COMMENTS: 57
Growing Up to Be Boys
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Media and Culture headlines via email.
Based on the eponymous 2004 novel by Kyle Smith, "Love Monkey" offered the latest iteration of "lad-lit," a genre popularized by the likes of Nick Hornby, whose novels inevitably featured a confused, neurotic, discontented man-boy being dragged kicking and screaming into adulthood, usually by his girlfriend.
But where "lad lit" authors disguise the dumbing-down of adult masculinity with witty prose, advertising executives are less subtle. Commercials for cell phones, fast food, beer and deodorants offer up an infantilized version of masculinity that has become ubiquitous since the rise of "lad" culture in the '90s. These grown men act like boys -- and are richly rewarded for it. A recent cell phone ad, for example, features a guy who responds to being dumped by his girlfriend -- because "you're never going to grow up" -- by playing, on his cell phone, an '80s pop song that tells her to get lost. Of course, this immediately earns him the attention of a younger, prettier woman walking by.
While these ads pretend to mirror a male fantasy -- say, of walking down the wedding aisle armed with a six-pack of Bud Light -- they in fact reflect a corporate executive's dream customer: a man-boy who is more likely to remain faithful to their product than to his wife.
This shift in the dominant image of manhood is most evident in the evolution of the so-called "Family Man." The benevolent patriarch of the '50s has been replaced by an adult teenager who spends his time sneaking off to hang out with the boys, eyeing the hot chick over his wife's shoulder, or buying cool new toys. Like a fourteen-year-old, this guy can't be trusted with the simplest of domestic tasks, be it cooking dinner for the kids or shopping for groceries.
These pop culture images are all the more striking because they directly contradict the experiences of men in the real world. Women may still bear the greater burden of domestic work, but American males today do more at home than their fathers, and are happy doing it. According to the Families and Work Institute, the percentage of college-educated men who said they wanted to move into jobs with more responsibility fell from 68 percent to 52 percent between 1992 and 2002. A Radcliffe Public Policy Center report released in 2000 found that 70 percent of men between the ages of 21 to 39 were willing to sacrifice pay and lose promotions in exchange for a work schedule that allowed them to spend more time with their families.
Yet popular culture continues to fetishize the traditional, '50s model of masculinity, but in a distilled form -- kick-ass machismo stripped of the accompanying values of honor, duty and loyalty. We seem to have carried with us the unreconstructed sexism of the past -- the objectification of women, inability to connect or communicate -- but discarded its redeeming virtues. Where traditional masculinity embraced marriage, children and work as rites of passage into manhood, the 21st century version shuns them as emasculating, with the wife cast in the role of the castrating mother. The result resembles a childlike fantasy of manhood that is endowed with the perks of adulthood -- money, sex, freedom -- but none of its responsibilities.
At least part of this image is rooted in a real cultural trend, according to State University of New York at Stony Brook sociology professor Michael Kimmel. His upcoming book, Guyland, argues that men "are resisting becoming men longer and longer," doing their best to postpone all the decisions that mark the passage into adulthood -- getting a job, moving out of their parents' home, getting married, and having kids -- in order to enjoy the lad lifestyle of "online porn, drinking, and poker." This trend has its big-screen avatar in the hero of the film "Failure To Launch," which stars Matthew McConaughey as a thirty-something slacker whose desperate parents "hire the gorgeous and talented girl of his dreams to get him to move out of the house."
More significantly, however, this resistance to adulthood is closely associated with a market-driven consumerist culture that feeds and sustains a Peter Pan version of masculinity. "To be grown up is to be settled, comfortable, stable, responsible, and secure," Kimmel says. "Those are bad conditions for advertising, which depends on our sense of insecurity, anxiety, and incompleteness."
The market also has little time for the old-fashioned male virtue of self-denial, the imperative to do the "right thing" at the expense of pleasure. A stoic John Wayne has been replaced by the "metrosexual," a man who is all about self-indulgence and defined almost entirely by his wallet. At the beauty salon, designer boutique or exclusive health club, a metrosexual spends, therefore he is.
Susan Faludi foreshadowed the rise of the metrosexual in her 1999 book, Stiffed: The Betrayal of the American Man, which describes an "ornamental culture" that tells men "manhood is displayed, not demonstrated. The internal qualities once said to embody manhood -- sure-footedness, inner strength, confidence of purpose -- are merchandised to men to enhance their manliness. What passes for the essence of masculinity is being extracted and bottled and sold back to men. Literally, in the case of Viagra."
Before it was hijacked by marketing gurus to peddle body lotions and pedicures, British author Mark Simpson coined the word "metrosexual" in 1994 to connote an "epochal shift" to a narcissistic form of mediated masculinity; a man who "has clearly taken himself as his own love object and pleasure as his sexual preference."
Contrary to popular understanding -- fueled by conservatives who are fond of caricaturing liberals as well-coiffed and manicured wimps -- Simpson does not define the metrosexual as particularly feminine or even gay, but as "a collector of fantasies about the male sold to him by the media." Thus George W. Bush strutting around on an aircraft carrier is every bit as metrosexual as a teen idol like Orlando Bloom. In a media universe ruled by marketing gods, "the traditional forms and sufferings of stoic, self-denying, self-sacrificing old-fashioned masculinity are merely cutesy, quaint props for the new, aestheticised, moisturized self-regarding variety." In the new millenium, it's more important to look like a hero than act like one -- as John Kerry could well testify.
That this market-driven narcissism finds expression in an adolescent version of masculinity should be no surprise. "In males, narcissism is something that has been associated with immaturity. Classically, it's something men are supposed to abandon to become adult males," Simpson says. "Today, consumerism tells all males that … they never need abandon their narcissism. That they never need grow up. Just so long as they buy the right products."
This isn't good news for either men or women. By defining domestic chores literally as "homework," the teen slacker version of masculinity offers no respite for working women struggling to balance their lives. And if adult responsibilities are defined as emasculating, then it's no wonder that popular culture now defines "commitment" solely as a woman's goal.
Domesticity may have always been a feminine realm, but marriage and children were once defined as integral to the traditional gender roles of both men and women. Today, it's the woman who is cast in the role of caveman, eager to club some unsuspecting, reluctant male on his head and drag him to the altar. While progressives and feminists have rightly championed a woman's right to reject marriage and motherhood, they rarely address the consequences of living in a culture where pair-bonding and parenting -- the basic processes that form the foundation of all societies -- are constructed as the antithesis of masculinity.
As Neil Chethik, author of the newly published book VoiceMale: What Husbands Really Think About Their Marriages, Their Wives, Sex, Housework, and Commitment, found, most American men -- the flesh-and-blood variety -- embrace their roles as fathers and husbands. "I found in my research that the values of duty, honor, and taking responsibility are far from forgotten by men in our culture," Chethik says. "Certainly, most men struggle to fulfill the ideals they set for themselves in this area. But they recognize that being a 'real man' requires that they are honest and respectful and willing to sacrifice. I saw this among men who worked at jobs they didn't love, who took care of an ill spouse or child, who helped in their communities without recognition or compensation. There are millions of such men."
American men may be doing their best to figure out what it means to be a man in the 21st century, but it's no accident that these men -- and more importantly, their sons -- aren't getting much help from the larger culture. "Consumerism wants to make us as atomized as possible -- because the more individualized we are the better consumers we are," says Simpson. "This is why masculinity is so fragmented today and incoherent -- and irresponsible. It used to be the tradition. Literally passed down from father to son. But we live in a society where tradition stands in the way of profit. So bye-bye daddy."
Discussions of masculinity on both the left and right inevitably circle around women's equality, either as a curse or boon to men. Where some argue that the women's movement has freed men from the straightjacket of traditional machismo, others have blamed it for depriving them of their identity. Yet the greatest threat to modern manhood may lie elsewhere -- in the flickering images on our television screen, bought and paid for by corporate America. Feminism may have sparked the battle over gender roles, but its outcome may well be determined by market forces determined to make voracious consumers of us all.
Stay up to date with the latest Media and Culture headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Narco-NYC on Mar 23, 2006 3:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yep...but
Posted by: nedwylie
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Mar 23, 2006 3:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American culture has revered the bachelor for decades, and portrayed wives as nagging kill-joys who insist that nights of playing poker and drinking with the boys must be limited.
I see nothing new in the modern culture except in that slackers(minimum wage earners) as well as playboys(rich) may be on display. And that the women may not be keen to drag them to the altar.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Mar 23, 2006 3:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American culture has revered the bachelor for decades, and portrayed wives as nagging kill-joys who insist that nights of playing poker and drinking with the boys must be limited.
I see nothing new in the modern culture except in that slackers(minimum wage earners) as well as playboys(rich) may be on display. And that the women may not be keen to drag them to the altar.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And before there were movies ... there was Peter Pan
Posted by: AdamSelene40
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NIKUZAI on Mar 23, 2006 4:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Finnegansawake on Mar 23, 2006 5:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are looking at a generation that a large percentage of which have grown up without a male in the household to serve as an example of what a man is really supposed to be. We are a generation that has been largely been raised by women, and while there is no shame in being a single-mother, it certainly leaves a void in a young man's life to be filled by hair products, skin moisturizers, and advertisements for the latest model Hummer.
You can decry the advertising industry all you want for creating a consumerist man-boy ideal in society, but the ad industry is only doing what it was made to do and moving a product on as many people as it can. The problem lies in the household where a boy doesn't learn what a real man is.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Second that!
Posted by: stuck_in_FL
» Careful there...
Posted by: Juergo
» RE: Careful there...
Posted by: Finnegansawake
» RE: the symptom is not the problem
Posted by: lamar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dr_Gno on Mar 23, 2006 5:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Facing that prospect, being a Love Monkey looks like a better choice to many young men. Pre-nups for young first-weds are still taboo, so until men have better expectations of security in marriage, this is not likely to change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: MrVetinari
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: KJack
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: monkeybrig
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: KJack
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Petros
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Lizmv
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: the poet
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RudiTuzla on Mar 23, 2006 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Advertising is based on lowest common-denominator theory. It's always been moronic. Nothing new here, and if it doesn't represent the real lives of men then what are you so worked up about?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Also...
Posted by: Dr_Gno
Comments are closed-
Posted by: janvdb on Mar 23, 2006 6:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The trend seems to have picked up steam since she wrote it. And, yes, it was starting in classic movies -- Barbara Ehrenreich tagged the start of the phenomenon earlier, but saw the big take-off with Hugh Heffner (that big toddler in his pajamas running around the house all day playing with his Playmates) and the "playboy" culture.
It probably really took off with the increased availability of non-marital sex once reliable birth control became available and women were no longer living "under the gun" every month.
What can be done about it? Well, I think that newborns should be wards of state and up for adoption until until they have a SS# and no newborn should be issued a SS# until that # can be linked, by DNA test if necessary, to a FATHER. The federal tax bill of a non-custodial parent(s) (probably the father) would instantly and automatically increase by about a child support payment; the money would be deposited in the name of the child in a special account managed by a regulated, high-quality daycare system. Custodial parent(s) or grandparent(s) could make application to the account for the payment of daycare, medical costs, educational costs and other legitimate child-related costs. Anything unused when the child is 21 would be turned over to the child.
Any man who failed to pay a minimum would be arrested, charged with a special misdemeanor, put to work inside a jail or prison and paid market wages to do any of the hundreds of jobs inmates now do for 17 cents an hour. All wages would be garnished until his unpaid minimum is covered.
I think this would address the worst outcomes of the problem Lakshmi is talking about -- scattered broods of abandoned, fatherless, unsupported children and men who don't think that birth control or abortion rights are their problems, but are something they can shrug off onto the backs of women.
Jan VanDenBerg
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Hey you!! Go to O'reilly's board!
Posted by: J-
» RE: Hey you!! Go to O'reilly's board!
Posted by: janvdb
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: janvdb
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: rollo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bettsoff on Mar 23, 2006 8:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This piece seemed more centered on immature modern masculinity and did not provide a link to the sources of masculinity in years past, when the same immaturity probably took on a more patriarchal face. At the same time, it did not draw distinctions between old mature masculinity and what mature masculinity should look like today. It is not the same as apples vs. oranges, but there are some pieces missing from the argument.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sojourner on Mar 23, 2006 8:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So 'lad culture' goes way, way back, because it is the way males have been merchandised--since Salome and her seven veils?
Yes, the difference is the intensity of it these days. That's because it works. And it's because both males and females choose to be entertained rather than educated. We even have the permission of our Freudian shrinks, who peddle the benefits of primary narcissism. Our healers are sick. Is it any wonder the rest of us are, also?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bettsoff on Mar 23, 2006 8:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
However, even if children don't always grasp the extent of the repercussions of their actions, I think most of them learn quite early that actions do have effects. If anything, I think this article subconsciously illustrates the effect marketing has on our perception of *children* as gleefully callous, selfish, irresponsible gadget collectors. Comparing a fake image of masculinity to a fake (but perceived as real) image of childhood. Interesting.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on Mar 23, 2006 8:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, many ads depict young men as immature bozos, but they do the same for young women, which Chaudhry chooses to overlook. Further, Chaudhry seems to equate male maturity with a willingness to subject one's self to the many horrors of marriage as it is practiced today. (For men, a marriage is usually a few years of domestic servitude followed by divorce and many more years of financial exploitation by the ex-wife.)
Yet Chaudhry seems to think men should rush to embrace this fate as part of their "responsibility" as adults. Nonsense! To their credit, young men are increasingly harder to "catch" -- as some women so accurately describe it -- and rightly so.
Yes, those brainless, narcissistic boys and girls on TV are annoying, but they are just phantoms conjured up by our consumer culture. Real-life coupling is much more serious and potentially dangerous, and men are justifiably much more wary of it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Nice.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sixties Girl on Mar 23, 2006 9:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gdieken on Mar 23, 2006 9:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With a broad societial rejection of boyness, how could a young man grow up to be anything but a pallid, indistinct metrosexual?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The internal qualities once said to embody manhood...
Posted by: Dr_Gno
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sundance98 on Mar 23, 2006 9:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Williams, Dandy Don Meredith and Muhammed Ali....are too
tough for the youngsters to understand.
rw
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gjames on Mar 23, 2006 9:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have to politicize gender because men of the white and straight variety still overwhelmingly dominate every post of leadership be it civic, commercial, industrial, political, military. Patriarchy is flourishing and THAT is the story--the man-boy distracts from that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ghoster on Mar 23, 2006 10:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sln70 on Mar 23, 2006 10:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lot of respondents want to blame feminism (*sigh*) but I think it goes much deeper - I think it's about men feeling like they have no way of attaining real power and therefore abandoning all attempts to get it. Immasculation comes frm the top downward.. no? Women can't immasculate men, other men have to do it.
In today's world there are arguably more barriers than every before to wealth, powerful positions, and even more barriers to marriage prospects for men. As a result, they rebel by acting like they dont' care anyway. To prove it, they get as irresponsible as possible.
It isn't about our education system or women in the workforce or even advertising and media. It's about a lack of hope that he will ever attain traditional "respect" from other men.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» make that emasculate?
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: twerquie on Mar 23, 2006 10:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: saywhat? on Mar 23, 2006 11:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kwfryatl on Mar 23, 2006 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A wise man once told me, "Everbody needs to figure out who they are, and then go be that on purpose."
I don't need anyone's acceptance, approval, or understanding for me to live my life the way I need to - and my life is chock full of love, support, success, peace, and joy.
Bottom line: if you don't want a "lad" in your life, don't hang with him, date him, or marry him. But that doesn't mean he's not going to be happy, successful, and content with his life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What Does It Mean to Be "A Man"?
Posted by: midge
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Blue Heron on Mar 23, 2006 12:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jobu on Mar 23, 2006 12:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Second, I appreciate Lakshmi's attention to this topic. The trend of overgrown idiots being used to sell anything and everything to us males has become very tiresome and insulting to men, in my opinion.
What I wanted to add is that more and more, our society seems to be questioning our traditions, which is at least partly evident in these men. The term "emerging adulthood" has been used to describe late 20 year olds who are increasingly putting off getting married and starting a career. As one of these older 20somethings, I know that I am nauseated at the thought of settling for the most commonly offered career, that of a corporate lackey, climbing the ladder, etc, especially at a time where employee loyalty and worker's rights are in such decline.
Marriage hasn't proven to be much more reliable in the past some odd years. We are continually questioning such man-made concepts and wish to make meaningful choices, not rash ones.
In the meantime, we're offered copious amounts of entertainment, all readily available, which helps us (or at least me) postpone such complicated, heavy decisions. So i guess in part I'm saying that this is this generation's "fuck off" to some traditions which have proven to be empty in many ways, and I'm also saying that now more than ever, we have such an array of vapid, mindless entertainment available to us...such temptation!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» good article, relevant issues
Posted by: T.S.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fleurdelamer on Mar 23, 2006 6:13 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What BS. Chethik must be living in an alternate universe from me. I am surrounded by whining, sniveling, scared, game-playing, lazy, crude, irresponsible, no-spine, 40-something males who act, dress, and behave like teens.
Not only can these boys not make commitments, they can even make the simplest of decisions. They want, need, and crave women who will instruct them on what to do and where to be every minute of every day. Some of us simply cannot operate in that model, and no woman should stand for that crap.
That is why I no longer use the word "man" or "men". I reserve those terms for when I meet someone who truly fulfills them.... which happens about once a year.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» For those who live like animals, it's a jungle out there!
Posted by: Sojourner
Comments are closed-
Posted by: insulafortune on Mar 26, 2006 3:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For me, growing up isn't just about accepting responsability and sacrifice it is also playing around and having fun. My failures in relationships was not due to so much to a lack of proper guilt or feeling of responsability but not being able to relax and accept my partner or my job. I was failing to generate fun in them as well. Depression and anxiety threw me off everytime, not a night out with the boys or porn or toys or getting my hair done.
The article is right about adversting and tv in general not wanting people to relax and making us always want something new, not noticing the world is always changing regardless.
I may not be a "man" yet by the article's standards but I'm not blaming feminists, my dad, or lack of values. I've always been pretty responsable at work or in relationships but I get depressed and anxious. Not cuz I'm habituated to too much easy fun, but because I'm not relaxing or I get "bored" which is usually the same thing. Which may or may not be influenced by advertising / cultural expectations.
a little self absorbed introspection for ya :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Roverton on Mar 27, 2006 4:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Convictions for me, at least, involve an understanding of how I interact with the others in my community, my nation, my world.
"Growing up" is in no small part, the amount of consideration for others that one can demonstrate in their own lives.
There are a lot of "Responsible" Americans who have their finances in order, but treat their fellow Americans like garbage.
I'm hard pressed to think of them in terms of being "Adults".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Petros on Mar 27, 2006 9:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Takeit on Mar 29, 2006 2:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Almost every ad today is not anywhere near focused on an unwed demographic.
How many cars do single men have? 1
Families? 2 or 3
How many diamonds do single men buy? 0 to 1
Families? 1 to 10 or more.
And this is the same for nearly every product.
And the very idea that marriage is a part of adulthood is equally idealistic and naive.
You don't need to be forced into being with someone forever to raise children in a loving home.
And whats wrong with online porn, and beer (gambling is just stupid)?
Women in the adult industry always have two detractors.
Chauvanist right wingers who want to protect (FUCK) them.
And feminist lesbians who want to protect (FUCK) them.
Not every man associates one pair of breasts on a website with every other woman in the world. And no one is holding guns to their heads.
And beer has been around almost as long as prostitution, which predates Abraham and the National Orgainization for Woman.
I work my ass off to take care of a woman I've been with for 5 years. And when I get home I cook and clean as much as there is to do. And I'd never marry her, because this is 2006, not 1492.
Sure I got a few "luxury items" as you like to dismiss them, as toys, but going to work day in and out, working weekends, just toput food in our mouths, I think I deserve some R&R when I can get it.
The reason there are these man-boys out there is quite easy to understand.
They've ALWAYS been here.
Some dudes are slobs who go no where and make no plans.
Big deal. Let them spawn their bastards and live with their parents.
Bush, Kerry and all the ad execs would prefer a married and complacint buying public, than a bunch of singles who can think for themselves.
Come on now, this article could be repeated just as easy by a Tom DeLay or Pat Robertson if you just switch all the party affiliations around.
It's a bunch of "Blame the Culture" winger garbage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EliotKing on Apr 30, 2006 12:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Narco-NYC on Mar 23, 2006 3:26 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Yep...but
Posted by: nedwylie
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Mar 23, 2006 3:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American culture has revered the bachelor for decades, and portrayed wives as nagging kill-joys who insist that nights of playing poker and drinking with the boys must be limited.
I see nothing new in the modern culture except in that slackers(minimum wage earners) as well as playboys(rich) may be on display. And that the women may not be keen to drag them to the altar.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Mar 23, 2006 3:31 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American culture has revered the bachelor for decades, and portrayed wives as nagging kill-joys who insist that nights of playing poker and drinking with the boys must be limited.
I see nothing new in the modern culture except in that slackers(minimum wage earners) as well as playboys(rich) may be on display. And that the women may not be keen to drag them to the altar.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And before there were movies ... there was Peter Pan
Posted by: AdamSelene40
Comments are closed-
Posted by: NIKUZAI on Mar 23, 2006 4:35 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Finnegansawake on Mar 23, 2006 5:04 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are looking at a generation that a large percentage of which have grown up without a male in the household to serve as an example of what a man is really supposed to be. We are a generation that has been largely been raised by women, and while there is no shame in being a single-mother, it certainly leaves a void in a young man's life to be filled by hair products, skin moisturizers, and advertisements for the latest model Hummer.
You can decry the advertising industry all you want for creating a consumerist man-boy ideal in society, but the ad industry is only doing what it was made to do and moving a product on as many people as it can. The problem lies in the household where a boy doesn't learn what a real man is.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Second that!
Posted by: stuck_in_FL
» Careful there...
Posted by: Juergo
» RE: Careful there...
Posted by: Finnegansawake
» RE: the symptom is not the problem
Posted by: lamar
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Dr_Gno on Mar 23, 2006 5:54 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Facing that prospect, being a Love Monkey looks like a better choice to many young men. Pre-nups for young first-weds are still taboo, so until men have better expectations of security in marriage, this is not likely to change.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: MrVetinari
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: KJack
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: monkeybrig
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: KJack
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Petros
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: Lizmv
» RE: Failure to commit
Posted by: the poet
Comments are closed-
Posted by: RudiTuzla on Mar 23, 2006 6:09 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Advertising is based on lowest common-denominator theory. It's always been moronic. Nothing new here, and if it doesn't represent the real lives of men then what are you so worked up about?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Also...
Posted by: Dr_Gno
Comments are closed-
Posted by: janvdb on Mar 23, 2006 6:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The trend seems to have picked up steam since she wrote it. And, yes, it was starting in classic movies -- Barbara Ehrenreich tagged the start of the phenomenon earlier, but saw the big take-off with Hugh Heffner (that big toddler in his pajamas running around the house all day playing with his Playmates) and the "playboy" culture.
It probably really took off with the increased availability of non-marital sex once reliable birth control became available and women were no longer living "under the gun" every month.
What can be done about it? Well, I think that newborns should be wards of state and up for adoption until until they have a SS# and no newborn should be issued a SS# until that # can be linked, by DNA test if necessary, to a FATHER. The federal tax bill of a non-custodial parent(s) (probably the father) would instantly and automatically increase by about a child support payment; the money would be deposited in the name of the child in a special account managed by a regulated, high-quality daycare system. Custodial parent(s) or grandparent(s) could make application to the account for the payment of daycare, medical costs, educational costs and other legitimate child-related costs. Anything unused when the child is 21 would be turned over to the child.
Any man who failed to pay a minimum would be arrested, charged with a special misdemeanor, put to work inside a jail or prison and paid market wages to do any of the hundreds of jobs inmates now do for 17 cents an hour. All wages would be garnished until his unpaid minimum is covered.
I think this would address the worst outcomes of the problem Lakshmi is talking about -- scattered broods of abandoned, fatherless, unsupported children and men who don't think that birth control or abortion rights are their problems, but are something they can shrug off onto the backs of women.
Jan VanDenBerg
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Hey you!! Go to O'reilly's board!
Posted by: J-
» RE: Hey you!! Go to O'reilly's board!
Posted by: janvdb
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: Phenix
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: janvdb
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: Dr_Gno
» RE: Barbara Ehrenreich's "Hearts of Men" made this point years ago
Posted by: rollo
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bettsoff on Mar 23, 2006 8:01 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This piece seemed more centered on immature modern masculinity and did not provide a link to the sources of masculinity in years past, when the same immaturity probably took on a more patriarchal face. At the same time, it did not draw distinctions between old mature masculinity and what mature masculinity should look like today. It is not the same as apples vs. oranges, but there are some pieces missing from the argument.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sojourner on Mar 23, 2006 8:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So 'lad culture' goes way, way back, because it is the way males have been merchandised--since Salome and her seven veils?
Yes, the difference is the intensity of it these days. That's because it works. And it's because both males and females choose to be entertained rather than educated. We even have the permission of our Freudian shrinks, who peddle the benefits of primary narcissism. Our healers are sick. Is it any wonder the rest of us are, also?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bettsoff on Mar 23, 2006 8:30 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
However, even if children don't always grasp the extent of the repercussions of their actions, I think most of them learn quite early that actions do have effects. If anything, I think this article subconsciously illustrates the effect marketing has on our perception of *children* as gleefully callous, selfish, irresponsible gadget collectors. Comparing a fake image of masculinity to a fake (but perceived as real) image of childhood. Interesting.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Moonray on Mar 23, 2006 8:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, many ads depict young men as immature bozos, but they do the same for young women, which Chaudhry chooses to overlook. Further, Chaudhry seems to equate male maturity with a willingness to subject one's self to the many horrors of marriage as it is practiced today. (For men, a marriage is usually a few years of domestic servitude followed by divorce and many more years of financial exploitation by the ex-wife.)
Yet Chaudhry seems to think men should rush to embrace this fate as part of their "responsibility" as adults. Nonsense! To their credit, young men are increasingly harder to "catch" -- as some women so accurately describe it -- and rightly so.
Yes, those brainless, narcissistic boys and girls on TV are annoying, but they are just phantoms conjured up by our consumer culture. Real-life coupling is much more serious and potentially dangerous, and men are justifiably much more wary of it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» Nice.
Posted by: ABetterFuture
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sixties Girl on Mar 23, 2006 9:14 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gdieken on Mar 23, 2006 9:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With a broad societial rejection of boyness, how could a young man grow up to be anything but a pallid, indistinct metrosexual?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The internal qualities once said to embody manhood...
Posted by: Dr_Gno
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Sundance98 on Mar 23, 2006 9:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Williams, Dandy Don Meredith and Muhammed Ali....are too
tough for the youngsters to understand.
rw
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: gjames on Mar 23, 2006 9:43 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have to politicize gender because men of the white and straight variety still overwhelmingly dominate every post of leadership be it civic, commercial, industrial, political, military. Patriarchy is flourishing and THAT is the story--the man-boy distracts from that.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: ghoster on Mar 23, 2006 10:00 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sln70 on Mar 23, 2006 10:05 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A lot of respondents want to blame feminism (*sigh*) but I think it goes much deeper - I think it's about men feeling like they have no way of attaining real power and therefore abandoning all attempts to get it. Immasculation comes frm the top downward.. no? Women can't immasculate men, other men have to do it.
In today's world there are arguably more barriers than every before to wealth, powerful positions, and even more barriers to marriage prospects for men. As a result, they rebel by acting like they dont' care anyway. To prove it, they get as irresponsible as possible.
It isn't about our education system or women in the workforce or even advertising and media. It's about a lack of hope that he will ever attain traditional "respect" from other men.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» make that emasculate?
Posted by: sln70
Comments are closed-
Posted by: twerquie on Mar 23, 2006 10:44 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: saywhat? on Mar 23, 2006 11:06 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kwfryatl on Mar 23, 2006 11:10 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A wise man once told me, "Everbody needs to figure out who they are, and then go be that on purpose."
I don't need anyone's acceptance, approval, or understanding for me to live my life the way I need to - and my life is chock full of love, support, success, peace, and joy.
Bottom line: if you don't want a "lad" in your life, don't hang with him, date him, or marry him. But that doesn't mean he's not going to be happy, successful, and content with his life.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: What Does It Mean to Be "A Man"?
Posted by: midge
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Blue Heron on Mar 23, 2006 12:18 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Jobu on Mar 23, 2006 12:29 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Second, I appreciate Lakshmi's attention to this topic. The trend of overgrown idiots being used to sell anything and everything to us males has become very tiresome and insulting to men, in my opinion.
What I wanted to add is that more and more, our society seems to be questioning our traditions, which is at least partly evident in these men. The term "emerging adulthood" has been used to describe late 20 year olds who are increasingly putting off getting married and starting a career. As one of these older 20somethings, I know that I am nauseated at the thought of settling for the most commonly offered career, that of a corporate lackey, climbing the ladder, etc, especially at a time where employee loyalty and worker's rights are in such decline.
Marriage hasn't proven to be much more reliable in the past some odd years. We are continually questioning such man-made concepts and wish to make meaningful choices, not rash ones.
In the meantime, we're offered copious amounts of entertainment, all readily available, which helps us (or at least me) postpone such complicated, heavy decisions. So i guess in part I'm saying that this is this generation's "fuck off" to some traditions which have proven to be empty in many ways, and I'm also saying that now more than ever, we have such an array of vapid, mindless entertainment available to us...such temptation!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» good article, relevant issues
Posted by: T.S.
Comments are closed-
Posted by: fleurdelamer on Mar 23, 2006 6:13 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What BS. Chethik must be living in an alternate universe from me. I am surrounded by whining, sniveling, scared, game-playing, lazy, crude, irresponsible, no-spine, 40-something males who act, dress, and behave like teens.
Not only can these boys not make commitments, they can even make the simplest of decisions. They want, need, and crave women who will instruct them on what to do and where to be every minute of every day. Some of us simply cannot operate in that model, and no woman should stand for that crap.
That is why I no longer use the word "man" or "men". I reserve those terms for when I meet someone who truly fulfills them.... which happens about once a year.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» For those who live like animals, it's a jungle out there!
Posted by: Sojourner
Comments are closed-
Posted by: insulafortune on Mar 26, 2006 3:32 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For me, growing up isn't just about accepting responsability and sacrifice it is also playing around and having fun. My failures in relationships was not due to so much to a lack of proper guilt or feeling of responsability but not being able to relax and accept my partner or my job. I was failing to generate fun in them as well. Depression and anxiety threw me off everytime, not a night out with the boys or porn or toys or getting my hair done.
The article is right about adversting and tv in general not wanting people to relax and making us always want something new, not noticing the world is always changing regardless.
I may not be a "man" yet by the article's standards but I'm not blaming feminists, my dad, or lack of values. I've always been pretty responsable at work or in relationships but I get depressed and anxious. Not cuz I'm habituated to too much easy fun, but because I'm not relaxing or I get "bored" which is usually the same thing. Which may or may not be influenced by advertising / cultural expectations.
a little self absorbed introspection for ya :)
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Roverton on Mar 27, 2006 4:48 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Convictions for me, at least, involve an understanding of how I interact with the others in my community, my nation, my world.
"Growing up" is in no small part, the amount of consideration for others that one can demonstrate in their own lives.
There are a lot of "Responsible" Americans who have their finances in order, but treat their fellow Americans like garbage.
I'm hard pressed to think of them in terms of being "Adults".
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Petros on Mar 27, 2006 9:26 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Takeit on Mar 29, 2006 2:03 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Almost every ad today is not anywhere near focused on an unwed demographic.
How many cars do single men have? 1
Families? 2 or 3
How many diamonds do single men buy? 0 to 1
Families? 1 to 10 or more.
And this is the same for nearly every product.
And the very idea that marriage is a part of adulthood is equally idealistic and naive.
You don't need to be forced into being with someone forever to raise children in a loving home.
And whats wrong with online porn, and beer (gambling is just stupid)?
Women in the adult industry always have two detractors.
Chauvanist right wingers who want to protect (FUCK) them.
And feminist lesbians who want to protect (FUCK) them.
Not every man associates one pair of breasts on a website with every other woman in the world. And no one is holding guns to their heads.
And beer has been around almost as long as prostitution, which predates Abraham and the National Orgainization for Woman.
I work my ass off to take care of a woman I've been with for 5 years. And when I get home I cook and clean as much as there is to do. And I'd never marry her, because this is 2006, not 1492.
Sure I got a few "luxury items" as you like to dismiss them, as toys, but going to work day in and out, working weekends, just toput food in our mouths, I think I deserve some R&R when I can get it.
The reason there are these man-boys out there is quite easy to understand.
They've ALWAYS been here.
Some dudes are slobs who go no where and make no plans.
Big deal. Let them spawn their bastards and live with their parents.
Bush, Kerry and all the ad execs would prefer a married and complacint buying public, than a bunch of singles who can think for themselves.
Come on now, this article could be repeated just as easy by a Tom DeLay or Pat Robertson if you just switch all the party affiliations around.
It's a bunch of "Blame the Culture" winger garbage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: EliotKing on Apr 30, 2006 12:27 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Half-Naked Hot Chicks and Beer: The Sexist Guyland of the Super Bowl Beer Commercial
Can Obama and Dems Overcome the Right's Talk Radio Monopoly?
Why We're Addicted to Disaster Porn




