What REALLY makes a man "a man" ?

[13788]

Simon9: No, no no.

It's not about intelligence, responsibility or compassion or muscles.

You only need two things to REALLY be a man: A big penis and a moustache. The bigger the better, for both.

My old Greek Grandmother, now there was a real man.

Talk to her about compassion and she'd just laugh and kick you in the balls. And what a moustache.

Come to think of it, maybe it was my grandfather in a black dress. Alright, never mind.

 

[13788]

GeorgenFLA: [quote author=Doubtless_Mouse link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=20#33 date=04/07/04 at 07:29:54]I read the post and wanted to try and add something - here goes.

We talk about stereotypes, we talk about hwo they are an unfair wa to veiw the world. We mention that the world would be a much better place if people left their preconceived notions at the door.  This being said, it won't happen.  The stereotypes about men and women for example are reinforced by the very people who are damaged by them.  

In psycology, their is a theory called the "Halo Theory"  it has been tested time and time again, and it basically says that as humans we tend to treat psycially attractive people better than ugly folks.  Even infants have shown different responses to ugly and good looking people. (Note: I use the term ugly because it confers a meaning of not good looking, not meaning to offend the political right or left).  In buisness, it has been tested by numerous exposes and news shows that two people equally qualified, the better looking person tends to get the job.  

The reason I say that we the very people who speak against stereotypse are the ones promoting it is that we try to fit the mold that main line marketing has set in respect to our sexes.  How many of you buy brand names clothes?  How many of you eat or drink a brand name product.  These items are part of the stereotype that we speak against.  You never see to ugly people kissing in the wrigley's gun commercials...while we may not consciously prmote these stereotypes, we do promote them non-the-less.

I had hoped with the onset of on-line communities that the idea of what we looked like would become a thing of the past, yet when ever people chat, they eventually come to a point where they want to know what the person they are talking to looks like.  And what is funny is that people tend to describe themselves differently than than they really are.  they tend to use words or expressions that paint them a picture closer to the image we see on bill-boards.  

Not accusing anyone of anyting, again just wanted to add something to the discussion.

What Really makes a man - It is a hard question to answer.  There are no words to expalin.  To me being a man is waking up on sunday morning, walking into the living room and seeing my two beautiful children healthy.  I know that I do the right thing by them.  Knowing that my son will grow into a strong youg man, knowing that their welfare depends on me.  That is being a man.  Doing the righ thing for the right reasons, that is really being a man.

Mouse[/quote]

Mouse, that was extremely well said. Thanks

 

[Pecker]

[quote author=Simon9 link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#40 date=04/08/04 at 08:55:21]Come to think of it, maybe it was my grandfather in a black dress....[/quote]

and holding a Miller Lite!

 

[13788]

bblumbee: What makes a man a man? Interesting thread....

I think what makes a man a man is his ability to be true to himself regardless of what others might think. Convictions, compassion, humbleness, humility, a protector and provider are key traits.

And one other, at least for me personally, is for a man to be able to cry. Nothing gets to me like that... nothing.

That is when a man is a man and is being true to himself.

bb

 

[13788]

Simon9: ...but in all seriousness, bblumblebee, aren't those also admirable traits for a woman as well? And if so, what differentiates a "real" man from a "real woman"? If spiritually and emotionally the differences are nil between the sexes when at their highest, then we're back to anatomical differences.

Hence the moustache and the big penis. Chest hair optional.

 

[13788]

roedhunt: Let's take this one step further..

If a man prefers men, dresses like a woman, talks like a woman and behaves like a woman.. is he still a man?

Or a woman who likes women, dresses like a man, acts like a man, talks like a man... is she still a woman?

 

[13788]

View_From_Below: [quote author=roedhunt link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#45 date=04/09/04 at 02:31:59]
If a man prefers men, dresses like a woman, talks like a woman and behaves like a woman.. is he still a man?
[/quote]

You can put it another way.  When we look at someone and say "that's my idea of a manly guy," are we really looking only at inner qualities, as some responses are suggesting??  I don't think so.  I just don't think our minds work that way.

It seems to me that we also respond to physical features and behaviors when we make an assessment like that. It may not be politically correct to say so, but I think it is true.

The question then is, how does the mix work?? Are there any deal-makers or deal-breakers?  If you are a model of a rock-solid dependable guy, true to your word, take responsibility, and all that, but you are overweight, effeminate, unimpressive sexually, etc -- then would we still say "that's my idea of a manly guy"?  I don't think so.  

And conversely-- with regard to the guy who is ruthless, double-dealing, and unscrupulous, but who is handsome, athletic, sexy, hung, etc.? We'd cut him a lot of slack before saying he's not "manly." That's the way the world works.

We may be uncomfortable saying so, but the physical side matters.

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

[quote author=roedhunt link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#45 date=04/09/04 at 02:31:59]If a man prefers men, dresses like a woman, talks like a woman and behaves like a woman.. is he still a man?[/quote]

Yeah, he's still a man, but not a "man", if you get my meaning. His sex is male, but his gender is female.

 

[13788]

H8Monga: .deleted.

 

[13788]

roedhunt: Interesting replies here. I think it all depends on the individual. In this day and age, there is no "right" man. It is up to the individual to decide. Just like what defines a "woman"? I hate wearing dresses, showing skin, and strutting around all lady like. I like dirty jokes, dirty sex, hardly anything offends me (tho I offend others), and wear comfortable "unwomanly" clothes.. hence comfortable..

Am I still a woman? Hell yeah! And my taste of men runs towards the man who does all the "typical" man stuff. Works on engines, drives motorcycles or horses, rides bulls, pumps iron, plays rough sports,.... I could go on forever.. I guess the bad boy image.. In the older days, he was called the Ladies Man.... Not sure if any exists anymore.....

 

[13788]

View_From_Below: This is a complex question, as we know. Part of the problem is figuring out what we mean by "man," "manly," "masculine," "macho," etc., and whether we are using the terms in the same way, whether we are using the terms essentially as synonyms or whether we differentiate among them.

In any case, here's an item to look at which I came across. A guy named Perry Nodelman, a professor of English at the University of Winnipeg, does research on children's literature. He has compiled a list of widespread cultural notions about masculinity. His interest is in how masculinity is represented in children's literature -- how much the literature conforms to the assumptions, and how much it challenges any of those assumptions.

Here is the link to the list, which is very interesting.

http://io.uwinnipeg.ca/~nodelman/resources/masculin.htm

Note: in all the categories of "masculinity" that Nodelman has compiled, there is no category in which moral traits, i.e., keeping your word, being good, or noble, or reliable, etc., are central. Does that mean that in general societal thinking those traits are not really considered essential to "masculinity" at all? I mention it because that would be clearly different from some of what has been expressed here, where those moral traits are claimed to be the only true indicators of "manliness."

VFB

 

[Max]

[quote author=View_From_Below link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#50 date=04/12/04 at 08:07:54]Note:  in all the categories of "masculinity" that Nodelman has compiled, there is no category in which moral traits, i.e., keeping your word, being good, or noble, or reliable, etc., are central.  Does that mean that in general societal thinking those traits are not really considered essential to "masculinity" at all? I mention it because that would be clearly different from some of what has been expressed here, where those moral traits are claimed to be the only true indicators of "manliness."[/quote]

A very interesting link, though it would be even better to see some worked examples -- that is to say a particular writer or text examined on this basis.

About the moral traits you mention ... if we hope that our daughters become reliable, noble, etc. etc, as well as our sons -- how can they be specific to masculinity? Surely any woman we truly admire would need these qualities every bit as much as a man.

In the past, of course, being "good" might have implied a very different set of virtues (which is of course at root a totally masculine word!) for men from the ones prized in a woman. Much less so these days, I think.

 

[13788]

View_From_Below: [quote author=Max link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#51 date=04/17/04 at 01:33:15]

About the moral traits you mention ... if we hope that our daughters become reliable, noble, etc. etc, as well as our sons -- how can they be specific to masculinity?  Surely any woman we truly admire would need these qualities every bit as much as a man.[/quote]

Yes, that's another way of looking at the point I was making. That is, a number of answers earlier in this thread seem to be asserting that the only meaningful indicators of "masculinity" or "manliness" are traits such as reliability, keeping one's word, taking care of one's own, dependability, etc. But as you say, wouldn't we hope that our daughters would also be reliable, keep their word, etc.etc? That doesn't mean we hope they'll be masculine.

Those are not exclusively masculine traits (though they do carry a little more weight somehow with regard to how we judge men versus how we judge women). In philosophical terms, these traits are necessary to "masculinity" or "manliness," but are not sufficient.

So the question then is: if these are necessary characteristics but are not sufficient, then what other characteristics do we unconsciously look for when we say "now that's my idea of a manly guy"? And among those other characteristics? I maintain that it is impossible that we don't consider physical traits -- how men "look," how they carry themselves, how they behave, and so on. Those do go into our routine unconscious assessment of the "manliness" of those around us, whatever other things we also weigh. We should be forthright in naming them, and in noting which ones we pay attention to particularly.

In the past, of course, being "good" might have implied a very different set of virtues (which is of course at root a totally masculine word!) for men from the ones prized in a woman. Much less so these days, I think.

Also a very good point. The moral or behavioral qualities prized in men were probably very different in earlier ages from those prized in women -- but we have moved nowadays to a sort of blurry set of admirable qualities common to both sexes. It might be very instructive to look backward, if we could, and see whether we have lost or gained by this.

As you point out, the "vir" in "virtue" is the same root as the "vir" in "virile" -- "virtues" (literally speaking) were exclusively masculine qualities. I don't know what the equivalent term for feminine qualities was (if there was one).

VFB

 

[B_DoubleMeatWhopper]

[quote author=View_From_Below link=board=meetgreet;num=1080624653;start=40#52 date=04/17/04 at 08:49:55]
As you point out, the "vir" in "virtue" is the same root as the "vir" in "virile" -- "virtues" (literally speaking) were exclusively masculine qualities.  
[/quote]

True. In fact, the Latin word virtus, whence comes the English word virtue. literally means 'manliness'. Strange how we more commonly associate the word with women today.

 

[jonb]

Well, I guess it's around the time makeup and clothing started being about concealment rather than ornamentation.

 

[Pecker]

Perhaps "facere de necessitate virtutem (make a virtue of necessity) goes a long way in explaining how men elevate their horniness for the fairer sex to the status of respectability.

 

[seriousdl]

HONK!...I'm sorry, the answer we were looking for was "bigass dicks"

BigAssDicks...

Thanks for playing

 

[MisterSlave]

Well, that is such a loaded question. Some might respond (physical attributed). some might say Philosophy, and the mind. No 2 people in this world are completely alike. Even identical twins differ in some ways. What I would say Makes a Man, is being unique. Sometimes its an attitude saying, Fuck it, . .Ill make my own way. I will make my own choices. That could be a definition of a man. Some heterosexuals may say, that a woman helps to define a man, and to some degree that can be true, also. There simply is no real singular answer to your question. I would say, many factors influence masculinity and what can be defined as Man, or Male.