Sat, 18th July Cardiff 25°
Nation.Cymru wordmark
Advertisement

Opinion

What about men?

By Stephen Price
The Green Man

Shân Morgain

Did you know that boy babies are cuddled much less? Held closely less? Talked to less? Instead they are bounced about away from body contact and expected to perform in fun ways. Cute and separate.

Girl babies by contrast are held close, talked to in soft voices. They learn to talk faster, they learn to listen. In later life they do better in linguistic matters and social skills. Recent decades have seen female achievements outstrip men in law, business and many professions after feminism fed confidence.

Angry young men have real reason to be hurt and angry.

I saw a mother at a toddler group, 'training' her son. The little thing sat beside her, sniffling miserably: untouched. In a hard voice she said "I am not going to talk with you until you stop making that silly noise." It took a while but he choked back his sniffles, manfully.

Trump masculinity is harmful for men, not just women. This is too little said. Toxic masculinity is poisonous to its carriers, men. They are trained from babies to be achingly lonely.

From lacking cuddles they go to amputating  emotions until most feelings have nowhere to go except a frantic, false sexuality. It funnels into the unhappy exhausted penis. It's false sexuality, not about pleasure or conception. It's about brief relief from the intense pressure of toxic masculinity.

John Rowan's The Horned God was a pioneer, opening up masculinity studies. He describes two kinds of male orgasm. One fills the body and mind with joy and transcendence. The other is a genital gasp. Rowan calls it a "sneeze". Its effect is so limited the sufferer almost immediately needs more. It fits well with porn.

[mid-content-banner]

Girl being a boy

As a teenage girl living independently, I chose a year living as a boy.

Not because I wanted at all to be a boy. I liked being a girl.

Rose with thorns

I was desperate to escape from constant groping, insults, coercion and assault. This was many years before the internet arrived so I was not bombarded with toxic masculine filth in that way like today's girls.

I wore male clothes, enjoying Carnaby Street fashions, tailored shirts, embroidered ties. Using the new shared dressing rooms was fun. Removing my shirt caused a wave of shock in other users as BREASTS became evident. Giggle.

I went to a barber for a male haircut. He thought it a great joke. My Nan laughed with me as I strode beside her, carrying her shopping. Dear Nan.

I have always loved dancing. One night in Soho walking between clubs I saw a pretty person and we made eye contact. They followed me quietly into a cafe a few steps away. We sat down, exchanging shy smiles of courtship. But when I ordered coffee his face changed, "Omigod you're a GIRL!!!!" Simultaneously I gasped "Omigod you're a BOY!!!!"

We became great mates. We danced together a playful double act of delight both in black gear, androgynous. Some we met were unnerved by our opaque personas. Far in my future lay a culture shift about trans. I knew nothing of that and nor did he. We laughed a lot but really I knew little about him.

So what did I find was the major difference in being a boy? apart from blessedly losing the bruises on my body and mind from insults and assault? Well I had never known such dire loneliness. No one was interested in me. No one reached out to me. The choice it seemed was between being swamped by groping and insults and being naked lonely.

Coming out of a club a male stranger clearly felt uneasy about me. He socked me in the eye. On reflection I felt that my strategy was not, it seemed, providing me the safety I craved. So after one eye opening year I withdrew from masculine life.

Much later I pioneered a men's group. Yes, led by a woman, they liked that (mama bear). At the start of the day, after one hour I was exhausted. There was no conversation, just each man jumping to centre, waving a flag.

I asked them to trust me to try  an experiment. Each time someone spoke they must end with a friendly question, and the next man must answer it. They gallantly obeyed though awkwardly. Conversation emerged. Connecting. They got better at it with practice, even said they liked it.

[taboola-banner]

Living with a man

When I  eventually lived with a man I found two instructive experiences. One was when he as a Cymro/ Welshman, said he never felt safe living in London. I was gobsmacked. Clearly he actually felt safe, somewhere. (He's a country boy from West Wales.) How I envied him.

Male symbol

Feminists have remarked that men are scared of women laughing at them but women are scared of men killing them.

In the searing feminist time of the 1970s I tried to research patterns of men killing women. How prevalent was it really? I was blocked because the Home Office advised me they did not have numbers grouped by gender, just killers and victims.

Today we recognise femicide, men killing almost three women a week (UK) mostly partners. The danger point, significantly, is when a woman tries to leave.

Domestic violence is at a peak when a woman is pregnant, at her most female.

Living with the violent gender takes courage and patience. My man suffered from terrible rages (verbally, never any physical threat). I became bewildered how to help us both. Patience, confrontation, joking, silence, my own rage back, nothing helped him (and me).

What we did have was a powerful mutual respect and communication (when he wasn't in a rage). So in a quiet moment I asked him "When you explode like that, what is it you feel you need most from me?"

His answer was shockingly revealing. He said bravely "I just want you to cuddle me."

Raw truth. The uncuddled, weeping boy child, his pain, and how it crashes on to us all.

Years later I wondered why male authors have difficulty writing female characters, why those 'women' seem so lacking. This wise partner of mine explained. "You women move through a landscape of signs, hints on what is happening. We don't. We walk in a desert which suddenly, unexpectedly erupts. It makes it harder to cope."

So exhausted by his rages I said "Dearest you need to pinpoint your personal signal. Something tiny you do or feel must herald your explosion. Drag it out and use it to take control."

He did, and to this day I have not asked what it is. Changed breathing perhaps. I noticed he began rushing out the room. The rages became far fewer. It can be done.

Mother of a son

As the mother of our son I was frightened, I researched carefully how to do it differently. John Rowan above was a great help. Another was Angela Phillips' Trouble with Boys.

How our children have too little access to living male models, so they turn to impossible superheroes on how to be men. The result is, inevitably, failure.

I pondered anthropology. In cultures where men must go away for long periods, hunting trips for days or weeks, driving long distance lorries, emigrating and sending money home, they are trained early into isolation. Boys are strictly separated from mothers at seven to painfully learn separateness, masculinity.

Doing the opposite I faced inevitable pressure – "He'll be a mothers boy, a wimp." But I kept him close in our everyday life, well cuddled, not even torn away into school. I watched his self confidence, my independent son, strong and sure. Ha ha.

I made soft comfy clothes for his superhero dolls, little knitted sweaters and jeans for off duty time. I sang him little songs about finding 'his own way of being a man'. We brought up a big strong gentle person. It can be done. Men can be lovely.

When he was four he asked me in great frustration why a woman in a film he was watching kept screaming. I explained Hollywood stereotypes, scared helpless women are popular.

"No, no" my boy said, exasperated. "This is different. This woman is a mother."

Hmm. Something was working well.

I'll give this boy, now a giant adult and my carer, the last word. At six he went to an 'after school' play-group and met another boy in mutual affection. Departing, mine threw his arms around his new friend saying "I do love you!"

The other child stiffened, wordlessly white with shock. In the car I gently explained some masculine codes of behaviour.

Thoughtful silence. "So", said my wise six years old son, "Men always have a double problem. There's the new problem PLUS they can't cry, talk about it, get help – so they always have double problems."

They do oh my son, and we all have to live with the pain, unless we change it.

Cwtsh.

……………………………………………………………………

Shân Morgain is more usually found explaining the genius of the Magnificent Mabinogi. She is a proudly adopted Cymraes living in Cymru for 35 years and it's all his fault.

For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.

Get more trusted Welsh news

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News to see more of our journalism.

Choose Nation.Cymru as a preferred source in Google News

24 comments

Sylwebydd

Thank you.

Reply
Shan Morgain

It almost seems wrong to respond to you but I do try to answer comments I get. So I'll just say that was the perfect first comment.

Reply
Leon

Diolch, that's a great piece

Reply
Shan Morgain

:)

Reply
Linda Jones

I find it difficult to accept that toxic manhood in all its forms is down to not receiving enough cuddles as a child.

Reply
Karl

I agree, its the continued fight back from the toxic adult male. The sexism from mothers don't help either. Often heard a mother outside aschool say boys will be boys, when does that stop, what age. Girls always held to higher standards younger than boys. Personally I held all my kids to the same standard, respect, polite, until some comes at you.

Reply
Shan Morgain

"Boys will be boys" drives me nuts. They leave boys lonely, bewildered, unguided, so they crash about as Lost Boys noisy and destructive. Then the adult shrugs "Boys will be boys". Sheer laziness. Also a recipe for rearing war fodder.

Reply
Shan Morgain

You're right Linda there are multiple causes. "Boys will be boys" attitudes for one, lack of firm discipline to crack down on cruelty and bullying. There are macro reasons too in economic changes. Once there was some reason for allowing rough, toughness when there were rough, tough jobs that needed it. But industry has changed so there is far less work for uneducated, rough males. My piece is asking you to look at one crucial cause - and something we can all do something about. And it's not just little boys that need compassion and cuddles it's the big boys too. I was just reading about a project calld Circles working with convicted paedophiles. They get a support group which gives them that warmth AND the tough feedback too, each where appropriate. Result? It cuts reoffending by 80%. We will continue to suffer from toxic males - and they will continue to suffer, until we love boys better. Hold them close, hug them, refuse to back down if they wriggle. Plus tough discipline on cruelty. I dream of Green Man groups everywhere like the consciousness raising groups we women had once. The growing number of personal experiences like mine, my partner changing himself, my son in all his beauty, show it can be done. Men can be good stuff.

Reply
Bethan

Agree Linda. I have to say it sounds a bit generalised. For one, where is the evidence to support this claim that little boys aren't given as much attention as little girls? I could put up links to some 'MomTok' videos from 'Boy Moms' that would directly contradict that belief. I think for the most part though, especially for young children, parents don't really deviate in behaviour based on gender. A baby is a baby. They're either given enough attention of they're not and psychological research suggests that there is very little difference (if any) in genders until the age of five, so, regardless of upbringing young children are likely to interact with each other in the same ways. Playing, laughing, sharing, hugging, fighting, screaming, crying etc. Only as they get older do changes in gender really becomes apparent. This could partially be a result of upbringing and social standards, but there are a miriad of other contributing factors such as biology. I just can't help but feel that quelle surprise, this becomes the fault of woman. Where's dad in these anicdotes about cuddles and conversations? This logic seems to be doing both genders a disservice here and is playing into the same old stereotypes that fuel toxic masculinity campaigners. I know plenty of grown men who know how to socialise, enjoy the company of other men, respect women and who know the difference between strength and aggression. I also know plenty of women who are anti-social, egotysical, hyper competitive, aggressive monsters. As well as vice-versa for both genders. I also know that the are parents out there who try their best to raise mentally stable adults (though they might be swimming against the current) and just to be very real, there are parents out there who are awful human beings and awful caregivers (just ask a social worker). There are women out there who didn't get hugs from their parents, men out there whose parents didn't give them any space, children suffering from neglect or abuse, and children who are spoilt rotten. When are these stereotypes going to stop? Where is the evidence for any of this article? Enough trying to figure people out by pigeon-holing them. Enough trying to guess 'whose got it worse'. That's a sad game and no one is a winner. We just don't know every person's history and they're not obligated to tell us so why not just assume that each new person you meet has had their own highs and lows and treat them with respect until they give you a reason not to?

Reply
Shan Morgain

Bethan I understand your concerns and will try to address them. The main reesearch study about how babies are treated differently came from Phillips.. Babies were dressed to mask gender (not blue or pink). They had girl boy name badges, some true some not. Assigned numbers on a list shoed researchers which gender they really were. People were then videoed as they handled the babies. The videos showed that babies given boy names were generally not held closely, got less talking in harsher voice tones.They were bounced, expected to 'exercise'. Babies assigned girl names were generally held close, talked to a lot more in softer voices. The researchers linked this with the known success rates by girl infants in talking and linguistic comprehension. I observed years later reports of young women outstripping young men in education and some professional training notably law. 

Reply
Shan Morgain

ps Bethan the adult participants in th research were both men and women so it was not finding any fault win women. On another point little boys lack male role models so desperately turn to fantasy action heroes. The boys then fail to live up to their ideal, and feel inadequate. This is not women's fault. Things have improved but most childcare and early school teaching is still done by women. There have been projects to provide little boys with male interaction, male teachers, but not a lot of difference yet.

Reply
Shan Morgain

Finally Bethan I don't think I was 2trying to guess who's got it worse". I describe suffering of different kinds on each side. I describe the insults, groping, assaults, rape received by females. I didn't say this also applies to younger, weaker males - but the key thing in common is the overwhelming majority of offences are done by males. I describe the awful loneliness, hurt, lostness suffered by males. I refer to boys' lack of living male models to help them learn how to be men. What they get from media, inluding porn is not helpful. Recent police stats suggest 40% of males enact forms of abuse of some kind. Modt females report experiencing it. Domestic violence damages both genders, but overwhelmingly the perpetrators (percentage around 90%) is male. I call for us to yes complain, weep, explode in anger, withdraw from contat, all necessary and helathy reactions to abuse. But we've had that for decades. So I call to go beyond the deep hurt reactions, and ACT. Criminal sentences are something, but often train yet more calloused, 'lost boys' feelings and behaviour. My call is to retrain lost boys, so they get the attention they crave and relearn how to be men. It's important this is not masochist. Not a flabby bandaging. But the practicality is that the pathway that works to change lost boys into happier healthier males is tough love programmes cf. Circles' paedophile programmes.

Reply
John Davies

I’m afraid I don’t much like other men. I find the great majority of male conversation is not about exchanging information, views, insights and delight. Instead it is about establishing a hierarchy. Who is quickest, strongest, cleverest, etc? Who can top the last remark someone made with something even more impressive? It is all, frankly, extremely boring. So I dropped out. Resigned from the game. Male bonding is very over-rated. You can keep it. I much prefer women’s company. Their conversation is more interesting. The strongest characters I have met have been women. This does not make me a wimpish “feminised male”. I have in my time played a good variety of “men’s games”, including once being First Mate of the leakiest schooner to get across the Atlantic that year. That is a whole other story, but the point is the whole gospel of male achievement, a “man alone with the elements” became severely boring too. I could do it, I did it, I was passably good at it, it became just another job. The memory of walking round the decks in the morning to collect the flying fish that had come aboard in the night, to make a nice breakfast, is pleasant. It is also pleasant to reflect that not all that many people can say that. But really, it is not very important. The important thing is to learn to connect. I am not as good at that as I would like to be, but I am also fairly self-sufficient, with a decent range of interests to keep me amused on my own. However, I have a strong suspicion that a good many men do not learn to connect, much, because they have been taught, from an early age, to be separate. This makes them very vulnerable to the lure of a pseudo-connection, membership of a manufactured tribe that gives them feelings of validation. Some of these are comparatively harmless. Others, like the lure of membership of an extremist political organisation, are not harmless.

Reply
Shan Morgain

Ah John you voice the loneliness of the man who tries to do better - and does so impressively. On how many men talk you speak of hierarchy struggle, I put it that each man jumps in the centre to seize it, waving their own flag. No connection. The female equivalent is an exasperated impatience with female, cowardly wittering, refusal to look at what so many men do, and act appropraietly. Refusal of sisterhood. But I suppose if I call for compassion and practical healing for men I must ask the same for wimp women.

Reply
Garycymru

You've broken the code that many men didn't know we had. I think the need to be listened to is a pretty good driver for some males to edge towards the likes of Andrew Tate and similar. I can only hope we move forward rapidly

Reply
Shan Morgain

Thank you. I've been breaking codes since I lived as a boy at 19 - 54 yrs ao :) But very welcome to be respected for it as often the teaction is nasty. Like I got hit. I think your point about listening is spot on. Ive seen political analysis saying Trump and Tate made the Lost Boys feel someone heard and understood them. They know they are deprived though probably only understand that financially where I'd widen it as my article says to deep personal deprivation. Money is a symbol. But Kamala Harris made them feel disapproved as the Left/ Progressives do. (I would add pop psych the disapproving, rejecting mother as a woman in authority is a kind of mother.)

Reply
John Davies

On femicide; in Britain three women a day are killed by men. That is upwards of a thousand a year. Just think about those numbers for a bit. If a thousand British Jews were killed every year for no greater “crime” than that of being Jewish, there would quite properly be outrage and talk of pogroms. If a thousand left-wing activists were killed every year by right-wingers, there would be talk of political terrorism. If a thousand football supporters were killed by supporters of rival teams in the running street battles that can follow a big match, there would be talk of major social crisis. If we took to sending raiding bands east across the Seven and killing a thousand Saes every year? That would never happen, outside the realms of alternate-reality horror fiction. Best forget it. But a thousand women killed? I would not quite say that is accepted as normal. There are investigations and prosecutions. But as a social phenomenon, it seems to be accorded remarkably little priority. If you want to understand the angry, man-hating version of feminism, that is as good a place to start as any.

Reply
Shan Morgain

John respectfully uour stat is incorrect while your heart is dead correct. . Femicide Census the rate of men’s fatal violence against women in the UK has not shown a tangible decline since the first year we monitored, 2009. [15 yrs] The number of women killed by men has hovered between 124 and 168 a year. On average, 62% of these women will have been killed by a current or former partner. As I said, about 3 a week. I remember that being quoted long before 2009, back in the 90s. What triggers it worst is if a woman tries to leave (often after being tortured by abuse) or is pregnant (at her most female and most vulnerable). I read this as Lost Boys insanely desperate to hold on to the female care they never had as a child, and (deep down) terrified knowing a baby is a rival, will focus the woman's care. My platform here is that while we may condemn, loathe, weep and withdraw, the only solutions are to cull males (and who will decide the individual selection?) or heal the males. Again I am impressed by Circles project who have 80% success working with paedophiles.

Reply
John Davies

I am happy to stand corrected on the numbers. Apology for such a major blip. But the principle is the same. if, say, 150 football supporters regularly died in post-game skirmishes every year, there would be an outcry. Police, club managers, league officials, etc, would be roped in to urgent conferences. Pundits would write an endless series of opinion pieces. Learned papers would be written about the role of deprivation in fuelling violence. Etc etc.

Reply
Shan Morgain

A fascinating datum to add on here about Christianity. Valerie Saiving back in the 60s said Christian humility and mildness was a doctrine suited to males who are trained into swollen aggression. It is NOT a relgion for women who need to be pushed and disciplined the other way, into self assertion. Disele Pelicot's iconic stand of courage and self assertion against a decade of male atrocity blazes the way. I mentioned John Rowan as a trailblazer for men. We need more of these for this new generation.

Reply
Shan Morgain

Should read "Gisele Pelicot".

Reply
John Davies

Afraid I don't buy that. There have been plenty of unpleasantly aggressive christian males. It is a lot easier to justify atrocities if you can delude yourself that you are "doing god's work". There are then no limits. In a secular context, there are perhaps limits to the violence that is justifiable, but "in god's name" anything goes.

Reply
Shan Morgain

Hah John, Saiving was not saying the Christian teachings of disciplining aggression were successful. In fact it's hugely hypocritical. Christianity marched with the invading aggressors in every Western colony. Priests blessed bomber planes in recent wars. Saiving's insight was merely that teachings of self restraint, holding back aggression, were/ are well suited to males. Much less so for females who even these days are more socialised into timidity and need to overcome it. Martial arts trainers, especially those working with domestic violence survivors, say the big barrier is overcoming female desire not to hurt the other person. That goes even when facing rape or assult, the female reaction is generally to escape, not to fight back - and hurt. We are very trained to nurture. It often goes against females that we freeze when facing violence, rape. Not fighting back can be seen as evidence there was no rape, that she consented.

Reply
John Brooks

Thank you for this thoughtful piece. Also thank you for the correct spelling of 'Cwtsh' Diolch yn fawr

Reply

Leave a comment

Comments are reviewed before they appear.