the tindog coffeehouse

Like a lot kids, I grew up without a father around. My parents divorced when I was six, and my dad moved out of town for work a couple of years later. I still kept in touch with him as I grew up, but it was hard not having him in my day-to-day life. I’ve struggled most of my life to figure out what it takes to be a man, what it means to be a husband and a father. And I think it’s fair to say that at some point in his life, every man wrestles with those same questions, wondering whether he’s good enough or strong enough or smart enough or whatever. The problem is, we don’t really have a good way to determine that.

We have this general notion of “manliness” as being tough, rugged, battle-hardened, and unemotional, and there may be some historical basis for that. As the Art of Manliness points out, such traits were the result of living in a harsh environment with scarce resources:

In a tribe or a society that faced issues of scarcity, where the danger of being attacked by wild animals or human enemies constantly threatened, men were needed to step up and take on the role of hunters, warriors, and protectors. Because of men’s greater physical strength and assertiveness, the lot for these jobs fell naturally to them. But while men may have some natural proclivities to embrace these roles, putting one’s self in harm’s way does not come naturally to either sex. Thus cultures needed a way to prod men into embracing roles which were undesirable but essential to the survival of the tribe.

In such a scenario, “manhood” isn’t so much about proving your worth but about simple survival, and therefore the evidence of a person’s manhood is pretty obvious. But we don’t live in such a society now. Very few of us know what real scarcity is, and while we may venture out every morning to go earn a paycheck, that’s hardly the equivalent of hunting for that day’s meal. Plus, many women do the same jobs as men and often earn at least as much or more than their husbands.

Further complicating matters is the fact that divorce and single-parenthood are so common. About 40% of the children born in the United States are born out of wedlock, and half of all children in the U.S. will live in single-parent households at some point before they turn 18.

The result is that traditional gender roles tend to get muddled. Boys raised without a father or older male mentor have no idea what being a man really means. They don’t know how to be husbands or fathers or leaders within the community. And without that guidance, they can struggle their whole lives with a sense of insecurity, never really sure of whether they’ll ever be able to measure up completely.

As Donald Miller writes in To Own A Dragon:

I spent a lot of time believing I wasn’t a man because I didn’t like football analogies, or because I didn’t want to put a cheesy bumper sticker on my car, or, well, because I didn’t have a father. In a way, the guys who are promoting this approach to manhood are pretty innocent. I realize they are just trying to keep guys from yelling at their wives. But when those tactics hit my insecurities, they created a twinge. To tell a guy who grew up without a father that he is not a man unless… and he will automatically assume he isn’t one.

So if we’re not having to hunt for scarce resources for survival and we don’t always have adult male mentors to guide us, how then can we really define modern-day “manhood”? How is a man to know if he is really a man? Miller concludes that “manhood” can, in its simplest terms, be defined in purely anatomical terms; if you’re a male, then you’re a man.

But I think it’s more complicated than that. Miller is absolutely correct that manhood isn’t necessarily defined by a propensity for sports or cars or action movies, but there has to be some way to differentiate manhood from boyhood, to let us know when we’ve passed that threshold from child to adult. And I think The Art of Manliness has probably the best definition I’ve ever seen (emphasis mine):

There are two ways to define manhood. One way is to say that manhood is the opposite of womanhood. The other is to say that manhood is the opposite of childhood.

The former seems to be quite popular, but it often leads to a superficial kind of manliness. Men who ascribe to this philosophy end up cultivating a manliness concerned with outward characteristics. They worry about whether x,y, or z is manly and whether the things they enjoy and do are effeminate because many women also enjoy them.

I subscribe to the latter philosophy. Manhood is the opposite of childhood and concerns one’s inner values. A child is self-centered, fearful, and dependent. A man is bold, courageous, respectful, independent and of service to others. Thus a man becomes a man when he matures and leaves behind childish things.

The apostle Paul essentially said the same thing in 1 Corinthians 13:

For we know in part and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes, the partial will be done away.

When I was a child, I used to speak like a child, think like a child, reason like a child; when I became a man, I did away with childish things. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.

Manhood, then, is not just anatomical, and I think it goes beyond mere emotional maturity. It is a choice, a conscious decision to take responsibility for who we are, for our actions, and for our attitudes. Sometimes that transition may involve a specific rite of passage, but more often I think it’s a tedious process, a lifelong series of rites played out daily, weekly, and monthly.

And as I’ve learned, the hardest part of that process is just realizing that it exists.

Previously:
Manly skills
Economist: Marriage is ‘necessary for good economic development’
Single parents cost taxpayers $112 billion