It is not always a simple thing to describe an aspect of ones own self. Just being a man should be enough and for the most part it is. Uncovering the truth of manhood seems to be an unimportant issue except at certain points in a man's life, and then only to decide what type of man he might become. As well, the uncovering is done without consideration of manhood but is instead focused on the situation at hand. The first girl that seriously catches our attention and then how we approach the matter is, to my mind, one of the first of these tests of manhood. All through our teens and young twenties we step away from childhood and begin becoming men. Our lives are filled with tests, temptations, thoughts, and teaching.
Traditionally, men have been the head of households, protectors of their family, neighbors, nations, and beliefs, or so it has been said. This is true to some extent, being more true in Christian societies, less true in others. And there has always been a vast minority who have chosen to do harm. The majority of men no longer seem to choose those institutions today, having been 'freed' by feminism and modernism and further drawn away from Christianity, marriage, and social expectations by the laws enacted against there interests in those institutions. In spite of these things, men will always be what men are. As well, the institutions never defined manhood, only one perception of expectations of manhood.
A man could be defined by his needs, wants, or a handful of characteristics such as bravery, cynicism, wit, or charm but all of these would miss the point. Though these things might begin to clarify the truth about the equality of men. That truth being that no man is equal to another. Equality is only sufficient as a theory in order to attempt a basis for law and evidenced purely only as an understanding of God's love for man. Those are the only things to which equality has any claim, despite 'modern common sense'. Most men know this in spite of, sometimes delineated by, socialist laws, feminine input, and group think.
So, how can a man be described? Most men have similar traits. The strength of body separates us from women. The need and will for action seems to be a common trait even for the lowly coward who will take the action of fleeing the action rather than standing spellbound. Men also seem to have an innate tinkerers delight, whether repairing a car, working on a rifle, creating a computer, or designing a gadget, men like to wreck, repair, and create things. Yet no two men are alike. Our differences range from our capacity to think, the ability to act, and the wisdom to choose which of those to engage. Our various abilities singular to each of us. Our primary difference, once inequality is accounted for, however, is our strength of character. This is what any women wishing to be with a man and any man interested in allying himself with another man must directly investigate.
Strength of character, or the lack of it, is nearly decided by the time we reach our early twenties. It is revisited at various times in our lives via tests, and can change. It is how we are best measured. If it is not who we are, it is how we will live within our other capacities. All the great men, even the infamous if in a misguided fashion, have the singular distinction of great fortitude and the will to move that forward through enemies, difficulties, bureaucracies, exhaustion, and the mediocrity of the uninspired to stand triumphant. It is also what a steady husband and father, a great worker, thinker, artist, and any solid man has some significant measure.
I have a few friends (one in particular) that would say your ideas apply to women as well. But, keeping away from controversy, I'll choose a different focus:
ReplyDeleteThe "equality" issue tends to get pushed to the forefront of my mind. This is partly due to how I think, and also the environment in which I work. So, some of it is inherent, and some of it is reflex. To make a long story short, I've come to the conclusion that ego problems originate in our inability to NOT compare.
We (I'll say "we", although some people, men or women, are affected more than others--silly disclaimer to cover my ass...) constantly have a desire (subconscious even) to rank themselves amongst their peers. A project is completed. The individual in question now seeks to judge it. Inevitably, the individual looks to others that have done similar projects. Was the other project completed in shorter time? Was it done better? Then the logical next step is to look at who did the project, and judge the character of the individual as a comparison.
In the end, we forget that even though equality is nonexistent, there are too many dimensions to assign rank. Skew lines don't intersect; a fact that can get muddled when taking a 3D image to 2D.
In the words of M: "I want you to take your ego out of the equation." Definitely something to strive for..
I think I know who you speak of, and I will just say that given no limits to our beliefs via practical applications, even a child could believe himself a firemen until he fails to save the lives of those stuck in a burning house. Girls are similar. Let her dream. Maybe she will never be required to know this, but more than likely she already does but she desires her and their group truths over reality. I have been there, but as can happen in a search for the Holy Grail... I, I got betta. As for controversy, you know that is absolutely forbidden in my actual or virtual presence, right? This is B. L. with which I communicate isn't it? *laughs, shakes head, laughs again*
ReplyDeleteAs for ranking the inequality, you are correct when it comes to skills, particular events, or simpler virtues (unless quantifiable). But those things I have relegated to not being the essence of a man. Where men are or are not equal is clearly defined when it is seen. Battlefields do this like no other means, a place where all that a man is, from strength to mind to spirit is pushed, threatened, and exposed. Some interactions with others can show glimpses and honesty and action on that honesty in spite of punishment or inducements to the contrary can show glimpses (these are where women can make false claims). Men of quality will also never be confused with women, even if said are also quality. The whole psychic and literal structures of quality men and women, even should it seem similar, are of such disparate natures, origins, and capacities that when quantifiably tested will be likened to apples and steak in similarity. Do not eat apples for protein, don't think to crunch into an steak. Why, even A. A. has come around and admitted some aspects of that.
On rereading your comment, I did have a question. Would you clarify "...I've come to the conclusion that ego problems originate in our inability to NOT compare."? The double negative causes confusion. Although, it sounds like you are implying because we need to compare we (may) have ego problems?
ReplyDeleteI will say that I don't believe we can correctly compare ourselves with other men, even if given to that peculiarity. For lesser qualities such as strength, speed, or the ability to solve problems, we can compete. But acting right every day all day to the capacity we have available to us is something not even we, for our own part, can, yet, discern. We are not sufficiently wise, smart, or objective enough. And, it is others (not through consensus) who see our greatness or lack of it, and they need to be seperated from us for the truth of that to be revealed without it being a minor form of love.