What is Your Idea of "Being a Man"?

Yes, the OP lent itself to different interpretations, which is why I'd suggested to Pixie, he lead by example. But I'm getting the sense that, at least in some situations, he prefers to hear others' views, and then respond to them: being a counter- debater, if you will.

I agree with your view of stereotypes being overly- confining. We all don't come from pink or blue cookie cutters, and it is a shame for all the potentials that these narrow perspectives discourage, in both boys and girls. Of course, the qualities are not exclusive. But, as I had interpreted the OP, even though he asked for our personal views of what is "manly," I feel that term of judgement really has its relevance, largely, because of influences that affect us all, both societal stereotypes, but also innate, human preconceptions, of both male & female ideals (naturally, these can also be affected by individual experience).

The one part of your opinion with which I may differ, is in your ending-- which I may be misinterpreting-- if you are saying that effeminate men, for instance, should still be considered "manly." While I am certainly against the maligning, or minimizing of a boy, for not displaying classic "manly" traits, nor do I support the idea of handing out participation trophies, as it were, by artificially expanding the definition of manliness, to include traits that are more naturally associated with women. Instead, I would advocate merely recognizing that a man's worth shouldn't be decided by how close he comes to matching some stereotype and that, like all stereotypes, it is but an imperfect, distorted, abbreviation.

Still, masculinity will continue to exist, and be appreciated by women. But it does have a plasticity. Masculinity, for example, is customarily associated with the active principle, as opposed to the passive one. That does not mean that there is no time, though, for passivity; if one is apprehended as being manly, that quality will be viewed in different terms-- as stoical resolve, or meditative focus.

Maleness is bold, not overly- cautious. But there are certainly times when prudence is the wise course, and it doesn't make one less of a man, for recognizing that. But, ultimately it is a decision that will be made by all the individuals in society, around each of us. Yet it is worth remembering that those judgements will vary: note how numerous posters here refer to Biden as "wimpy," and Trump as tough; while I see our current President as standing up to Putin, in an important & historic way, and I think of Trump's obsequiousness around Putin, his begging the President of Mexico, to play along with the border wall idea, by just giving it lip service, and his sore- sported inability to accept his electoral loss, like a man.


So, to a degree, at least, masculinity is in the eye of the beholder.

 

Its really about being the best version of yourself whatever that happens to be. No need to comform to historical stereotypes of gender roles or current hyper-egalitarian norms.

 

Pixie is a female.

 

It's not about the dying part, it's about the living part.

 

Oh yeah .. biology is so ancient history.

 

The question was about MEN, not women. Women can do whatever they want (obviously), but this thread isn't about them.

 

How about our MAMMALIAN instincts? Disregard those as nonsense too?

Females are hardwired to seek certain attributes in a mate, and there ain't nothing you can do about that. Conformity is what keeps the human race intact. Disregard it at your own peril.

 

I'm sure it helps to believe that.

 

No one is going to argue with that except Climate Warriors (who apparently believe in their own exemption).

 

None of which is 'toxic'.

Males are obliged to reject the feminine, because embracing it will get the clan killed. It's not freaking personal, it's survival.

 

That's sad. There are plenty around.

 

If you make your whole identity about being attractive to women, because its super needy. Its best to have a balance between doing things for you and doing things that get the girls.

And being your best version of yourself often does help with women. This includes advancing your career, getting fit, improving your look, doing fun things on the weekend, hanging out with friends, etc.

 

Biology?

A male without family or children is a woman is biology?

 

Aren't they fictional characters?

 

I understand. But those traits and characteristics listed are not male only.

 

how is that off-hand obvious joke supposed to be biology lol

 

Subjects of fiction, not fictional.

 

Sigh

 

GOOD LUCK!

Are you, by chance, a psychologist?

Your tank example notwithstanding-- but what if the killing of one of those legionnaires, leads to her not being born, I. the first place? Or maybe to the inventor of the time machine, not ever coming into being?-- you are blind to a reality of our species. Read what I will relate, below.*

I had no idea that you were a woman, Pixie. It's ironically funny, considering the thread, that I hadn't picked up on the obvious clue, of your chosen name. In my defense, though, online, you can never really be sure (not that I don't believe you). So you just were curious as to what men today (most of us, middle aged or better, so not the best representation of the modern attitude), felt indicates true manliness. Now that is a tangible focus, and a little bit different from my earlier treatment of the question. Much of what I said, still would apply, though, from an inner perspective, at least. That is, we have answers that we give to others, maybe even tell to ourselves, things that sound good, and can certainly contain truth, but in an idealized fashion. Then there are the truths that we may not be able to put into words, may not even understand, but which we feel.

So, as I had said, prowess with the opposite sex is not the kind of answer one wants to give, to represent the masculine ideal; it doesn't sound "evolved" enough. And it certainly does not define my idea of "manliness," from just that one trait-- how could it? Conversely, "courage," or "bravery," do sound like very defining, manly qualities. But my t.v. star idols, as first a boy, and then a teenager, were both courageous, and ladies' men: first, Arthur Fonzerelli, "the Fonz," and then Captain James T. Kirk. So, I am saying that I would assume that many edit the honest truth, in what either they believe or, at least, what they are likely to say, out loud.

If you're with me this far, I can now insert the asterisk beacon, for cristiansoldier. *This is out of left field but, before I continue, while it occurs to me, if you decided to leave the "h" out of the word christian, for more of a phonetic spelling, why didn't you replace the last four letters of soldier, with "j-e-r?" Not really important; the missing "h" just always puzzles me.

So, not only do individuals not present to the world all their true feelings, or are even, always aware of all their true feelings-- I think we all realize that this is true--

 

GOOD LUCK!

Are you, by chance, a psychologist?
If so, you might be curious to read something that I bring up, below-- look for the second asterisk.

Your tank example notwithstanding-- but what if the killing of one of those legionnaires, leads to the female tank operator never having been born, in the first place? Or maybe causing the inventor of the time machine, to never have come into being?-- you are blind to a reality of our species. Read what I will relate, below.*

I had no idea that you were a woman, Pixie. It's ironically funny, considering the thread, that I hadn't picked up on the obvious clue, of your chosen name. In my defense, though: online, you can never really be sure (not that I don't believe you).

So you just were curious as to what men today (most of us, middle aged or better, so not the best representation of the modern attitude), felt indicates true manliness. Now that is a tangible focus, and a little bit different from my earlier treatment of the question. Much of what I said, though, would still apply, from an inner perspective, at least. What I mean is that there are the ways we present things to others, that sound good, and seem as if they will be well- received, or will at least be acceptable, which may not speak to the entire truth. I, like most, really don't want to define "manliness," in terms of one's being a "player," or even simply by one's sexual prowess. It just doesn't sound very "evolved," and doesn't even feel like that one trait could define something so broad-- no pun intended-- as manliness. Conversely, "courageousness," or "bravery," seem much more in accord with what we are seeking to evoke. Nevertheless, my two, male, t.v. idols, as a boy, and then as a teen, were both courageous and ladies' men. First, for me, came the male role model of Arthur Fonzerelli, "the Fonz;" later on, Captain James T. Kirk, was my manliness icon. And it's not just me; there is a good explanation for the success of the James Bond franchise, among women, as well as men.



If you're with me, so far, I can now insert my asterisk- beacon, for cristiansoldier. *Before I continue on, just because I'm thinking of it, let me ask you something: since you decided to go for more of a phonetic spelling, with the word christian, why didn't you replace the last four letters of soldier, with, "j-e-r?" Not that it's of any importance-- but whenever I see your name, I can't help but wonder about that missing "h."

Now, as I was about to say, oftentimes, we explain things to our own selves, in this "best light," or in an idealized fashion; and we may even come to believe our own, edited version of truth. And we do this, not just as individuals, but as societies.

I had heard an interview/ book review on NPR (national public radio), maybe 15 years ago, with this woman who had written about the way that the attack, on 9-11, had affected our group psyche, in America, and I found it fascinating. The author spoke about (her own?) biogical research, presented at the time, that male children were more susceptible to negative repercussions, from some environmental toxins. And, though the data was irrefutable, the scientific community, even, rejected it.

The reason-- and the author provided numerous other examples which did not stick with me, like the fact that male children were more vulnerable, than females-- was that, across all facets of American culture, there was an exalting of masculine ideals, and a rejection of anything implying weakness, or sensitivity, among men. In other words, the 9-11 attack, caused a society-wide, reflexive tightening up, of our male stereotype, concurrent with a suppression of manifestations of things deemed feminine, throughout our society-- wild, right?

And most never realized this had occurred. That is, it was not a conscious choice, that people made. It was instinctual.

 

would you mind sharing a link to the actual interview or are you really only able to provide a summary of it based on a 15-year old memory?

 

An old memory was all I'd relied on, for my post-- and I do have a good memory, for such things-- but I will investigate online, and see if I can find the book title, at least and, if we're lucky, maybe even an old review or interview.

 

No offense but my analogy had nothing was not to make any statements about time travel. I only wanted to use an example where the most well trained all male military of its time could not stand against one woman with a tank. My point was as technology advances and what we deem in the past as a role reserved for men can be performed by woman. If you are piloting a drone of hacking a computer your sex makes no difference.

As a total tangent because I am a bit of a scifi junkie you need to consider which form of time travel we are dealing with. If you are thinking in terms of Terminator or BTTF you can go back in time and indeed make changes and it will change your reality. Or the multiverse theory where a change you make in the past has no effect on your reality but spawns off a separate reality. Some maybe killing the legionnaire will cause a the time machine inventor to never be born in that universe but yours will remain unchanged.

My name dates back to my gaming days. Over 20 years ago when I was really into online gaming I used the name cristiansoldier because the standard spelling was taken and unavailable. Nor were any of the alternative spellings using 3 for E, k for c, etc... Since I was taking a linguistics course back then we learned that Cristian is a variant spelling of Christian so it seemed like a good alternative. I used it for years and it kind of stuck so I continued to use it for other games and such.

 

I wouldn't know, since I'm not male. As far as I can tell this stuff is all just natural drivers coupled with refined expression (what some might call tradition/culture). I doubt any but the most oddball male does any of that stuff against his own instinct to be effeminate, just to secure a mate. If it's not happening automatically and entirely without fanfare, it's performance .. which is always blindingly obvious.

"Being the best version of yourself" isn't a good goal. If 'yourself' is an a$$hole, being a better a$$hole isn't going to help.

 

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you didn't raise babies at home on the breast, while your man went out and 'hunted' to keep you all fed.