Philosophy: April 2008 Archives

Here is a situation:

A father and his university-aged son have a very rocky relationship. It's to the point where they no longer speak. The father is faced with a choice: try to rebuild the relationship with his son, or do whatever he can to ensure his son's future, including happiness. This might include working longer hours and away from the family for extended periods of time, or offering views that might not be popular, but that he believes must be heard for his son's survival, if only he would accept the words. Is that a true test of his love for his son? To sacrifice his relationship with him to ensure that he has a better life? Is it similar to dying for your son's freedom, but just less dramatic?

How about a man doing something similar for his woman? Is it different? Is it appropriate to say that he loves her so much that he is willing to lose her as long as she recovers from her illness, financial situation, family situation or whatever it is that is making her "sick", or threatening her survival, be it physical, spiritual, mental or financial?

Have you ever loved someone enough that you would be willing to sacrifice your relationship to that person? Is that even love?

For God so loved the world that he gave his only son...

Have you ever thought about masculinity? The more I read about it, the weaker it actually seems to me. It makes me think of the Emperor's new clothes; strong, majestic and noble, yet when you look directly at it, ridiculous and with no substance.

The thing about men and masculinity (as opposed to women and masculinity; some women have it, but it doesn't define them), is that although independence is often thought of as being part of masculinity, the truth is that is depends on women and other men to have any meaning at all. It depends on how much you can control and subordinate others, particularly women and female stand-ins. This largely explains why men are so often the perpetrators of violence against women, "lesser" men and children (although women are very often the violent ones, make no mistake). This explains why so many men insist that they have the final word on important decisions, because otherwise, they wouldn't feel as though they had any value in the running of the home. So much happens because men feel as though they have or don't have enough masculinity. It so important, yet can be so easily taken away, whether it be by women or by societal institutions (think: black American men and systemic discrimination, a topic too large to really get into here.).

In short, men can't be men without women to make them feel like men.

It must seem so silly to some women that the notion of appearing to be or feel like a man is so important to some men that they will literally do anything to achieve that masculinity. And I mean, ANYTHING. Some will sexually assault women because they threatened their authority, also known as manhood. (I've always slightly bristled at the term "manhood" in reference to one's penis, as though it is the sum total of a man.). Some will engage in violence for the same reason. Defending one's manhood is a little like defending one's honour. When you read about the things some people will do for it, you shake your head and wonder how it could possibly be that important.

I suppose you could say that femininity depends on others as well. Some women will do anything to be a mother, for example, including kidnapping and murder. It does happen. But in general, it seems more innate and less fluid than masculinity. Of course, this could simply seem that way because of female gender theorists that too easily criticize masculinity, but have little to say on how fragile femininity might be. I would have to do more research on that.