Real Men

Lately the concept of a "real man" has appeared on my radar quite a bit. Being a beneficiary of the 70's feminist movement but having more male friends than female, it is a question I've often wondered about, but maybe not in the way you think. I have always maintained, even through hormonal insanity and spending a small fortune on bras, that I'd rather be a woman in today's society than a man. Though complicated, women have more "acceptable" choices as to who to be than men. That's a bit of a generality, but I find it to be true.

I saw some fluff piece in a UK paper about now that there is a global recession and people are concerned about survival, the metrosexual image is going out of style because women now want a "broad-shouldered, strong provider type". This of course supposes that all women are needing or even looking for some man to protect them from the big, bad economy. I'm sure women in Canada are finding that hilarious since the majority of jobs that are being eliminated are traditionally male positions. Rentals of the old 80's movie "Mr. Mom" are sure to rise up there.

Then I saw this on Yahoo home page: What Is a Man? Well, I had to check that out! God knows Yahoo is known for their superb journalistic standards. Expecting another superficial piece of crap, I was surprised by the thoughtfulness of the list/article. Some of the stuff on there is a bit suspect in my opinion, but I think that may be simply because I'm female. (I try, but there will always be things about guys that I will never understand.) The thing that struck me most about this is the idea that a man should be thoughtful, observant and somewhat introspective. Such qualities are sorely missing from your usual sitcom, sporting event or advertising image. I also liked the slam on Mark McGuire about taking responsibility. My sentiments exactly.

And let's not leave out "The Nice Guy" concept. Poor, sweet, trying-so-hard Nice Guy who always finishes last. He's constantly the counterpoint to the womanizing asshole, but neither one of them ever appealed to me at all. I've always had a problem with Nice Guy but couldn't quite put my finger on it. This blogger, while criticizing a webcomic, does a nice job of giving voice to my nagging doubts about Nice Guy.

In 1982, Joe Jackson released the album "Night & Day". It's a wonderful album and contains the song "Real Men". I don't know Joe's sexual orientation, (he was once married, but what does that mean really?) but his examination of what being a man is about is still relevant. ("Trying to Cry" on "Laughter and Lust" is a good one, too.)

So what does this all mean? Can there be a monolithic definition of what a man or woman is outside of the biological? Is biological even a fit basis anymore? Humans have always tried to explain their world in absolutes, things that everyone can understand and act on. You would think we would be able to think in more abstract terms by now. Not unlike the way I choose to understand a higher power, I believe that men and women are whoever they want to be. Whatever best suits who you are should be what you do. If you're secure in what you're about, then go forth boldly and do your thing. Unfortunately, we just aren't there yet.