What does Manhood mean to YOU

[TylerM4]

I find this comment very interesting, as it groups three things together and classifies them as "weaker" than men.

treat woman/children/animals anything weaker than you with respect and protect them when needed..

That is saying that, "women are weaker and not equal to men".

That is a VERY interesting statement to make.......

I feel like you're trying to stir the pot here. Popcorn emoji's and all. Hoping for some drama. Let's avoid that practice OK?

There is sexism, and then there is genetics. This is simply genetics. Men and women are not exactly the same. We are different and it's OK to recognize those differences.

[ferri]

[mbfarm131]

and provide an income sufficient that your wife could stay home.

Why?
Enter the discussion on men being nothing more than a meal ticket and if that doesn't work, nothing more than a support payment in the eyes of her and the gov't.

Why? Preservation of the family unit. The mother stays home for the benefit of the children, so she can teach them and help to provide exposure to the community in a cooperative and symbiotic setting. Unfortunately this ideal doesn't really hold up in modern, urbanite living where the individual is atomized and alienated rather than part of a strong family unit that helps to provide value an a community that works together for sufficiency and socialization. But that's how it once was, and still is in more rural/farming settings. The consequences of having children placed in the care of the state, under the guidance and supervision of a stranger, due to having both parents away from the home and working, are very negative for the preservation of social cohesion and personal responsibility. Households with two working parents are a nightmare for the developing mind and spirit. By extension, most of the framework of social modernity is a disaster for childhood development.

A man should lead his family, doing what it takes to provide in order for the family to remain cohesive, healthy and functioning. Having an atmosphere of perpetual stress, upheaval and separation within the family unit is being a bad leader and a bad provider. Being a debt slave, living below your means and artificially supported on credit so that it's necessary for both parents to be working and having the children being raised by someone who could never have the love and prioritization for the child that it's parents do, is not being a good leader or provider. This manosphere BS about not wanting to be a "meal ticket" is childish thinking and could only be the thought process of a man who does not have kids, or worse yet does not love his kids, and is therefore not an actual provider. It's placing material desires above familial, social and existential priorities.

By that metric, I could argue that since this ideal is almost impossible to achieve in an urban environment, it's therefore almost impossible to be a man in an urban setting. Rather than carving out an existence and providing for the mother of your children, children who will carry your lineage and bloodline into the next generation, you're working for someone else so that you can pay someone else to provide for you and your family. Nothing really separating you from an infant, other than motor skills. Even if you have a wife and kids in an urban environment, there is little chance your wife is raising them on a day to day basis, she probably needs to work so you can make ends meet, so you're dependent on someone else to raise them as they see fit. There is little chance you're teaching them tangible skills or the importance of sufficiency since the urban environment provides everything you need to survive, you exist merely to pay for your existence and you seek out entertainment and quick dopamine hits with the little spare time you have. That is nothing more than being a consumer that happens to have offspring, a title that is gender non-conforming, which may be why we're seeing this whole virtue signal about equality and blurring the lines of male and female. Consumers are equal, they have no specific titles that gives them purpose or status other than what type of product they can consume and how often.

In the modern world, where we don't work toward a purpose greater than our own material gain, there is no difference between men and women. In the traditional and/or natural world, where existence itself is a higher order than simple material desires, nobody would even think about asking what manhood means, it would be self evident, equally as important as womanhood but serving a polar opposite, yet perfectly balanced, calling.

[mbfarm131]

In my minds eye I had a white picket fence , a rainbow and almost had some butterflies while reading this.
Real world isn't like that. There are people having as many kids with as many different partners they can to get gov't cheques and support payments from as many payers as they can....and manhood (in Canada anyway) is about realizing we are not equal in that arena and to avoid those situations because it-'the system' isn't going to work out your favour. Some streets are one way only. Just being a realist here, thats all.

Pretty bleak outlook. I admit, in general there is a lot of truth to what your saying, but that's not to say that having ideals geared toward building and preserving the ideal familial unit is unattainable. There are many ideal families out there, they just don't get any recognition or accolades.

Some streets are one way in regards to men can't go around having multiple kids and getting paid by the government for it? Yeah, I agree with you there, but what man want to do that? Have kids and be supported by the system? Why would he ever impregnate a woman who has that desire or capacity? She flirted with him one night at the pub? That's on him. A man is a slave to his appetites, and some men think that being a man means being some kind of "stud" that women find irresistible and bedding as many as they can. Well, those are not men, they're boys of varying ages. Low quality women prey on low quality men, why wouldn't they? If the man is just looking for the self-serving action of getting laid, then it's morally justified that the woman could be trying to attain the self-serving reaction of being as financially compensated as she can for the act. I'm trying to not get longwinded again. In my opinion what makes a man besides all the Hallmark qualities of being tough, reliable etc, is having a focus, an ideal, greater than his own material desires. By and large we're a material driven society nowadays, that negates any moral anchor or long term outlook, it's all about a rat race type of smash and grab where you get as much of the pie as you can and then you die. That's it. No wonder women take advantage of men who think like this, as I said previously: men lead. Some men make mistakes, and they should not be defined by them, but if they can be honest with themselves and hold themselves accountable for that mistake, learn and grow from it, rather than play the victim and gnash their teeth in anger, then they will overcome those mistakes and become wiser for it.

I think this modern move to an atheistic, science-driven, chaos-theory society is what's uncoupled men from that focus on something greater than their desires. You can call it god, the universe, ether, creator, life force...doesn't matter, when we lost the focus that existence is more than the material, we lost our moral anchor and it has led us to the point where we're at today. If we continue to believe that everything is random, chaotic chance, nothing matters, morality is relative to perception etc, then we've lost our polarity. If that's the case then we'll just keep spiraling into this world we've created for ourselves where nothing has meaning or definition, men can be women, women can be men, and a whole host of ever-expanding options. You are your own god and your existence is governed by nothing more than your fleeting urges. We're really going to let that narrative stick and then wonder why everything and everyone has gone crazy? When we reconnect with the idea that life is a test and that the morality that you've held yourself accountable to will determine whether you've passed the test or not, pathways become more defined, relationships become more enriched. Again, you can accuse me of being idealistic but I find it to be true.

I'm not a religious person, I don't go to church, I'm not trying to turn this thread into a debate on any of that. But I do believe there is something greater than myself and I hold myself morally accountable to it. I follow my morality, my wife follows me, the children follow her. If my morality wasn't anchored, if I followed my own material urges would she follow me or would she think I'm a joke, take the kids and instead have the system be her provider? And lets say she does one day completely flip and leave me and take the kids. Am I going to get angry and define myself on how I was so great but this crazy woman destroyed me? How would that serve me? I'd like to think I would take it as an opportunity to approach my own moral compass and see if there was something that I was missing. I'm sure that's easier said than done, but it's a reality that I don't plan on finding myself in because I was fortunate enough to find someone who connects completely with me on these matters.

Damnit, I got longwinded again. I'm ending this absolute word salad right here. I have a feeling that if we really drilled down on this topic, we'd find more we agreed with than disagreed with.

[cb0208]

When a male stops messing around and starts making a meaningful life for others.

[cb0208]

I'm not sure the term is relevant or exists anymore.
If it does exist still, my definition from 40 years ago would be totally different than what it would be today.
Manhood....or masculinity, are no longer valued as they are not needed in our soft modern world.

I see your point with how many responses I have been getting. I asked my dad what manhood is and he said, "You know, we don't talk about that stuff, we keep things inside."

[cb0208]

I'm not sure the term is relevant or exists anymore.
If it does exist still, my definition from 40 years ago would be totally different than what it would be today.
Manhood....or masculinity, are no longer valued as they are not needed in our soft modern world.

Oh, dp you mean, something like this?

The idea of manliness has grown indelibly associated with the idea of being cool. We’d be wiser to shift the masculine ideal towards a new idea: warmth.

I love this truly this is very good!!!!

[cb0208]

I find this comment very interesting, as it groups three things together and classifies them as "weaker" than men.



That is saying that, "women are weaker and not equal to men".

That is a VERY interesting statement to make.......

I feel like you're trying to stir the pot here. Popcorn emoji's and all. Hoping for some drama. Let's avoid that practice OK?

There is sexism, and then there is genetics. This is simply genetics. Men and women are not exactly the same. We are different and it's OK to recognize those differences.

[cb0208]

In my minds eye I had a white picket fence , a rainbow and almost had some butterflies while reading this.
Real world isn't like that. There are people having as many kids with as many different partners they can to get gov't cheques and support payments from as many payers as they can....and manhood (in Canada anyway) is about realizing we are not equal in that arena and to avoid those situations because it-'the system' isn't going to work out your favour. Some streets are one way only. Just being a realist here, thats all.

Pretty bleak outlook. I admit, in general there is a lot of truth to what your saying, but that's not to say that having ideals geared toward building and preserving the ideal familial unit is unattainable. There are many ideal families out there, they just don't get any recognition or accolades.

Some streets are one way in regards to men can't go around having multiple kids and getting paid by the government for it? Yeah, I agree with you there, but what man want to do that? Have kids and be supported by the system? Why would he ever impregnate a woman who has that desire or capacity? She flirted with him one night at the pub? That's on him. A man is a slave to his appetites, and some men think that being a man means being some kind of "stud" that women find irresistible and bedding as many as they can. Well, those are not men, they're boys of varying ages. Low quality women prey on low quality men, why wouldn't they? If the man is just looking for the self-serving action of getting laid, then it's morally justified that the woman could be trying to attain the self-serving reaction of being as financially compensated as she can for the act. I'm trying to not get longwinded again. In my opinion what makes a man besides all the Hallmark qualities of being tough, reliable etc, is having a focus, an ideal, greater than his own material desires. By and large we're a material driven society nowadays, that negates any moral anchor or long term outlook, it's all about a rat race type of smash and grab where you get as much of the pie as you can and then you die. That's it. No wonder women take advantage of men who think like this, as I said previously: men lead. Some men make mistakes, and they should not be defined by them, but if they can be honest with themselves and hold themselves accountable for that mistake, learn and grow from it, rather than play the victim and gnash their teeth in anger, then they will overcome those mistakes and become wiser for it.

I think this modern move to an atheistic, science-driven, chaos-theory society is what's uncoupled men from that focus on something greater than their desires. You can call it god, the universe, ether, creator, life force...doesn't matter, when we lost the focus that existence is more than the material, we lost our moral anchor and it has led us to the point where we're at today. If we continue to believe that everything is random, chaotic chance, nothing matters, morality is relative to perception etc, then we've lost our polarity. If that's the case then we'll just keep spiraling into this world we've created for ourselves where nothing has meaning or definition, men can be women, women can be men, and a whole host of ever-expanding options. You are your own god and your existence is governed by nothing more than your fleeting urges. We're really going to let that narrative stick and then wonder why everything and everyone has gone crazy? When we reconnect with the idea that life is a test and that the morality that you've held yourself accountable to will determine whether you've passed the test or not, pathways become more defined, relationships become more enriched. Again, you can accuse me of being idealistic but I find it to be true.

I'm not a religious person, I don't go to church, I'm not trying to turn this thread into a debate on any of that. But I do believe there is something greater than myself and I hold myself morally accountable to it. I follow my morality, my wife follows me, the children follow her. If my morality wasn't anchored, if I followed my own material urges would she follow me or would she think I'm a joke, take the kids and instead have the system be her provider? And lets say she does one day completely flip and leave me and take the kids. Am I going to get angry and define myself on how I was so great but this crazy woman destroyed me? How would that serve me? I'd like to think I would take it as an opportunity to approach my own moral compass and see if there was something that I was missing. I'm sure that's easier said than done, but it's a reality that I don't plan on finding myself in because I was fortunate enough to find someone who connects completely with me on these matters.

Damnit, I got longwinded again. I'm ending this absolute word salad right here. I have a feeling that if we really drilled down on this topic, we'd find more we agreed with than disagreed with.

Definitely love this and all the feedback I'm getting and will be using I am sincerely surprised and left with a lot more questions.

[cb0208]

Okay: I love all the responses and I am going to use them. Awesome discussion and so worth looking into with the way life and feminism and so many other situations in life has impacted men and the term as well. I agree it is old fashioned only because the more I chit chat with men in person the more I hear them say: I don't know.... or the term is non existent nowadays. Shocking to hear so many men shrug shoulders and not say much about it. I heard from one mother that her two young sons cried after a class about gender and they were kicked out for calling their privates penis. how far have we gone to define men? I happen to love my dad so much and respect him, and he truly is a good man!

I talked to a friend of mine, and was discussing the fact that when I did this before and posted what is womanhood to you, I had a lot of responses way more than what I am seeing here. So my friend stated to .... ask questions because it will help narrow it down for them.

Questions like:
1. What superhero was your favorite as a kid?
2. What superhero as an adult is your favorite?
3. Who is your role model as a kid?
4. Who is your role model as an adult?
5. What do you think of when you hear
a) men are weak
b) men are strong
c) men are angry
d) grumpy man syndrome?
6. What advice would you give young men or what our government now is calling persons or personhood about being a male gender or heterosexual gender my goodness so so complicated I will rephrase the question and keep things simple!!!
6. What advice would you give your son? or young man about being a man?
7. If you had a father what traits would you consider a great quality?
8. As a wife or daughter, what do you think of your dad and his masculinity and what did you learn?

Does this help?

[cb0208]

Lol hahaha yes true enough but we all need a little help…. “Beatles sings it well”

[sobrohusfat]

.....what is 'grumpy man syndrome'?

[OldBlindDog]

What the hell would a worthless loser like me know about manhood?

[jcdenton]

To me, a big part of manhood is learning to live independently. Learning to stand on your own, without support from parents etc. Moving out on your own, and not needing help to provide his basic needs. A real man could put food on the table, build a shelter, and support a family, and do anything it takes to protect them.

[alanjh595]

*removed*