimulation) were the most correlated with later attention issues.]

I suspect that boys are more affected by this over-stimulation as infants than are girls, which may explain the higher level of ADHD diagnosis in boys. There needs to be a longitudinal study of children raised with the simpler, less invasive forms of entertainment versus those raised with all the lights and buzzers and moving objects. Or perhaps, do a study comparing a cohort of Amish kids versus a cohort of suburban children to see what the difference in cultural complexity does to children's brains.

Failing Boys: Part 3 of 6: Are we medicating a disorder or treating boyhood as a disease?

Carolyn Abraham

Last year, more than two million prescriptions for Ritalin and other ADHD drugs were written specifically for children under 17, and at least 75 per cent of them were for young males. Part 3 of a 6-part series.

For school children across the country – most of them boys – taking a drug for attention deficit disorder each morning has become as commonplace as downing a vitamin. But the daily ritual has been quietly growing in Canada, year after year – a trend that's dwarfing rates in other countries and raising disturbing questions about the forces driving it.

More related to this story

Figures compiled for The Globe and Mail by IMS Health, an independent firm that tracks pharmaceutical sales, show prescriptions for Ritalin and other amphetamine-like drugs for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder shot up to 2.9 million in 2009, a jump of more than 55 per cent in four years.

More than two million were written specifically for children under 17 – a leap of 43 per cent since 2005 – and at least 75 per cent of them were for young males – a ratio some see as evidence that society is making a malady of boyhood itself.

“What if we were drugging girls at the same rate?” asks Jon Bradley, education professor at McGill University. “What if [the majority] of these prescriptions were being written for girls? There'd be a march.”

The figures seem to suggest a spike of epidemic proportions. But an analyst with IMS Brogan, a division of IMS Health, says the four-year snapshot is emblematic of a drug category that for more than a decade has surged annually in Canada by 10 to 13 per cent. While total prescriptions, worth $249-million, do not represent the number of people taking the drugs, a per capita breakdown of daily doses shows a similar escalation.

“It certainly suggests the drugs are being abused,” says Gordon Floyd, president and CEO of Children's Mental Health Ontario. “There's a desire for the quick fix … the idea that – ‘oh, we'll fix this with a pill' – rather than spend a few months in counselling, is pretty appealing.”

Our penchant for the pills has pegged Canada – after Iceland and the U.S. – as one of the world's top three consumers of methylphenidate, including Ritalin and similar drugs, according to the 2009 Annual Report of the UN International Narcotic Control Board, which based rankings on per capita consumption. A 2007 U.S. report on global use of ADHD drugs also singled out Canada for “higher than expected” consumption, and suggested our exposure to American advertising and “cultural norms” play a role.

ADHD is one of the most commonly diagnosed disorders of childhood, with core features that include an inability to focus, and hyper and impulsive behaviour. Increasingly, it's seen as a chronic condition that 60 per cent of kids never outgrow and one that experts estimate affects five per cent of children worldwide.

But the diagnosis rates in North America are notoriously higher. In Canada, research suggests that seven to 10 per cent of children have ADHD – most often, boys.

To some extent, the medical gender gap simply exposes the biological bias of Mother Nature: Boys' brains, perhaps due to chromosomes and hormones, are more vulnerable than girls to several neurological disorders. Boys are four times more likely to develop autism, three times more likely to suffer dyslexia, and two to three times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD.

But some see a system of harried parents, school officials and general practitioners too ready to label rambunctious young males. While boys might be three times more likely than girls to develop ADHD, research suggests they are nine times more likely to be sent for a clinical assessment and five times more likely to be medicated for it.

IMS figures show ADHD prescriptions for males have increased 50 per cent since 2005.

The decline of male teachers in primary schools, Prof. Bradley suspects, is partly to blame for ballooning drug use – “What are we drugging? Female teachers who don't understand boys like to run and jump and shout – that's what boys do.”

Medications are definitely needed in some cases, he says, “but definitely not in the quantity that we are seeing them.”

Diagnosing ADHD has been a medical minefield ever since the rise of the so-called Ritalin Generation in the 1980 and 90s. With no blood test or any other biological means to confirm an ADHD case, psychiatrists, psychologists or a general practitioner diagnose children after a clinical assessment or, often, with behavioural reports from parents and teachers.

But evaluations are subjective and the distinction between ADHD symptoms and standard childhood traits can be quite subtle – such as forgetfulness, and fidgeting.

“We don't have a biological test to rule out ADHD and that gives rise to the possibility that ADHD may be misdiagnosed, or missed,” says Rosemary Tannock, a psychologist at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children who studies children with the disorder.

Dr. Tannock says biological signs of the syndrome exist. Imaging studies show brain development in children with ADHD lags two to three years behind a normal brain, particularly in the prefrontal cortex, an area involved with self control. The less mature a brain looks, she says, the more severe the symptoms, though kids with ADHD score average and above average in IQ tests.

Yet because males with ADHD tend to be boisterous and disruptive and females with the disorder tend to be distracted and daydream, boys are more likely to be identified and girls are more likely to be missed, she says.

“Everything we knew about ADHD was based on behaviour of 11 year old boys,” said Dr. Tannock, who also works with the Ontario Institute of Studies in Education, training teachers to teach children with the disorder.

“The imbalance of medications comes because girls are not seen as having serious behavioural problems – they're not hyperactive.”

A growing awareness that girls also suffer ADHD has added to the increase in drug use, experts say and IMS data show prescriptions for females rising by more than 60 per cent since 2005. But prescriptions for males still account for the vast majority.

Prof. Bradley, who taught elementary school before joining McGill to teach prospective teachers some 40 years ago, believes that schools have removed “the time to be male.” Shorter recesses, and lunch and gym periods, and the decline of metal and woodworking classes all contribute, he says, to boys' restlessness in the classroom and the likelihood of being picked out for acting up.

In his home province, the story is particularly striking. Quebec, where boys drop out of school at a rate of nearly 40 per cent – the highest in Canada, and one of the highest in the western world – also leads the country in ADHD drug use.

IMS data show ADHD drug use rising in all provinces, but Quebec's rate of more than 10 doses a day for every 1,000 people in the population, tops the list. Nova Scotia follows with 9.2 daily doses, while consumption in B.C., the lowest user in the country, is half that amount.

Prescription rates for ADHD drugs, which like cocaine, are psycho-stimulants, can also vary by school board, says Wendy Roberts, a developmental pediatrician at Sick Kids and Toronto's Bloorview MacMillan Children's Centre.

In certain boards, Dr. Roberts says, teachers are more likely to say to parents – “I'm having a problem with [your] child, and so you should go and see Dr. So-and-So,” confident the doctor will recommend drugs, says Dr. Roberts. “Some parents have certainly told me that they have felt they could not take their child back to school unless he was taking a medication …I think we're jumping to medication too quickly.

“There's no question if you have a child that's going to sit quietly in your classroom, you're going to be a happy teacher.”

A study of three Ontario school boards in 2000, which Dr. Roberts co-authored, suggests ADHD diagnoses and drug use can vary wildly. At the East York Board of Education, the proportion of kindergarten to Grade 6 children taking drugs after an ADHD diagnosis was 13 per cent – boys nearly three times more than girls. At the Metropolitan Toronto Separate School Board it was three per cent and girls and boys had nearly equal drug use. At the more rural, eastern Ontario Hastings County Board of Education, it was 43 per cent of children with ADHD who were medicated, and boys seven times more than girls. The survey, published in the Pediatric Journal of Child Health, also found that 27 per cent of boys with ADHD were medicated for the condition compared to five per cent of girls.

Other reasons cited for the increase in ADHD medications, include their illicit use among college and university students who treat the stimulants like brain steroids to improve their studies.

Part of the drug increase is thought to reflect the fact that new and longer-lasting ADHD medications have hit the market. It may be, says Mr. Floyd at CMHO, that those who didn’t tolerate the older drugs have signed up for the next generation – which are also more costly than the last. IMS statistics show spending on ADHD drugs surged 104 per cent – from $122-million in 2005, to $249-million in 2009.

Any time new medicines become available, drug companies facing more competition ramp up their marketing efforts, he says. This includes dispatching legions of drug representatives to doctors’ offices to promote their use – “So their drug is top of mind for the doctor when kids come in.”

Drugs to treat ADHD, with common side effects that include insomnia and headaches, have been better studied than most psychiatric medications used in children. But questions linger about their long term safety – a U.S. study last year suggested that Ritalin, or methylphenidate, could have unknown consequences on crucial brain systems. As well, Health Canada, and later, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, warned a few years ago that the stimulant drugs may be dangerous for those with underlying heart problems – and those who do not actually have ADHD.

Mr. Floyd feels counselling stands a better chance of getting to the root of problem with children, rather than using drugs for years to dull symptoms. Research shows, he says, that talk therapy can be very successful for kids with ADHD.

But with wait times of six months or more in Ontario for behavioural therapies for children, many don’t wait. “There’s a desire for quick fix….the idea that “oh, we’ll fix this with a pill’ rather than spend a few months in counselling is pretty appealing.”

As well, he notes, “the kid with ADHD is going to be bumped to the back of the line…ADHD doesn’t stack up against a kid who is suicidal.”

In the meantime, general practitioners with little training in the disorder will prescribe drugs for ADHD and not even make a referral for counselling, he says, because of the wait times – “So a kid might get a drug and nothing else.”

In Ontario, the numbers of children coming through provincially funded mental health services and assessed as having ADHD remain fairly stable, says Mr. Floyd. But kids seeking help elsewhere seem more likely to be diagnosed and to receive drugs. “When we see a high energy youngster, we jump to put the label on. An assessment would look much deeper.”

With files from Celia Donnelly

Saturday, October 23, 2010

Failing Boys: Part 2 of 6: The endangered male teacher

Mike Parr, assistant professor education and schooling and special education at Nipissing University. - Mike Parr, assistant professor education and schooling and special education at Nipissing University. | James Forsyth for The Globe and Mail

Here is part two of the Globe and Mail's series on failing boys - this is good stuff. It's interesting to me how things have changed since I was young. Between grades K-8, I had around 8-10 male teachers (including having multiple teachers each day in grades 6-8). I take it that this would be unusual now.

A couple of those teachers were very important in my life.

Mr. Carter, my 4th grade teacher (also the principle of our little school in southern Oregon), recognized that three of us were way ahead of the other students, so he went to the middle school to get us more advanced work and keep us challenged. He also had us take the talented-and-gifted (TAG) test so that we could be in that program when we got to middle school in the 6th grade (2 of the 3 of us made it).

One of the other teachers was the man who taught the TAG classes - Mr. Nussbaum. He was kind and supportive, and he encouraged us to follow our interests. For one of the parents' nights, another student and I debated the merits and risks of nuclear power (I was opposed). He allowed us - encouraged us - to get real about it, with information from government researchers and environmental groups. I think when I started talking about half-lives of radioactive waste I saw eyes glaze over in most of the parents.

Hell, even Mr. Newton, the basketball (and every other sport) coach in middle school, taught me discipline and hard work are the keys to being successful. When I started playing ball for him, I had only ever played baseball and soccer - he helped me become a good basketball player (but not without allowing me to make mistakes and embarrass myself first).

Anyway - I think male teachers are important for young male students - and these men need to feel safe from accusations of pedophilia for doing their jobs. Young men and boys need to see men who are smart and educated and who encourage them to be the same - who make it OK to be smart, to get good grades, to want to aspire to greatness (even though most of us simply end up being normal guys who love to read and love to learn).

Instilling that love of knowledge is a huge gift I got from these men.

Failing Boys: Part 2 of 6 - The endangered male teacher

Carolyn Abraham

A new study says male elementary teachers live in a steady state of anxiety, with 13 per cent reporting they had been wrongly accused of inappropriate contact with students. Part 2 of a six-part series.

The male elementary teacher is the spotted owl of the education system, the leatherback turtle, the Beluga.

More related to this story

His presence is so endangered that in many public schools his numbers can be counted on a single hand. In some schools, it requires no hands at all.

“It is now possible for a child in Canada to go through elementary school and high school and never see a male at the front of the class,” says Jon Bradley, an associate professor of education at McGill University, where men make up just five per cent of the elementary teachers in training.

The trend isn't new. Men have been the clear minority in primary teaching since the days of the one-room school house. But with their numbers dwindling to less than 20 per cent nationally, fixing the imbalance has taken on a certain urgency and there's already been talk of affirmative action. Of all the theories offered to explain why boys trail girls in academics, the lack of male role models tends to lead the pack.

Boys increasingly grow up without fathers at home, male high school teachers have slipped into the minority, and at the primary level, where children gain their first impressions of schooling, the numbers look bleaker by the year. “They're getting the bias, unintentionally, that school is a girl thing,” says Mike Parr, an assistant professor of education at Nipissing University in North Bay, Ont. “They don't see teaching or reading, or even learning, as a guy thing.”

Yet the barriers that keep men from teaching are tough to tear down. Several countries have crafted programs to recruit more men and, for the most part, have failed.

If they're not turned off by the prospect of being the only man using the unisex bathroom, or the lone male at the lunch table, men, several studies suggest, see the profession as a nurturing, feminine domain, underpaid, over-worked, low in social status and – for a male – stigmatized.

The most troubling deterrent men cite is the fear that society – for historical reasons – is suspicious of a man who enjoys working with young children. And a new study from Nipissing, where researchers have delved into the male-teacher shortage, suggests the fear is warranted.

In a recent survey of 223 male elementary teachers in Ontario, nearly 13 per cent reported they had been wrongly accused of inappropriate contact with pupils.

The study, to be published in the McGill Journal of Education, found the incidents ranged from a male teacher chastised for holding the hand of a female student to more serious accusations that took weeks to resolve.

“[It was] very, very stressful,” one male teacher wrote, “Why bother! It makes you think you should just do the job as described and forget about being HUMAN!”

While the sample size is small, and contains no comparison of allegations female teachers face, the study, partly funded by the Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario, suggests male teachers work in a steady state of anxiety.

“I live life on the edge every day I step into the classroom. All it takes is one parent or fellow teacher to perceive that the line between nurturing and pedophil(ia) is blurry and I am a dead duck!”

Prof. Parr, and co-author Douglas Gosse, write in the paper that the results show a balance must be found to keep student safety paramount and still allow male teachers to feel comfortable doing their jobs.

“We have to erase the social stigma,” says Prof. Parr.

A marketing campaign, similar to billboards used to attract women to apprenticeship programs, he says, could help this with images of men working with young children, so society can see men that way, and men can see themselves that way.

Boys, he believes, need male role models in school more than ever, when the modern world sends mixed messages of what it means to be male – “A sissy is still a sissy – we want boys to grow up nurturing, sensitive, and understanding…[and] they get bullied...it's not cool to be smart.”

Rosemary Tannock, a psychologist at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, doesn't buy the idea of school boys in crisis. She doesn't believe their poor performance reflects a feminized education system but suggests that current testing methods are not an accurate way to gauge how well boys are learning.

While she thinks that having more male teachers would be valuable for girls and boys, she says that “gender makes no difference [to academic performance] – it's the quality of the teaching.”

Indeed, most studies have found male teachers have no impact on boys' academic performance or their school-related problems – that peers are the dominant influence. What's more, a “feminist critique” published in the Journal of Education Policy last year argued that women have taught boys well for decades, and only now that girls are outperforming boys do people suspect young males suffer under female teachers.

Prof. Parr agrees there's no proof male teachers will boost boys academic performance. But he says that studies to date have not been long term, and that history shows it worked for girls.

When calls came for more female role models in math, science, law and medicine, he says, it contributed “to increases in aspirations of girls overall and to their increasing presence in medical school and law school.”

“Why does this same logic not apply to men serving as models for boys [and girls] in the younger grades?”

Having trained elementary teachers at McGill for 25 years, and seeing “the vast majority” of former male graduates eventually leave teaching, Prof. Bradley believes it's time to move beyond billboards.

“We need to get fairly draconian,” he says, and use affirmative action to ensure that 20 per cent of teachers at every school are male.

When most of the teachers, elementary school principals, and support staff are women and “the token male on staff tends to teach phys ed,” he says, the entire system has an intrinsic bias against boys.

“Females are making the decisions, they're choosing the books, and setting up the class.” Which is why he believes that the early grades focus too heavily on sitting still, and stress co-operation over competition.

A few years ago, he tried to launch a network of male elementary teachers, but couldn't drum up enough support – “Probably,” he says, “because most teachers are female.”


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Guyland Author Michael Kimmel on ‘Dads Unplugged’

This comes via the Good Men Project Magazine, alerting us to Michale Kimmel's recent appearance on the Dads Unplugged radio show/podcast. The Podcast is posted at the bottom. I have more Kimmel videos to come in the next few days.

Guyland Author Michael Kimmel on ‘Dads Unplugged’

Michael Kimmel, sociologist and author of Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men, appeared in a Dads Unplugged Radio podcast this week. He discussed his recent Newsweek article, “Man Up,” and expounds on the idea that men must now rethink their ideas of masculinity to stay afloat.

There’s a lot of interesting stuff here. Kimmel argues that there were two masculine archetypes from the American Revolution to the Industrial Age: the “genteel patriarch”—cultured, artistic gentry such as Washington and Jefferson—and the “heroic artisan,” the “virtuous worker”—for example, Paul Revere. This gave way to the 19th-century Horatio Alger idea of the self-made man, the middle-class man, which remains with us today. It’s a romantic idea: a special breed of man can pull themselves—and America—up by the bootstraps.

Advertising perpetuates this. As men’s roles shift and become more family-oriented, commercials hint they’ve been gypped. “We know the compromises you make,” Kimmel jokes, “but when you buy this car or wear this shirt, you’re back on the frontier”—where, it’s implied, men were men.

But men know better than this. We know family makes us happy. We know our interpersonal relationships are more gratifying than business, and we’ll never be the guy at the law firm who never knew his children’s birthdays. If there’s a hidden benefit to the “he-cession,” this is it: not having to make the sacrifices our dads made.

And, laughs one of the hosts, more sex.


About Cooper Fleishman
Cooper Fleishman is a senior editor at the Good Men Project Magazine. A transplant from small-town Ohio, he now lives, works, and blogs in Brooklyn, NY. Email him here.

Here is the post from Dads Unplugged.

Dads Unplugged Radio – Manhood in America

Dads Unplugged Radio – Manhood in America

Michael Kimmel has written 12 books dealing with Men. One was recently referenced in a Newsweek Cover article titled “Man Up.” It really defines where we men have come from and where we are going. This nationally renowned author and professor at Stony Brook University joined Todd and Kent to talk about what men are facing in this day and age. We answer the questions: Why do men have to Man Up and how can they? It’s not as difficult as some men might think.




Friday, October 22, 2010

The Art of Manliness - What Does It Mean to Forgive?

This post comes from The Art of Manliness a while back - on the nature of forgiveness for men. The idea runs counter to much of what we see in the media. The article begins with a look at the prevalence of justified revenge in male films - my personal favorite is The Crow. Then they move toward what it means (and how it benefits us) to practice forgiveness.

Anyway, this is a great post . . . . From Is Forgiveness Manly.

What Does It Mean to Forgive?

by Brett & Kate McKay

As men I think we often resist the idea of forgiveness both because it seems contrary to the idea of justice and because it seems like an action born of weakness. After all, many people equate forgiveness with letting someone off the hook for their crime and allowing them to get away with wrongdoing. Doesn’t the lack of just punishment encourage the person to commit the same act again and put us in the position of condoning their crime? And if so, is forgiveness for suckas? For whipped push-overs?

But true forgiveness shouldn’t involve ignoring the issues of justice. It does not preclude justified anger. It shouldn’t be a get out of jail free card you bestow upon everyone willy nilly. It is not something you agree to simply to avoid conflict. It should not involve being a doormat who allows someone to hurt you over and over again. It is not the same as reconciliation, and it does not mean that you forget what has happened, nor that you automatically trust a person again.

What it does mean is that you let go of both your ill-feelings towards the offender and your need to personally balance the scales of justice. It’s a process whereby the antagonism you feel for the offender is replaced with compassion.

Sound sissy? It’s not. In fact, summoning the strength to forgive someone can increase your manliness is a variety of ways-

Forgiveness:

Shows Maturity

The reason it’s easy to cheer for revenge in a movie is that typically the plot is set up in a very black and white way. The hero is an admirable and virtuous guy; the villain is pure evil and kills the hero’s family simply because his heart is a black lump of coal.

Of course the real world is rarely so simplistic. Seeing things in black and white is generally reserved for children.

At a certain point the boy must become a man. Maturity involves the ability to step into another person’s shoes and see things from a different perspective. It requires a mind that understands the human condition and recognizes people as truly complex creatures, with frailties, failures, and checkered histories.

You need not condone the wrong someone did, but you should try to understand it, and them. Okay, your dad was a dick, but why was that? Probably because his dad was a dick to him and that’s all he knows about being a father.

Did your friend do something completely out of character? What was going on at the time? Was he acting out of the hurt of his recent break-up?

Sometimes people do wrong us randomly. And perhaps these offenses are the most difficult to deal with. But even then the person typically has a screw loose; something is just not right upstairs.

Forgiveness can change your whole perspective on life and people. We come to see others as fellow travelers in this world; everyone’s walking around with various wounds and various capabilities for dealing with those hurts and angers. They’re not evil villains who are out to get you, but people stumbling around, trying to do the right thing, and sometimes failing miserably. Kind of like….you.

Involves Taking Personal Responsibility and Shunning Victimhood

Being a man means taking personal responsibility for your life. But we often hold onto our grudges because they make for handy excuses, excuses that keep us from finally growing up. We can’t forgive our dad for what he did to us because when we do we will no longer be able to use that as an excuse for our personal failures. We’ll have to move forward and accept full responsibility for our lives. And that can be scary.

When we hold onto a grudge, we hold onto our identity as victims. We let someone else’s actions define us. When we forgive, we decide that we define who we are.

Puts You in Control

By withholding forgiveness you feel like you’ve got the upper hand on someone. You can dangle reconciliation on a string, make them continually grovel with contrition. Grudges thus offer the illusion of power and control. Yet they can’t fulfill that promise.

Because ironically, the offender is still the one holding your puppet strings. Your mental state is dependent on them. You’ve made your happiness contingent on another person: you need to show me X and treat me like X for me to be happy. If we wait until the other person is sorry, we’re giving them control over us-we’re waiting on them. Don’t give them that power. When you choose to forgive you embrace your free choice and agency-no one can make you feel like shiz without your permission.

Grants You Freedom

When we hold grudges and plot our revenge, we limit our freedom. Yes, we get to keep the other person in prison and wield that power. But what we don’t realize is that we’re stuck in jail with them, having to play the role of the ever vigilant warden. You can put someone in the doghouse, but you better make room for two. Or as a Chinese proverb says, “He who seeks revenge should remember to dig two graves.”

Revenge eats us up from the inside. It’s a pile of coals that we hold in our hands, giving off heat while it burns our body. Once you let the other person go, you’re not just releasing them, but you’re releasing yourself, breaking free from the rotting prison and moving forward.

Allows You to Grow

What people usually won’t say out loud is that resentment and anger make us feel good-powerful, tough, untouchable. And having an enemy and plotting revenge gives our life purpose, a tent pole for our thoughts to revolve around. Where would superheroes be and what would they spend their time doing without an archnemesis?

But this kind of purpose is a dead end and a waste of our valuable energy, consuming us and retarding our progress.

When you come to a place of forgiveness, you can start to find meaning in your suffering. You figure out what you’ll do differently next time and come to an understanding of how the pain helped you grow and become a better man. Forgiveness can become a platform for leaping forward in life.

Requires Bravery and Confronting Pain

Blame and bitterness might make you feel powerful and tough, but they’re often a cover for the inability to face pain head on. Holding a grudge against your ex-wife, thinking about how much of a she-devil she is every time she crosses your mind is a coping mechanism. Continually drinking from the well of anger keeps the pain from the dissolution of your marriage at bay.

We use bitterness as a way to keep ourselves from having to mourn a loss. Once we let go of the anger, we’re forced to confront the pain directly. Forgiveness involves taking a risk; we have to open ourselves up to the past hurt and the potential of being hurt again. And that takes courage.

Creates a Manly Legacy

Perhaps the manliest benefit of forgiveness is the way it enables you to not only free yourself from being locked inside bitterness, but how it creates a powerful legacy for those who come after you. You may come from a family where generation after generation has been hurting each other and keeping those feelings locked up, sickening the men from the inside.

Instead of making the same mistakes with your kids as your parents did with you, forgiveness says, “The buck stops here with me.” You have the courage to acknowledge and feel the pain and then to let it go instead of passing it on. You have the power to weld a new link in the chain of generations, and manliness.

What do you think? Is forgiveness manly? Or is revenge the manlier way to go? Leave a comment and share your thoughts.


The New Men's Magazines - Real Men Cry and Do Laundry

From Slate, a brief look at some of the new magazines for men - it's not just Playboy, GQ, Maxim, or FHM anymore. Thank god.

Real Men Cry and Do Laundry: An anthropology of the new male self-improvement mags

The Art of Manliness Web site. Click image to expand.

Men, you may have heard, are having a major midlife crisis. They've lost more than 7 million jobs since 2007. Their wages are dropping. Increasingly superfluous, they're now the human equivalents of newspapers: out-of-step with a changing world and struggling to stay relevant, in some limited fashion, before they disappear entirely.

his is bad news for the necktie industry, but great news for aspiring men's magazine publishers. Adrift and rudderless in the tricky currents of post-feminism and globalization, men need guidance, mentorship. Established men's magazines like Men's Health and Maxim are struggling to do that, but the instruction they offer is superficial and glib: "Beach muscle now!" "Shave my what?!" "Do you deserve a hotter girlfriend?" The oldest of the old guard—GQ, Esquire, Playboy—are even less tuned to the tenor of the times. Sequestered in their cashmere bubble of designer cologne ads and exquisitely curated layouts of super-premium tennis shoes, they're the cocksure house organs of male privilege, not male crisis. They do LeBron James in $8,000 suits, pithy guides to the world's best beers, in-depth investigative pieces on what Lindsay Lohan looks like in her underwear.

Their complacency leaves an opening for newer, younger voices who face the twilight of the patriarchy head on—and yet also provide a formula to restore men's cultural potency. Brett McKay is the twentysomething creator of a Web site called The Art of Manliness. A few years ago, he had a revelation while browsing the men's magazines at his local Borders. "I realized that every month it's the exact same thing," he explains in a video FAQ. "There's always an article about how to get six-pack abs, how to score eight chicks this weekend, how to go on this $50,000 safari adventure that no average guy that I know could afford and that's it. And I remember sitting there thinking, 'Is this what manliness has become? Is this all there is to becoming a man—six-pack abs and Megan Fox's boobs?' "

In McKay's estimation, his wayward peers didn't need celebrity glitz and consumerist fluff so much as they needed ab crunches for the soul. Masculinity 101. Along with his wife, Kate, McKay created The Art of Manliness, which aims to teach men how to be "better husbands, better fathers, better men" via a curriculum that plays a little like Oprah channeling a Black & Decker catalog: "Be a Modern Knight," "Toolmanship: How to Use a Screwdriver," "How to Split Firewood," "Our Disembodied Selves and the Decline of Empathy."

The idea, apparently, is to rebuild the American Man, vertebra by vertebra. Out there in Apatowpia, confused and directionless slackers are heeding its call. According to Compete.com, The Art of Manliness attracted 337,128 unique visitors in August 2010. This doesn't put it in league with Maxim, Esquire, or GQ, all of whom have larger print circulations and attract more unique Web visitors, too—but for a two-year-old site run by a husband and wife in Oklahoma, it's pretty impressive.

In recent months a handful of similar sites have emerged to help rescue manhood. There's Made Possible, which promises to "empower America's 40 million young men under age 35" and "inspire them to maximize their potential in every way." There's Man of the House, which explains that it's "not the glossy fashion magazine that tells you that you need to have a pair of $3,000 shoes," but rather a "real man's magazine," for guys who are "trying to be better -- at work and at home, as a father and as a husband." There's The Good Men Project, which believes that the world needs a "new kind of men's magazine – one that takes men seriously" and understands that it's the "most macho thing in the world" to be a loving father and a faithful husband, and "even more macho … to come clean about how hard it is to try to be all those things at the same time."

Or to put it another way: Out with the chest bumps and in with the hugs. These are men's magazines that nurture, men's magazines that wrap today's downsized, outsourced, overextended, underappreciated males in a cozy but masculine fleece of understanding and sympathy. But such comfort comes at a price. In feeling the pain of today's beleaguered males, these new men's mags also co-opt the dog-whistle decree that has informed women's magazines for years: You're not good enough. Try harder. With these 13 steps you can be a better person.

In the women's magazine realm, of course, the fascist cheerleading usually involves physical appearance and sexual desirability. "18 foods that fight cellulite!" "23 great things to do with your hair tonight!" "Little mouth moves that make sex hotter!" In the new men's magazines, it's not sex or body size but some philosophical notion of masculine virtue that's the oppressive ideal. Don't like to clean your house? Then you're not the charming slob in the beer commercial but some kind of a wuss, because "part of becoming a man is picking up after yourself." Have trouble crying, even when you've just been sprung from the slammer or you're confronting the cremated remains of a beloved pet? Come on, Petunia! Don't you know that "bawlin'" is just about the most virile thing a guy can do? Drop down for 20 and shed a few brawny tears!

This new male archetype arguably started in the 1980s, when Robert Bly led thousands of baby boomers into the woods to reclaim their masculinity by terrifying squirrels with poetry and bongo drums. Then there were the Promise Keepers, hijacking NFL stadiums to tailgate for Jesus and pledge their faithfulness to their beautiful subservient wives. More recently, the federal government's been dabbling in manovation, first in the Clinton years with task forces and conferences, then in the Bush years with the Healthy Marriage and Responsible Fatherhood initiatives, which allocated nearly a billion dollars between 2006 and 2010 to transform lyin' and cheatin' (but probably not bawlin') louts and deadbeats into responsible family men.

But if major government programs to retool the American male suggest a potentially disturbing trend toward heavy-handed social engineering, infringing on the sacrosanct territory of traditional men's magazines exacerbates this trend in a way that's downright intolerable. Just as there's an unwritten law that you can't show traffic jams or trips to the mechanic in car commercials, you can't show the real responsibilities of male adulthood in men's magazines. Or at least you shouldn't. Men's magazines are idealized Edens of irresponsibility, hedonism, wistful dreaming, places where all the women are gorgeous and underdressed, all the booze is top-shelf and on the house, and life's greatest challenges involve nothing more pressing than how to infuse your pocket squares with a little more rebel attitude.

Turn them into virtue factories and pretty soon you'll have real problems. For decades, women's magazines have tirelessly evangelized on behalf of superficial, compliant ideals—"Curb Your Food Cravings!" "Orgasm Noises He'll Love!"—and look how that's turned out. Women are earning more college degrees than men now. Their wages are rising. They're waiting longer to become wives and mothers. Feed men a steady diet of stories mandating responsibility, loyalty, and "the best way to approach your pregnant wife about remodeling a nursery," and eventually you're going to produce a generation of men who make Charlie Sheen look like Ozzie Nelson.*

*Correction, Oct. 11, 2010: The article originally misspelled Ozzie Nelson's first name.


Thursday, October 21, 2010

Carolyn Abraham - Failing Our Boys

The Globe and Mail (Canada) has been running an excellent series on the many ways we are failing to support our boys in the educational system. Whether it's allowing them to fall behind in and drop out of school, the lack of male teachers to serve as role models, a feminized education system, the over-medication of boys to make them more docile, or any number of other issues - our boys are being betrayed by the system.

Thanks to my Facebook friend who pointed these out to me.

These articles are about Canada, but we face the same issues here in the States, and maybe even more so. I'm going to post some of these articles over the next few days.

Failing boys and the powder keg of sexual politics

Carolyn Abraham

From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Compelling statistics show boys rank behind girls by nearly every measure of scholastic achievement, yet the phenomenon is as polarizing as it is puzzling. Part 1 of a six-part series.

In 1998, when stories about schools short-changing girls still played in the press, and research continued to chronicle the gender bias against females in the classroom, some of Canada’s leading educational publishers began revising their standard science textbooks for Grades 7 through 10.

Several studies had faulted textbooks for pushing sexist stereotypes of Dick and Jane, driving girls away from certain subjects, science in particular. Mindful of that, publishers instructed their contributors to feature girls prominently in the revised editions.

“If you had a picture of a person doing something positive, winning a race, performing an experiment successfully, etc., [you had to] make sure it was of a girl,” said one of the consultants involved in the revisions. “If you had to have a picture of someone doing a bad thing – bullying, making a mistake, being unsure which course of action to take, etc. – the image was invariably of a boy.”

The consultant, who asked that his name be withheld to protect his employment, said the intentions were good but perhaps the pendulum swung too far. “The side effect was to show the boys that they are rarely winners and we expect less of them,” he said. “The unstated assumption was that boys did not need the same degree of encouragement.”

Just 12 years later, the assumption seems as dated as the strap. Boys have been recast as the underdogs of academics. It’s a controversial shift – fuelling a complex battle of the sexes – but these days boys are the ones making news, for falling behind and flunking out, from the U.S. to China, from the U.K. to the Philippines, from New Zealand to Canada.

Here, a hill of data suggests that boys, as a group, rank behind girls by nearly every measure of scholastic achievement. They earn lower grades overall in elementary school and high school. They trail in reading and writing, and 30 per cent of them land in the bottom quarter of standardized tests, compared with 19 per cent of girls. Boys are also more likely to be picked out for behavioural problems, more likely to repeat a grade and to drop out of school altogether.

While men and women are enrolling in university in record numbers, the proportion of women attending is significantly higher. Men make up just 40 per cent of university undergraduates, and they’re much less likely than women to graduate from the college or degree program they start.

Yet the phenomenon can be as puzzling as it is polarizing. Some see it as proof of society’s forgotten boys – that while diligent efforts went into helping girls learn, boys were disregarded, left to find their own way in a feminized education system.

“I’ve been accused of being a dinosaur and anti-feminist when I bring it up. But it’s the elephant in the room – the classroom,” said Jon Bradley, a professor of education at McGill University in Montreal, where the dropout rate is as high as 60 per cent in some urban schools. “We’ve got all the data, and still we don’t really want to admit there is a problem.”

Others, however, feel the current concerns over education statistics smack of smoke and myopia. They argue girls have always earned better grades and that it’s the marketplace that’s changed, making young men without good marks less competitive in a knowledge-based economy. They balk at the notion that boys now need special measures to get ahead.

After all, despite the giant strides women have made in higher education – outpacing men with their degrees and grade point averages – boys grow up to be men and, as The Globe documented in its series on Women in Power last week, it is still a man’s world. Men run the vast majority of countries and companies, and even when women have the same level of education, men still bring home more bacon.

“It’s hard to argue that boys are being short-changed. Even with the generation difference, it’s very doubtful that today’s girls will be ascending into positions of power and today’s boys will be in a minority in business and politics,” said Paula Bourne, head of women’s studies at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

It’s no mystery that talk of males in need can become a powder keg of sexual politics, said Paul Cappon, president and CEO of the Canadian Council on Learning. “We don’t like to talk about it, because we think it’s denigrating the achievements of females, but that’s not the case,” he said. “You have to ask what is happening, and you have to ask why. It’s a head in-the-sand, politically correct view to say there’s no problem with boys.”

Theories abound to explain the new gender gap in education – slower brain development, video games that zap away study time, peer pressure, a lack of male role models at school and at home, and sons parented differently than daughters.

Compelling insight comes from Statistics Canada’s ambitious Youth In Transition Survey, which in 2000 began tracking 30,000 15-year-olds at 1,000 schools and 23,000 youths between the ages of 18 and 20. It finds that while overall marks, reading ability and study habits are the top three predictors of which teenager will go to university, parental expectations rank fourth.

Nearly 70 per cent of parents said they expected their 15-year-old daughters would complete a university degree. Yet only 60 per cent had the same expectation of their 15-year-old sons.

“I think too many of us accept the failure of boys, we say, ‘Well, that’s just the way boys are,’ there’s a social impulse in that direction, that even our expectations are lower,” Dr. Cappon said. “We don’t pay nearly enough attention to their needs and aspirations, take seriously their interests, and what motivates them, whether it’s reading comics or science fiction. It isn’t at all clear that schools have taken account of that.”

In 2002, Toronto youth psychologist Fred Mathews organized the First National Conference on the Status of Male Children in Canada. It was the culmination of two decades of research showing the struggles of males, from the earliest days of childhood, are under-reported, understudied and ignored.

“We really don’t know a lot about boys, we make a lot of assumptions about male children, but we don’t know,” said Dr. Mathews. “In the playground, we pick up girls who fall down and give them a hug; with a boy, we brush him off and send him on his way.”

Dr. Mathews hoped to hold a boys conference every year, and to tackle the education question head-on. But he was unable to raise the money to hold another one.

Canada’s youth survey found boys are more likely to say they feel disengaged with school, to spend less time studying or none at all, and to report that neither they nor their friends plan to go to university.

Dr. Cappon suspects the new gender gap in education could be a harbinger of social and economic upheaval if males drift to the fringes of productivity and women have to be both primary breadwinners and child-bearers.

Prof. Bourne argues that society adapts. Back when the first classes of women began graduating from Dalhousie, she says, people worried that women would stop getting married. Girls have always viewed a university degree as the ticket to higher earnings, she says, but only in recent decades are they “reaping the benefits” of their hard work. And only now, with the loss of manufacturing jobs, has boys’ school performance become an issue.

She feels the story of boys struggling in school has been “overemphasized,” when many boys are doing quite well. (Indeed, some 32 per cent of boys are A students, a distinction that applies to more than 46 per cent of girls.)

Last fall, University of Alberta president Indira Samarasekera told the Edmonton Journal that as a female leader and visible minority, she hoped to be an advocate for young white men, calling their decline in universities a “demographic time bomb.”

Angry students put up 300 posters around campus a few days later, likening the university president to King Kong. “Women are attacking campus,” they read. “Only white men can save our university.”

“It got a little testy,” Dr. Samarasekera recalled.

But without drawing more men to postsecondary education, she feels, the work force will lack diversity, women and men will lack compatible mates, especially as the economy shifts to one of mind over manufacturing.

Dr. Samaraskera described how her daughter, a lawyer, had been a self-starter where schoolwork was concerned. Her son “took a little more time to figure out what he wanted.” Today he’s training to be a surgeon, but, she says, “I was on him all the time.”

She feels more young men have to hear about the benefits of education, that their minority status in university is not a reflection of intelligence, but interest. Advances women made in education could now serve as a template for helping boys, she said: “We should take a page out of the book of what we did years ago.”


Wednesday, October 20, 2010

Zettler Clay - Is The Emasculated Male An Evolved Norm?

This article comes from Clutch, an online magazine targeted at young Black women:
Clutch is the only online magazine for Black women that is updated numerous times daily and releases a full issue every Monday. Weekly interviews with the biggest names in the world (Russell Simmons, Diahann Carroll, Sheila Johnson, Hill Harper, Sanaa Lathan, Nia Long, John Legend, Suze Orman, among others) are mixed with editorials by some of the most eclectic minds of this generation.
Great - I'm sure there is a market for what they are doing, and it's a slick site.

This piece looks specifically at black men and women. While there are certainly some huge differences in the cultural background - more black men are in prison than college (I think I read that -correct me if I am wrong); black men are less likely to have an in-home father; young black men are more likely to have children outside of marriage; and so on - I think some of the issues about changing gender roles are outside of race, though perhaps they are experienced differently.

Really, it's an issue for all men and women trying to make sense of the evolving gender roles. Things are changing for men, in particular, faster than they are willing to adapt to new ways (if they even know what those ways might be) to be men in our society.

As the author points out, and questions in the title, traditional gender roles for men are no longer relevant or sustainable. Further, it seems that women do not want this type of man. Yet, they do want men to be strong, directed, responsible, and so on - traits which are associated with the older roles.

When men are compliant, submissive, deferential, make less money, etc, they are perceived as emasculated - and they are. They did not grow up with a healthy model of masculine identity - and for black men, they grew up with cultural images of themselves as gang bangers, hit-and-run fathers, lazy, and whatever other racist stereotype you can think up. Problem is, they lived down to those role models.

Men can learn new and better ways to be men - they can be strong, dependable, loving, supportive, and so much more - but they need role models, and they need our help to find those traits within themselves.

Is The Emasculated Male An Evolved Norm?

Monday Oct 11, 2010 – By Zettler Clay


As the shift in our world becomes more palpable by the day and week, there is a vortex of cultural norms that seek settlement.

If cultures are full of organisms which live and breathe and form groups based on habits, then a settlement of a culture would imply stagnation. And if any aspect of our culture has been stagnant, it is the belief in a male-dominated society.

In the context of capitalism and sexism (our favorite “isms”), the gender-hierarchical mindset is persistent.

But in a social context, it’s not as cut and dry. Heterosexual marriage statistics indicate decline. The narrative of the harried single Black woman is still alive and well. And the devolution of what society deems to be a “manly” man is as salient as it’s ever been.

What is a “manly man”? People have tried to define manhood for centuries without regard for individual differences. A Procrustean standard is generally imposed, and any male who deviates from this standard does so at his peril.

In this country, the dominant perception of a “manly man” is one borrowed from the larger patriarchal framework inherited from Greco-Roman culture. Modern traits include:

  • Man as head of household financially, bread winning. Although this is steadily changing, the notion of man being the top earner is still entrenched. Stigmas still arise from wives or girlfriends earning more (more on this later). In a capitalistic society, this is a primary determinant of manliness.
  • Man as the physical head. He should be the first to put himself in harm’s way if the situation so requires, as well as the first to take on the physical chores of the house, such as pushing heavy lawn mowers, fixing leaks in the ceiling, making sure the AC is working properly, etc.
  • Man as the spiritual head. This notion takes its cue from the King James Bible (76 percent of U.S. citizens are Christians). The man should follow God as the woman follows him, because Christ ordained it.
  • Man as the emotional rock. Women as being more prone to act on feelings and intuition and men as being more rational and cool-headed—an idea which rests deep in the collective psyche of our culture. This presents numerous implications, most notably an implicit acknowledgment that women are unfit for leadership over men because leadership requires, well, a rational and cool-headed individual.

In the Black community it’s more complex. A dual-income household was established much earlier in Black households. Many of these families weren’t economically equipped to live off of single incomes during the Jim Crow and mid-20th century. Out of necessity, egalitarianism was encouraged.

This threw the “manly” paradigm out of whack. Men in these environs often followed the Bible or Koran and took their cues from Western capitalism, which makes household partnership a compromise rather than an empowering way of life. When a man is reared in a culture of power and feels he has none—experiencing “compromise” within the home and feeling the weight of White supremacy outside of it—hypermasculinity tends to happen.

What followed was a cycle of fractious relationships and self-destructive behavior that led to men not being present with their wives (or girlfriends) to raise their children. It wasn’t merely the absence of fathers that was the problem. It was a lack of a viable masculine outlook. Even men reared in two-parent households can share this lack.

The absence of Black fathers in the household is a well-noted and targeted reason for weakness among Black males. Over the years, however, other explanations—institutional racism and discrimination—have been cited as causes for the emasculation of Black males in their social interactions with women.

The author Dr. Francis Cress Welsing even asserts that White supremacy is the root of Black male homosexuality. Her heteronormative premise is stark: homosexuality deriving from a social malady. And she goes further to imply homosexuality as defective, a fruit from a crippled tree.

Questionable views about homosexuality aside, Welsing is on to something about the effects of oppression. Oppression has a way of withering the human mind and shaping “norms” among the oppressed. If Black men who grew up in the 60s and 70s—the generation that integrated the school system—were fed various devaluing narratives about the plight of the Black male (remember the Moynihan Report), how does that alter the impressionable mind?

Instead of growing up to be what their fathers were not, it was easier to conform to society’s expectations of them.

Invariably, I come across women who express dissatisfaction with dating men who aren’t “assertive enough,” “too timid,” or “act too much like me.” Much to their chagrin, many women feel like they have to walk on eggshells because of the emasculation they’re confronted with on a daily basis.

This is odd because the term “emasculation” assumes a patriarchal connotation. Many women base their ideas about what a man should be on the same male-centered standard which these same women rail against.

Nevertheless, there are holes that women are prone to point out in today’s men: It isn’t just the typical male definer of aggression that is missing, but an inability to be self-reliant. To be a protector. To not be a pushover. To tone down on the excessive “masculinity.” To be a rock they read about or may have grown up under.

Here, emasculation isn’t the issue at root; the lack of balance in the relationship is. At a time when women are outnumbering men in the workforce, acquiring more degrees than men, and making more money, the opposite is occurring for men.

If women are less apt to do without “weak” men now, men are more apt to continue feeling the sting of their societal niche being co-opted. Does this insecurity make him less of a man?

22 percent of husbands have wives whose income now exceeds theirs, compared to four percent in 1970. According to sociologist and author Christin Munsch, the gender identity of a husband is threatened when he earns less than his wife, leading him closer to cheating to improve his identity and compensate for his insecurity.

So if the current mancession is a result of absentee (both emotionally and physically) fathers and emerging alpha women, where does that leave us?

Gender roles are changing at a more than steady pace, leaving us with the charge to redefine masculinity and femininity in the context of a modern-day relationship.

Throughout this land and abroad, evolving norms in manhood are taking place. Living and breathing cultures tend to have evolutions because of macro changes. Financially, there has never been a time in U.S. history when women have been more dominant. A trickle down effect was bound to occur.

Will men find other ways to affirm their “manliness?” Will women accept these new ways? New masculine paradigms are being delineated and carved out before our eyes. Perhaps it’s time we pay attention.


Humor in Human Sexuality - And Sobering Numbers on Cancer Deaths


My current class in school is human sexuality and sexuality counseling. The first textbook of two is simply about sexuality, gender, and identity. It's been pretty boring. Until now.

I'm reading the chapter on male sexual anatomy and function & the one on sexual relations. They must have been written by the lone male on the editorial team - because there are some great one-liners, as well as demonstrating a keen grasp of the obvious.
"By the way, the ejaculate is a low-calorie food—largely protein—when ingested."

"people who practice the “withdrawal method” of birth control are often called “parents”"

"The erect penis is an efficient funnel for depositing sperm deep within the vagina."

"In an effort to distract himself from erotic fantasies and to allow an erection to subside, many a male adolescent desperately renews his interest in his algebra or language textbook in class before the bell rings."

"Orgasm is generally pleasurable."

"Most of us would find funeral music a damper on sexual arousal."
OK, that was fun - now the real world, where more men die of prostate cancer than women die of breast cancer.

According to our textbook:
  • Breast cancer: Breast cancer strikes nearly 270,000 women in the United States each year and takes about 40,000 lives
  • Prostate cancer: 230,000 new cases of prostate cancer in the United States each year, and about 90,000 deaths
We have pink ribbons, Susan G Komen march for the cure, even the NFL does a breast cancer awareness month - yet MORE THAN TWICE as many men die of prostate cancer each year than women dying of breast cancer. Research funding is more than 2:1 in favor of breast cancer.

WTF?!

Apparently, there are blue ribbons for men and prostate cancer awareness, but have you ever seen a promotion for them? They've been out for more than 10 years.

The other reality is that WAAAAAY more research money goes into erectile dysfunction drugs than into drugs to fight and cure prostate cancer. So men would rather get it up for as long as possible than live longer.