Jayson Gaddis - Why Men Need to Feel Their Feelings

From Role/Reboot, this is a good article from Jayson Gaddis - originally posted at his own blog. This is an important topic for men, and I include myself in needing to pay more attention to this aspect of my life. I've become very attuned to feeling my client's emotions, but I have been paying less attention to my own feelings.

My being shut down lately has made my partner angry and uncomfortable - she feels shut out and that I am not fully invested in our relationship. It's understandable that she feels that way in the absence of any indication from me.

This article from Jayson is a good reminder to get back to being self-aware - because when I was younger, I was exactly as he described himself, "emotionally shut down." I don't want to fall into that trap again.

Why Men Need to Feel Their Feelings

By Jayson Gaddis
May 19, 2013

This originally appeared on JaysonGaddis.com. Republished [at Role/Reboot] with permission.

I was emotionally shut down for years. Every woman I dated had to deal with my inability to identify a feeling. She would ask, “Hey is something bothering you?” I would reply, “No, I’m fine” with a hint of defensiveness.

The closest I ever came to identifying what was really going on was “I’m in a funk.” Many folks know this as feeling off somehow or my personal favorite, “I’m in a bad mood.”

Underneath such comments is an entire emotional landscape that remains largely unexplored. The metaphor I like to use is that of a lake.

When standing on the shore of a large lake, you can see ripples, colors, and reflections. If it is windy or stormy out, the surface of the lake changes and makes it even harder to see beneath the surface. Not until the storm dies down can you begin to see more clearly. When things are still, the lake's surface mirrors its surroundings.

Venture beyond the shoreline and even more possibility opens up. The lake takes on a new perspective. Looking beyond the reflection, it becomes three dimensional and you can see below the surface.

We are very similar. When we are upset, it is hard to see things clearly. The only way to see things clearly is to take some space from the upset, calm down, and gain a new perspective. Why am I mentioning this metaphor?

Because feeling helps you see clearly. And seeing clearly helps you move more freely toward what you want in your life. And when you get what you want, you are more fulfilled.

But Why Is It So Hard For Dudes to Feel?

Contrary to some big generalizations out there, men do in fact feel, but most men were trained as little boys by the “boy code” to not feel. They were trained and taught to suck it up, not cry, etc. For example, as a boy I was trained by my dad and my culture to not feel. To feel meant I would be judged as a wimp, a girl, or even gay. (As if girls or gay people are somehow bad?) So, men do feel, it’s just challenging for many men to know what they are feeling.

So, it’s understandable why many men don’t allow themselves to feel and can’t even identify a feeling. Many adult men are still very scared to feel their feelings because if they do, their fear is they will be judged as not manly, acting like a girl or being weak or gay.

So, most men never venture out beyond the shoreline and certainly don’t look below the surface. Therefore, many men remain locked up, shut down, and not free.

The Cost of Not Being Willing to Feel

1. relationship blues

Sadly, these old fears keep many men locked up around their feelings and lead to very frustrating relationships for women dating these men. Rather than dive in to the unknown waters of intimacy, men stay on the shore, where it is safe. But as any sailor will tell you, a ship in a harbor is safe, but that’s not what ships are built for (a William Shedd quote).

Moreover, men who shut down or stuff their feelings remain emotionally constipated and have very little facility or freedom when it comes to intimacy. Then, they keep resisting actual help like couples counseling.

2. narrow bandwidth of expression

If you never let yourself feel grief, anger, sadness and other “negative” emotions, you will have less access to the “positive” emotions such as joy, love, and happiness. The waters you are able to swim and navigate are more shallow. For example, if you avoid “negative” emotions, you might experience some happiness but the depth with which you feel it is limited.

3. you are not free

Staying on the shore, you never really get to test if your vessel is seaworthy. Freedom is the open water of who you are, not the shore.

4. physical problems

Most body workers, massage therapists, and good body-centered, somatic therapists know that the body holds and stores trauma and unexpressed emotion. The more you hold, the more the body has to carry the burden. Your boat begins to decay having never touched water. Stoic men who never learn to feel, are simply in pain.


5. You are less available to give and receive love

If you shut yourself off from your own emotions and never “set sail,” you’ll never know what it is like to swim or sail. The endless terrain that is available to you will remain a distant dream. If you want to feel more love, try feeling all your feelings. Try exploring what lies below the surface farther from the shore.

For the brave who do decide to face the unknown lake of discomfort and painful emotion, what you will experience may shock you. Try it and see what happens. To me it’s something like an elixir.

But Where Do I Start?

1. Get quiet: When you are upset or “in a funk” sit down or lie down and be still. You cannot see below the surface until you are still. Meditation is a tool that can help.

2. Get Curious: Start with the facts before you begin to interpret or try to figure it out. Target three main areas:

a. Thoughts: When did it start? Ask yourself when this feeling started? Was it the fight with your partner last week? Was it a call with your parents? An ex-lover? Did something piss you off at work? Where are your thoughts going and what are they like? 

b. Emotions: What does it feel like? Explore the feeling quality and the sensation that goes along with it. Is it hot? Cold? Tight? Humming? Vibrating? Tense? Soft, Achy? Does it have a color? A tone? Does it radiate? Is it dense? Thick? 

c. Body sensations: Where in your body do you feel it? Is it in your throat? Gut? Chest? Where does it live?

3. Take responsibility for what you are feeling: Name it, begin to articulate it with a friend. For example, “Wow, for the last few days I was locked up. Now I know that it started when ____happened. I have felt tense and irritated ever since. I feel shut down and I don’t want to be around anyone.”

4. Notice what your default behavior is when you feel this way. When you find yourself “in a funk” do you numb out with TV? food? sugar? porn? masturbation? alcohol? drugs? Or do you isolate? Or both?

5. Choose to feel it until it changes. Have the balls to turn toward it. After all, what is the worst thing that could happen?

Want to feel more love and lightness in your life? Then start saying “yes” to feelings you have been saying “no” to. Invite them in and get to know them. As psychotherapist John Welwood says, befriend your emotions.

Jayson Gaddis is a yerba mate addict and a householder. He’s a relationship healer, psychotherapist, and guide devoted to helping people awaken through relationships, intimacy, and parenting. He’s a husband and part-time stay-at-home Dad getting schooled by his two kids.

Related Links:

• Why I've Turned Down Good Men
• The Friday Five
• Why The Personal Is Political

Mike Robertson - 6 Best Exercises for Strength

This is a nice article with some good advice - the only thing I would change is weighted dips instead of the close-grip bench, and if I made that change, then I would want to make the resisted push ups into feet elevated resisted push ups.

But Robertson is the expert, not me. He is a frequent contributor to T-Nation, from whence this article comes,

Mike Robertson has helped clients and athletes from all walks of life achieve their strength, physique and performance related goals. Mike received his Masters Degree in Sports Biomechanics from the world-renowned Human Performance Lab at Ball State University. Mike is the president of Robertson Training Systems, and the co-owner of Indianapolis Fitness and Sports Training which was recently named one of America's Top Ten Gyms. 

Enjoy.

6 Best Exercises for Strength

by Mike Robertson – 5/7/2013 

What would you do if you could only pick 6 exercises to put into your strength-training program?

Here's a better question: What if strength was only one component of your entire program?

If you compete in strength sports such as powerlifting or Olympic lifting, picking your exercises is easy. But if you're an athlete, you have hundreds, if not thousands, of exercises to choose from.

How do you whittle it down and only focus on a few exercises, the ones that would be the most impactful to your overall strength and physique?

The Athletic Strength Conundrum

These are the exact questions I was asking myself a few months ago.

I've been lucky in recent years to work with a handful of professional and Olympic-caliber athletes. The problem is, in my mind, I'm a "weights" guy. In my estimation, everyone can benefit from getting stronger.

And I still feel that way, no matter how many books I read, conferences I attend, etc. But I also realize that for an athlete, there's a lot more to athletic success than simply being strong in the weight room.

If I'm trying to get someone ready for a 90-minute soccer game, we're doing a ton of conditioning in that last phase or two leading up to camp. I don't have a ton of time to do 6, 8, or 10 lifts in one training session.

So what do I do? Forget about weight lifting? Lose all the strength that we've taken precious time to develop in the off-season?

Absolutely not.

What we have to do is focus on a handful of big-bang lifts that will not only improve performance on and off the field, but maintain our mobility, strength, and power as well.

As a result, I came up with a list of the following exercises. I call them "athletic strength" exercises, not because you can't get strong off them, but because the powerlifter or hardcore meathead may not totally agree with them. I'm okay with that.

If you're a powerlifter, squat, bench, and deadlift until the cows come home.

If you're an Olympic lifter, snatch and clean and jerk repeatedly.

However, if you're an athlete that wants to not only get strong but also develop and maintain other critical qualities such as power, speed, mobility, and general athleticism, these are your exercises.

#1 – The Power Clean

While no one will confuse me with an Olympic lifting purist, I definitely respect the power of the Olympic lifts.

And I'm not even going to get into the whole "should you take the time to coach them?" debate – that's been beaten to death already. Regardless of your stance, we can all agree that the Olympic lifts are fantastic for developing power and explosiveness.

Can you do this with a med ball throw? Or jumping exercise?

To a certain extent, sure. But these exercises belong more on the "speed-strength" side of the continuum.

The power clean is a great way for an athlete to improve or maintain explosiveness and power. If you're comfortable coaching or training it, I highly recommend using it.

#2 – The Front Squat 

The front squat is an amazing exercise for athletes and it provides unique benefits from its cousin, the back squat.

If you're an athlete, you need strong quads. Quads are critical not only for improving your vertical jump, but your ability to decelerate, plant, and cut as well.

However, quads are just the starting point. The front squat is an amazing anterior core exercise. You know how you can get totally caved over and still manage to finish a back squat? Yeah, that ain't happening with a front squat.

If your abs are weak, do a 2-3 month front squat cycle and you should walk away impressed with how much stronger and more stable your core and trunk are as a result.

Last but not least, the front squat is an amazing tool for maintaining your mobility. Front squatting ensures that you maintain ankle, knee, hip, and thoracic spine mobility, which is why it's a mainstay in my programs.

#3 – The Trap Bar Deadlift

We all know that deadlifts are awesome. After all, the deadlift is my favorite lift, so there's no way I'm going to downplay its importance.

For athletes, though, mobility could be a concern. Or in the same vein, they may not have adequate strength in the posterior chain to do conventional deadlifts safely and effectively.

The sumo deadlift doesn't work either as it doesn't get you into a very athletic position. This is why I'm a big fan of the trap bar deadlift.

When you use the high handles you can get someone into a very vertical tibia/inclined trunk position. This combo gives the trap bar deadlift the potential to be very posterior chain dominant.

Note: If you want to learn more about how to maximize your leg development, read this.

Trust me, if you work with enough athletes, you know they often have the posterior chain strength of Gwenyth Paltrow. They need stronger backsides, period.

Also, if you're working with an athlete who has the mobility of a stone golem, the trap bar deadlift is a great starting point. It allows you to load their hips effectively while addressing other mobility needs throughout the "corrective" part of their programming.

#4 – The Close-Grip Bench Press

As much as I love wide-grip bench pressing for powerlifting performance, I feel as though the close-grip bench press is a superior alternative for athletes.

Think of it this way: if your hands (or elbows) are out really far from your body and someone is coming to push you off your spot, you're going to lose.

However, if you have your elbows and arms in tight to the body, you can maximize leverage, as well as effectively tying together the legs, trunk, and upper body.

The close-grip bench is also an ideal exercise for building upper body strength. I know the bench gets a bad rap, but there's something to be said for being flat-out stronger than your competition.

#5 – Resisted Push-ups

As awesome as the close-grip bench press is for developing the upper body, it does have limitations. The biggest issue when benching is that even if your core and lower body are tight, they're rarely the limiting factor in your performance.

While close-grip benching is great for developing upper body strength, it doesn't necessarily tie that strength together by unifying the upper and lower body. Which is why we do heavy, resisted push-ups.

A well-executed push-up with the core stable and in neutral spinal alignment will absolutely crush your anterior core. And even though this isn't a coaching article per se, try this little trick to get even more core development:

Set up in the top position of a push-up and before you start moving, think about exhaling hard. After you've exhaled, pull your head and neck back to get into a more "neutral neck" position.

It may sound easy, but getting into a more ideal position through the neck and core will definitely crank up the intensity. The other huge benefit you get from performing a push-up versus a bench press is scapular stability.

When you're doing a bench press, the goal is to "pin" your shoulder blades back and down. The scapulae are stable, but it's a very static kind of stability. On the other hand, a push-up is similar to actual sporting movements since you're forced to actively control the position of the scapulae.

Instead of simply pinning them back and down behind you, you need to make sure they're moving appropriately and in the right place at the right time.

Finally, the push-up is a closed-chain pressing variation, meaning it's awesome for developing rotator cuff strength and stability.

Next time, instead of doing 3x15 shoulder external rotations with a Theratube to crush your rotator cuff, bang out 2-3 sets of high-quality push-ups.

You'll get more out of the exercise, and look infinitely more awesome to boot.

#6 – Chin-ups

The last exercise on my list is the chin-up. Just like the previous exercises, chin-ups are an incredible "bang-for-your-buck" exercise.

In most sports (and strength training programs), there's a ton of emphasis on "pushing." All you have to do is observe the posture of someone who "presses" all the time, without balancing it out with upper back work, to see why this is an issue.

These athletes are a disaster waiting to happen. Chin-ups, however, will help balance out the equation.

Another awesome benefit of well-executed chin-ups is developing the lower trapezius muscle. The lower trap is not only a key shoulder stabilizer, but (along with the upper trap and serratus anterior) constitutes one-third of the upward rotation force couple.

The key with chin-ups is that you need to focus on getting your chest to the bar and actively depressing your scapulae down. Here's a short video on how to maximize chin-up performance:

Bottom line, if you only have a limited amount of time to strength train, at least some of that needs to be geared towards strengthening the upper back.

The chin-up will give you a ton of benefits and should be a staple in your athletic strength program.

What? No Single-Leg Exercises?

I know someone is going to come on Live Spill raging because I didn't include single-leg work in my programming. Look, I'm a big believer in single-leg work, but this article is called "Athletic Strength," not "Athletic Stability."

Single-leg work has a time and a place. If you have a stability limitation, then single-leg work may be ideal, but if you want to get seriously strong or powerful, train on two legs (or arms).

Summary

Whether your goal is to be a beast on the field or court, or to simply look like a beast in the gym, the exercises included in this article are tried and true.

Make them a focus of your upcoming training programs and I guarantee you'll see results not only in your physique, but in your performance as well!

According to this author, "masculinities scholarship can be understood as providing the basis for a critique of feminist legal theory. This approach begins with the allegation that feminist legal theory generally and incorrectly treats men as a monolithic group when there is in fact a multiplicity of male identities. Masculinities scholarship, in this framing, could be categorized as the male-focused companion to critiques that have been made over the past thirty years that feminist legal theory is excluding and essentializing. It is this understanding of the significance of masculinities to feminist legal theory that prompted this Essay."

Interesting article, though it's on the geeky gender theory side of things.

Full Citation:
Fineman, MA. (2013) Feminism, Masculinities, and Multiple Identities (2013). Nevada Law Journal, Vol. 13, No. 101; Emory Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-238. Available at  SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2255182

Feminism, Masculinities, and Multiple Identities

Martha Albertson Fineman

Emory University School of Law

2013

Nevada Law Journal, Vol. 13, No. 101, 2013

Emory Legal Studies Research Paper No. 12-238

Abstract:

Masculinities scholarship could be seen as distinct from and complementary to feminist theory — an independent and parallel companion theory, developed by men. In this regard, from a feminist’s perspective masculinities scholarship might be thought of as ethnography, helpfully providing insights into the operations and assumptions of a distinct masculine culture. This approach would seem to validate the notion that there are significant differences between men’s and women’s experiences and perspectives, and consideration of both is necessary to form a complete legal theory picture. Feminist legal theory and masculinities theory are thus seen as both contrasting and complementary in nature.

On the other hand, masculinities scholarship can be understood as providing the basis for a critique of feminist legal theory. This approach begins with the allegation that feminist legal theory generally and incorrectly treats men as a monolithic group when there is in fact a multiplicity of male identities. Masculinities scholarship, in this framing, could be categorized as the male-focused companion to critiques that have been made over the past thirty years that feminist legal theory is excluding and essentializing. It is this understanding of the significance of masculinities to feminist legal theory that prompted this Essay.

I. INTRODUCTION

It has been suggested that feminist legal theorists might productively use the scholarship on masculinities that has been developed over the past decade. There are several ways in which masculinities scholarship might interact with feminist legal theory. Masculinities scholarship could be seen as distinct from and complementary to feminist theory—an independent and parallel companion theory, developed by men. In this regard, from a feminist’s perspective masculinities scholarship might be thought of as ethnography, helpfully providing insights into the operations and assumptions of a distinct masculine culture. This approach would seem to validate the notion that there are significant differences between men’s and women’s experiences and perspectives, and consider-ation of both is necessary to form a complete legal theory picture. Feminist legal theory and masculinities theory are thus seen as both contrasting and complementary in nature.

On the other hand, masculinities scholarship can be understood as providing the basis for a critique of feminist legal theory. This approach begins with the allegation that feminist legal theory generally and incorrectly treats men as a monolithic group when there is in fact a multiplicity of male identities. Masculinities scholarship, in this framing, could be categorized as the male-focused companion to critiques that have been made over the past thirty years that feminist legal theory is excluding and essentializing. It is this understanding of the significance of masculinities to feminist legal theory that prompted this Essay.

I begin with summarizing some of the recent work on masculinities and reflect on the relevance of masculinities scholarship to feminist legal theorists. Specifically, I am concerned with the role of identity-based approaches in critical legal theory (feminist or otherwise critical), particularly how they often result in unnecessarily vigorous, overly broad, and ill-conceived accusations about exclusion and silencing that have otherwise similarly oriented individuals at odds with each other. That form of academic criticism may build individual careers, but it also negatively channels energy and resources away from a comprehensive critical legal project in which the demand for social justice is a universal one.

This objective of universality is important. When we deal with the law and the relationship between legal institutions and the structuring of power and authority, as well as their allocation among the individual, the state, and societal institutions, we employ a system dependent on the process of classification, generalization, and universal applicability. My reservations about masculinities theories, and other identity-focused approaches to law, reflect my belief that the most important task for those interested in a social justice project at this particular time in legal history in the United States is to construct a legal subject with which to replace the abstract liberal subject with its accompanying and unrealistic constructs of autonomy, self-sufficiency, and independence. This new legal subject must be based on an appreciation of the human condition in order to effectively displace the rhetoric of personal responsibility, small government, and condemnation of state intervention. The liberal subject is a universal construct and, so, must be its alternative. This is not an argument that discrimination on the basis of categories such as race, gender, or sexual orientation is no longer a problem in the United States. Nor do I suggest that stronger remedies for discrimination are needed. My question is, as interesting as the deconstruction of traditional legal categories such as “woman” and “man” might be, how does the fragmented multiplicity of modified legal subjects that remain after such deconstruction aid a legal theorist in constructing an approach within the confines of our imperfect system to address problems, such as poverty and lack of social mobility, that transcend those fragmented identities?

You can download the whole paper from the link above.

Peter Lawler & Nina Easton - Perspectives on the Economic Struggles of Men

In his column at Big Think, Peter Lawler breaks down an article from CNN Money on why men are falling behind economically. First the original article and then the response from Lawler.

6 reasons why men are falling behind women

Readers weigh in with their personal observations about why American men are struggling economically

By Nina Easton, senior editor
May 8, 2013

FORTUNE -- There is a growing consensus among scholars on the right, left, and center that the state of median-income men in America is in distress.

They've endured a three-decade drop in earnings. Even before the financial crash, prime-age men were dropping out of the workforce altogether, and the problem has only worsened since. Meanwhile, women are far outstripping their male counterparts in the area that's most important for a 21st century global economy -- education.

The big question remains -- why? On this, the research still falls short. So the outpouring of reader feedback on my column in the April 29 issue of Fortune -- "America's Wayward Sons: Why They Can't Carry On" -- offers some valuable on-the-ground perspective.

The focus of that column was an MIT study showing the sharp rise in single-parent households hurts boys more than girls. Other scholars have blamed a rise in more readily available government assistance, making aid checks more appealing than paychecks. The decline of well-paying manufacturing jobs, combined with fast-paced technological change, also factors in.

Here's what readers, reporting on what they see in their own backyards, had to say:

Flight of fathers. There was broad agreement with the MIT study's conclusion that the rise of single-parenting has set back achievement levels. "My father was a small-time white-collar criminal that fled the country prior to a court date when I was just a few months old," Adam C. Dudly writes. "Even now, in my 30s, I struggle with laziness, sense of identity issues, figuring out who I am or what I want to be, and what kind of man I'm supposed to be ... I would have to assume most young men are not as proactive as I am."

"While this may seem glamorous for those who admire movie stars and athletes, such family arrangements in the real world often doom children to lead lives of emotional and material privation," writes Jason DeSena Trennart. "It is a clear and present danger to the fabric of our republic. Senator Moynihan spoke honestly about this problem in the African American community as long ago as 1965. Sadly, the phenomenon of single-parent households has only grown."

A rise in autism and ADHD. "Unfortunately, the current debate is being waged by social scientists and psychologists who are quick to blame the issue on vague societal trends (globalization, decline in manufacturing) and of course, single mothers and the lack of a male role model," writes Michelle Linn. "I suggest you consider exploring how biological (real) science may be playing a role in this alarming issue. The generation of children born since 1988 are by many accounts the unhealthiest on record. The rates of ADHD, asthma, autism, bipolar disorder, diabetes, and allergies have skyrocketed in the last two decades. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control published a rate of 1 in 5 children having a behavioral disorder or chronic disease.

"It is well known that neurological disorders affect boys more frequently than girls (for autism, the rate is fivefold)," she continues. "Could it be these illnesses and diseases of the central nervous system are actually affecting our economy? It is very easy to blame the lost potential of up to 20% of our youth on social stereotypes and psychology 101 blithering."

Video games. "As the mother of two boys ages 14 and 15," writes Chris Olofson, "my biggest fear is that it's the video gaming, in addition to the factors you mentioned in your article, that is causing the lack of motivation and initiative to work and thus get a firm hold on the economic ladder.'' She wants to see more research on how video games lead to a decline in reading and thereby college performance.

A K-12 education system biased toward girls. As Rob Ritzenthaler bluntly put it: "Who was the nut that thought that boys should sit at a desk for 6-8 hours a day while they were growing up?" Some readers also criticized the emphasis on obtaining college degrees.

Microbiology professor Pinghui V. Liu cited Japan's system of vocational schools for high school students who can't afford college -- offering engineering and mechanics, commerce and accounting, schools of agriculture and forestry, and even schools of fisheries. With this kind of schooling, teenagers "can start looking for jobs at the age when American students are just beginning to worry about how to pay for their college education," he writes.

Likewise, writes Dave Danson, "the constant message to your our young people that they are going to be a failure in life without a four-year degree is the wrong message to send to parents and young people ... The food in your grocery store was delivered by a trucker who most likely did not have a degree. The store mechanicals are maintained by someone without a degree ... Post-secondary training is vital ... But please try to look at the bigger picture."

Several readers noted that in school, boys and men still outpace women in science and math. And they still dominate in high-paying industrial jobs. Corey Planter, who graduated with a paper-engineering degree, notes that men mostly fill factory jobs as millwrights, pipe fitters, welders, and ironworkers -- paying up to $28 an hour. "You may be thinking that these jobs are rapidly disappearing, however they are not," he writes, noting one machinist shop that was on a nationwide search for enough machinists to keep up with his orders.

The financial gains of women. Gustavo A. Duran makes clear he supports the recent economic gains of women -- his own daughter has a masters from Stanford -- but he sees more and more men taking a backseat. "I am now seeing many women in their 40s being the main breadwinners while their husbands diddle [around] daily in odds and ends," Duran writes. "I think this trend will just get larger as we move on the next two to three decades unless we as a society become more demanding of our male children to be disciplined and accountable ... Men need to be equally responsible for themselves so that they can contribute to taking care of their children and their spouses."

Affirmative action. "I was surprised, however, not to see any mention of affirmative action as a contributor," writes T.J. Wilsson, echoing a number of readers. "With so many major employers obliging 'guidelines' pressuring them to, effectively, discriminate against males ... For example, I read that a major employer in one state had guidelines that some 80% of its newly hired veterinarians be female." Ron Goddard complained that "every step of the way my sons and I were put on notice by corporate America that we were their second choice."

Whatever their perspective, most of the readers who responded wanted more discussion, more research, and more attention to this vital conversation.

* * * * * *

And now the response - and an alternate viewpoint.

Men Fading Badly?

by PETER LAWLER
MAY 10, 2013

Here’s a good article that offers six explanations for why “median-income men in America” are “in distress.” Their incomes are dropping. Lots of “prime-age men” have been “dropping out of the workforce altogether.” Maybe most importantly, men have been disappearing from our institutions of higher education. If our future leaders are to be those who graduate from our colleges in the most serious programs and with the highest levels of achievement, then most of our future leaders will be women.

At my college, which is fairly typical, we've been worried about the “man dearth” for a while now. We can get filled up pretty easily with solid students, but recruiting men is a challenge. We just started up intercollegiate football, which did reduce the “gender gap” for next fall. But everyone knows that that remedy is temporary.

Where are the men who should be in college? The credential of a college degree, of course, is more important than ever, given the “decline of well-paying manufacturing jobs.” Everyone talks about picking up flexible skills and competencies outside the formal academic structure, but it’s not like that’s so easy for the ordinary guy to do. Peter Thiel ain't offering his entreprenurial grants to guys like that.

I’m not talking about my college now: It’s pretty clear that many or most colleges now have a kind a covert affirmative action for men. They’re knocking themselves out looking for them, and (perhaps) they’re compromising standards just a bit on their behalf. But the various schemes just aren’t working that well.

I’m not complaining about having to teach a disproportionate number of women: While I had a good number of really fine male students this spring, there’s no denying that women, in general, are more mature and have better personal discipline at 18 (or 19 or 22). They also have much better social or relational skills, and so they are much better at flattering (someone might say playing) me. Given my self-esteem “issues,” I really appreciate that.

I want to talk about all six causes of the decline of the middle-class man. The somewhat mysterious epidemic of autism is above my pay grade, but I do see it with my own eyes. And then there are video games, which really do cause some young men to exhibit another kind of asocial behavior.

Whatever I might want to do (eventually), I’m just going to put forward for your consideration what might be the most controversial cause.

I call your attention to the “MIT study showing the sharp rise in single-parent households hurts boys more than girls.”

The “flight of fathers,” for one thing, creates “identity issues” for young men. They haven’t been given guidance—or role modeling—about “who I am and what I want to be.” The result is “achievement levels” suffer.

I would add that fewer young men are either being responsible fathers or thinking of themselves as fathers in the near future. Surely one powerful incentive for personal achievement is parenthood. And parenthood isn’t what it should be if the father isn’t present at home and doing his part.

Because most single-parent households are headed up by women, the toll on motherhood just hasn’t been as great. We might even say that moms seem more noble than ever. Maybe one powerful incentive for the personal achievement of women these days is the knowledge that they can’t and shouldn’t rely on men.

So it’s very possible to speculate that the achievement level of our men fades as their participation in genuinely responsible relational life fades. Or at least we can say that the two forms of fading are interdependent.

by PETER LAWLER

Billy Johnson II - Traditional Gender Expectations May Contribute to Rising Suicide Rates in Men

This is not surprising. In a world where traditional male gender roles are no longer valued economically, where macho behavior is seen as cavemanish, and where gender roles in general have become more confusing, it's no surprise at all that men who feel they have to live up to traditional definitions of masculinity might feel hopeless and depressed about their future.

This article comes from the Good Men Project - and they are seeking stories by those affected by suicide (not sure if their deadline has passed).

Traditional Gender Expectations May Contribute to Rising Suicide Rates in Men

MAY 8, 2013 | BY BILLY JOHNSON II

Feeling trapped between a traditional masculinity and a progressive one can contribute to depression and suicide in men.

Despite strong national efforts, completed suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the United States. According to the CDC, in 2010 there were 38,364 suicides in 2010 in the United States, a daily average of 105 each day.

Furthermore, these statistics are thought to under-exaggerate the total number of completed suicides as the data can be difficult to gather and this behavior often goes unreported.

Adolescent suicidal behavior has received the bulk of scholastic and media attention because suicide is the third leading cause of death for young people ages 15 to 24. However, the New York Times reported significant increases in suicidal behavior among middle-aged individuals, in particular middle-aged men: specifically completed suicides by persons aged 35-64 increased by nearly 30% from 1999-2010.

The gendered nature of suicide has been well documented with males being three to four times more likely than females to die by suicide. Men’s use of fire arms, tendency to stuff emotions, and low likelihood of seeking help are a few of the variables listed as responsible for the contrast in suicide rates between men and women.

But how do we account for the significant rise in suicide among middle aged men?

The New York Times article listed several possibilities for this trend including access to fatal drugs and the impact of the current economy, one of the consequences of this being higher unemployment rates. Furthermore, this generation may feel financially and emotionally burdened by the task of taking care of their parents or older family members while ensuring their own financial stability.

Depression and anxiety are often at the center of suicidal thoughts, and research by Samaritans, a U.K. charity which aims to lower the number of suicides, revealed that middle aged men who experience divorce or relationship separation, unemployment, and poverty are more likely to experience depression and consider suicide.

The researchers add that these individuals may also feel stuck between traditional masculinity, with its focus on emotional stoicism, and the more recent and progressive gender politics of expressing emotions openly.

Finally, they report that the ineffectiveness of some approaches in curbing suicide lies in the lack of a strong social conversation on the role of inequality in suicidal behavior. Men with low socioeconomic backgrounds are more likely than more affluent males to complete suicide; therefore, any approach for reducing the prevalence of this behavior must also include an analysis of the impact of poverty. This begs the question: how can suicide rates be lowered in a declining economy with such differing opinions of masculinity? What is in our power to do to help lower suicide rates among men of all ages?


In Canada and the U.S., the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-TALK (8255).

In the U.K., ring the Samaritans on 08457 90 90 90.

We’re looking for stories of people who have been affected by suicide. Please email lisa@goodmenproject.com if you would be willing to write about the experience.

Photo: ChrisHConnelly/Flickr

Read more:

• New Study: Male Suicide at All Time High
• 7 Types of Self-Care to Help Prevent and Heal Depression
• We’ve Got To Learn To Talk About Men

KATHRYN DEHOYOS - NEW STUDY: Macho Advertising Encourages Hyper-Masculinity

From The Good Men Project, a brief report on how macho advertising leads to hyper-masculine behaviors in men. The research, published in the May issue of Sex Roles, found that “print ads targeting men also encourage them to aspire to an unrealistic and potentially harmful brand of masculinity,” what is often referred to as hyper-masculinity, defined in the paper as “gender-based ideology of exaggerated beliefs about what it is to be a man.”

Nearly all advertising aimed at men is essentially "macho," so this problem is so pervasive that it seems unlikely that it will change any time soon.

NEW STUDY: Macho Advertising Encourages Hyper-Masculinity

MAY 9, 2013 BY KATHRYN DEHOYOS

Hyper-masculine advertising has been found to encourage men to an “unrealistic and potentially harmful brand of masculinity.”

A new study published in the most recent issue of Sex Roles suggests that sexist advertising aimed at men is just as damaging as that aimed at women. According to the report, researchers found that “print ads targeting men also encourage them to aspire to an unrealistic and potentially harmful brand of masculinity,” otherwise known as hyper-masculinity, which the paper defines as “gender-based ideology of exaggerated beliefs about what it is to be a man.”

Psychologists from the University of Manitoba studied the ads in 8 US men’s magazines which were published in 2007-2008, the publications were “differentiated by readership age, education, and household income,” and the ads were analyzed for any “hyper-masculine depictions.” What researchers found was that at least 50% of the ads in most magazines, and as many as 90% in some promoted one or more of the following hyper-masculine beliefs:

• Danger is exciting.
• Toughness is a form of emotional self-control.
• Violence is manly.
• It’s fine to be callous about women and sex.

The study indicates that throughout the ads which were analyzed, “The beliefs that toughness equals control and that danger is exciting were more common than the belief that violence is manly or callousness towards women and sex.” Research also showed that hyper-masculine ads were significantly more common in magazines geared toward “younger, lower-income, and less educated readers.” In other words, those who are most at-risk for “appropriating such beliefs and behaviors.” The study also asserts that the perpetuation of the hyper-masculine images in the advertisements is problematic because it “exposes readers to these beliefs and normalizes them.”

Photo: FontShop/Flickr

* * * * * * *

Full Citation:

Vokey, M,  Tefft, B, Tysiaczny, C. (2013, May). An Analysis of Hyper-Masculinity in Magazine Advertisements. Sex Roles, Volume 68, Issue 9-10, pp 562-576. DOI: 10.1007/s11199-013-0268-1

An Analysis of Hyper-Masculinity in Magazine Advertisements

Megan Vokey, Bruce Tefft, Chris Tysiaczny

Abstract

Hyper-masculinity is a gender-based ideology of exaggerated beliefs about what it is to be a man. HM consists of four inter-related beliefs, namely toughness as emotional self-control, violence as manly, danger as exciting, and calloused attitudes toward women and sex (Zaitchik & Mosher1993). Adherence to HM is linked to a host of social and health problems in North America, such as dangerous driving and violence toward women (Parrot & Zeichner 2003). Advertising is believed to play a role in constructing hyper-masculinity (Kilbourne 1999). In this study, eight U.S. men’s magazines published in 2007–2008, differentiated by readership age, education, and household income, were analyzed for hyper-masculine depictions in their advertisements. Using a behavioural checklist with good inter-rater reliability, it was found that 56 % (n = 295) of 527 advertisements depicted one or more hyper-masculine beliefs. Some magazines depicted at least one hyper-masculine belief in 90 % or more of advertisements. In addition, reader age, education, and income were all inversely related to the prevalence of hyper-masculine beliefs, with HM depictions presented more often in advertisements targeting young, less educated, and less affluent men. Implications of these findings for the well-being of men and society are discussed.

Mark Sherman, Ph.D. - Mr. President, Our Boys and Young Men Need Your Attention

Over at his Psychology Today blog, Real Men Don't Write Blogs, Mark Sherman offers a letter to President Obama requesting more and better support for boys and young men. Like Warren Farrell, he would like to see a White House Council on Boys and Young Men.

Mr. President, Our Boys and Young Men Need Your Attention

A strong Obama supporter asks for his attention to America's long ignored boys

Published on May 9, 2013 by Mark Sherman, Ph.D. in Real Men Don't Write Blogs

Dear Mr. President,

I am a lifelong liberal Democrat and a strong supporter of your presidency. A friend and I drove two hours to canvass for your candidacy in Scranton, PA during the 2008 primaries; I was overjoyed when you first won the nomination and then the presidency that year, and equally, if not more, ecstatic when you were re-elected last year.

I contributed by far more to your campaigns than I ever have to any other political candidate.

I continue to be a huge fan of yours -- bravo for your stands on gay marriage and gun control – but there is one thing about which I have been disappointed: your administration’s apparent lack of concern about how boys and young men are doing in America today. It is in this one area that I have found you, to my dismay, entirely silent. I have been concerned about this issue for 20 years. When I started reading and writing about it I had three sons; they have since been joined by three grandsons. I would love to have had a daughter or granddaughter, but I have simply been blessed by boys. (I suspect Abraham Lincoln may have understood my feelings. When 11-year-old Grace Bedell wrote to him in 1860, suggesting he grow a beard, she included this line, “Have you any little girls about as large as I am if so give them my love and tell her to write to me.” In his reply, the President wrote, “I regret the necessity of saying I have no daughters. I have three sons…”)

I am sure you are aware that on so many measures boys are lagging behind girls, and have been for quite a few years now. 0ne of the best comparisons comes from Tom Mortenson, a senior scholar at the Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education, in his oft-cited "For every 100 girls...": Here is just a small sampling of his statistics: 

"For every 100 . . .

• girls diagnosed with a learning disability 276 boys are diagnosed with a learning disability.
• fourth grade girls who watch television four or more hours per day, 123 boys do.
• girls ages 9 to 11 years enrolled below modal grade there are 130 boys enrolled below modal grade.
• tenth grade girls who play videogames for an hour or more a day, there are 322 tenth grade boys who do.
• girls who are suspended from high school, there are 215 boys who are suspended.
• young women who earn a bachelor's degree, there are 75 men who do.
• females ages 15-24 who kill themselves, 586 males do.
• women ages 18-24 who are in correctional facilities, there are 1439 men who are behind bars."

I realize that women have still not achieved full equality -- whether in terms of salary or position. But if one considers Americans under the age of 25 (and probably even going up to 30), there is little question that it is boys and young men who are lagging.

Even Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times, who is well-known for his op-ed pieces on the terrible problems facing girls and young women across the globe, has noted and written about the very different situation here in the United States (and it is one that exists in other industrialized nations as well). In March 2010 he wrote a piece titled "The Boys Have Fallen Behind," where he opens with these words:

“Around the globe, it’s mostly girls who lack educational opportunities. Even in the United States, many people still associate the educational “gender gap” with girls left behind in math.

“Yet these days, the opposite problem has sneaked up on us: In the United States and other Western countries alike, it is mostly boys who are faltering in school. The latest surveys show that American girls on average have roughly achieved parity with boys in math. Meanwhile, girls are well ahead of boys in verbal skills, and they just seem to try harder.

“The National Honor Society says that 64 percent of its members — outstanding high school students — are girls.”

There are efforts throughout the country to rectify this, but there is no movement even vaguely comparable to the effort made to help girls in areas where they have been behind. I believe this is because the effort to help girls came as an outgrowth of the women's movement. Women understandably felt that they did not want their daughters to face the same obstacles they did, and both fathers and mothers of daughters have been excited by the ways in which they have excelled.

Until recently, and perhaps even today, mothers of sons have been excited by not only the success of women, but also of young girls. But I have found that more and more mothers – and grandmothers -- of boys are becoming concerned about their sons' and grandsons' futures. A perfect example is Dottie Lamm, former first lady of Colorado, Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in 1998, and a leading feminist in her state. Ms. Lamm, who has three young grandsons, wrote a piece in the Denver Post in April 2010 titled "Our Boys Are Falling Behind in Education." Her opening lines are “What’s the next battle for an aging feminist? Boys.”

Parents of daughters should be concerned about boys as well. Young women typically want to marry men who are their peers, or close to it, in education, ambition, and earning potential, but as the gender gap grows, finding a partner becomes more and more difficult. This situation is particularly pronounced in the minority community.

To parallel the White House Council on Women and Girls that you initiated soon after you took office, might I respectfully suggest a White House Council on Boys and Young Men? In the meantime, if in one of your speeches, comments, or press conferences, you could just mention the fact that America’s boys and young men need our nation’s attention, it would bring to me, and so many others, a great feeling of hope.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Carolyn Kizer - The Great Blue Heron

The Great Blue Heron

BY CAROLYN KIZER


M.A.K. September, 1880-September, 1955
As I wandered on the beach
I saw the heron standing
Sunk in the tattered wings
He wore as a hunchback’s coat.
Shadow without a shadow,
Hung on invisible wires
From the top of a canvas day,
What scissors cut him out?
Superimposed on a poster
Of summer by the strand
Of a long-decayed resort,
Poised in the dusty light
Some fifteen summers ago;
I wondered, an empty child,
“Heron, whose ghost are you?”

I stood on the beach alone,
In the sudden chill of the burned.
My thought raced up the path.
Pursuing it, I ran
To my mother in the house
And led her to the scene.
The spectral bird was gone.
But her quick eye saw him drifting
Over the highest pines
On vast, unmoving wings.
Could they be those ashen things,
So grounded, unwieldy, ragged,
A pair of broken arms
That were not made for flight?
In the middle of my loss
I realized she knew:
My mother knew what he was.

O great blue heron, now
That the summer house has burned
So many rockets ago,
So many smokes and fires
And beach-lights and water-glow
Reflecting pinwheel and flare:
The old logs hauled away,
The pines and driftwood cleared
From that bare strip of shore
Where dozens of children play;
Now there is only you
Heavy upon my eye.
Why have you followed me here,
Heavy and far away?
You have stood there patiently
For fifteen summers and snows,
Denser than my repose,
Bleaker than any dream,
Waiting upon the day
When, like grey smoke, a vapor
Floating into the sky,
A handful of paper ashes,
My mother would drift away.


Carolyn Kizer, “The Great Blue Heron” from Cool, Calm, and Collected: Poems 1960-2000. Copyright © 2001 by Carolyn Kizer. Reprinted with the permission of Copper Canyon Press, P. O. Box 271, Port Townsend, WA 98368-0271, www.coppercanyonpress.org.

Source: Poetry (April 1958).

Straight People Answering A Question Gay People Have Been Asked For Years

Most everyone has seen this video already, but I wanted to make sure it's archived here for posterity - I found it through Upworthy, they found it at Wipe Out Homophobia.

If more straight folk thought about this question and their answer, there might be a whole lot more understanding that being gay (or bi, or straight, or poly) is not a choice or a decision - it's who a person is, at birth, as nature intended.

Watch These Straight People Answer A Question Gay People Have Been Asked For Years

Watching these straight people react to being asked a question that gay people have been asked forever is pretty delightful. If only more people were this empathetic and understanding...

Posted by Rebecca Eisenberg


ORIGINAL: By Travis Nuckolls and Chris Baker (follow Chris on Twitter). Found on Wipe Out Homophobia.

From Bookforum's Omnivore blog, here is a collection of links on the state of masculinity in America. There are three links to articles exposing the fraud of the men's rights movement (which is not to claim, or at least I don't, that ALL men's rights activists are a poor reflection on men in general - some are good guys and their issues are important). As a movement, this small but vocal minority is giving masculinity a bad name.

The perils of masculinity

MAY 8 2013

9:00AM

• Dean Laplonge and Kath Albury (UNSW): Doing Safer Masculinities: Addressing at-Risk Gendered Behaviours on Mine Sites. 
• Susan M. Landt (St. Norbert): Books for Boys: Multicultural Literature with Strong Male Characters. 
• From Crisis, Donald DeMarco on barriers to teaching boys how to become men. 
• What being a handyman has taught Andy Hinds about male insecurity: Some guys feel really bad about the fact that they don't know how to hang crown molding. 
• The perils of masculinity and the truth about sex: Jonathan M. Metzl reviews Why Men Fake It: The Totally Unexpected Truth About Men and Sex by Abraham Morgentaler. 
• From Vice, Allegra Ringo on why men’s rights activists are celebrating the Brian Banks case for the wrong reason; and Brad Casey went to a men’s rights lecture in Toronto — and discovered that they’re a bunch of losers. 
• Men's rights activists bombard feminist with death threats — and it's the wrong woman.