{"id":77466,"date":"2019-01-18T08:00:20","date_gmt":"2019-01-18T13:00:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=77466"},"modified":"2019-01-18T13:29:10","modified_gmt":"2019-01-18T18:29:10","slug":"nyt-op-ed-thomas-edsall-the-fight-over-men-is-shaping-our-political-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/kendallharmon.net\/?p=77466","title":{"rendered":"(NYT Op-ed) Thomas Edsall–The Fight Over Men Is Shaping Our Political Future"},"content":{"rendered":"

Last week, however, the American Psychological Association entered the fray with the release of its long-planned \u201cGuidelines for Psychological Practice with Boys and Men<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n

The A.P.A. guidelines argue that the socialization of males to adhere to components of \u201ctraditional masculinity such as emotional stoicism, homophobia, not showing vulnerability, self-reliance and competitiveness\u201d leads to the disproportion of males involved in \u201caggression and violence as a means to resolve interpersonal conflict\u201d as well as \u201csubstance abuse, incarceration, and early mortality….\u201d<\/p>\n

From a more academic vantage point, Steven Pinker<\/a>, a professor of psychology at Harvard, replied to my inquiry with a detailed critique of the A.P.A. guidelines.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe report is blinkered by two dogmas. One is the doctrine of the blank slate\u201d that rejects biological and genetic factors, Pinker wrote, adding that<\/p>\n

\n

The word \u201ctestosterone\u201d appears nowhere in the report, and the possibility that men and women\u2019s personalities differ for biological reasons is unsayable and unthinkable.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The other dogma, Pinker argued,<\/p>\n

\n

is that repressing emotions is bad and expressing them is good \u2014 a folk theory with roots in romanticism, Freudian psychoanalysis, and Hollywood, but which is contradicted by a large literature showing that people with greater self-control, particularly those who repress anger rather than \u201cventing,\u201d lead healthier lives: they get better grades, have fewer eating disorders, drink less, have fewer psychosomatic aches and pains, are less depressed, anxious, phobic, and paranoid, have higher self-esteem, are more conscientious, have better relationships with their families, have more stable friendships, are less likely to have sex they regretted, are less likely to imagine themselves cheating in a monogamous relationship.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In Pinker\u2019s view, the A.P.A. guidelines fail to recognize that<\/p>\n

\n

a huge and centuries-long change in Western history, starting from the Middle Ages, was a \u201cCivilizing Process\u201d in which the ideal of manhood changed from a macho willingness to retaliate violently to an insult to the ability to exert self-control, dignity, reserve, and duty. It\u2019s the culture of the gentleman, the man of dignity and quiet strength, the mensch. The romantic 1960s ethic of self-expression and escape from inhibitions weakened that ethic, and the A.P.A. report seems to be trying to administer the coup de gr\u00e2ce.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Pinker suggested rather that<\/p>\n

\n

One could argue that what today\u2019s men need is more encouragement to enhance one side of the masculine virtues \u2014 the dignity, responsibility, self-control, and self-reliance \u2014 while inhibiting others, such as machismo, violence, and drive for dominance.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Read it all<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cThe greatest adverse shock to the psychosocial welfare of U.S. men has not stemmed from dysfunctional notions of masculinity.. nor from MeToo (..long overdue) but from.. labor market forces.. that have.. reduced the demand for skilled blue collar work.\u201d https:\/\/t.co\/dZOB47vU2h<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Peter Gelman (@petergelman) January 18, 2019<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n