Interesting article from Memoria Press: The Dangerous Article for boys

[elegantlion]

I agree with some of this, not all of it. Interesting read none the less.

 

http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/dangerous-article-boys.html

[Soror]

Interesting, thanks for sharing.

[mom2scouts]

Interesting. The ending of the article made me laugh.

[Impish]

I pretty much agree w/the article.

 

I've noticed that a lot of current fiction tends to be slanted towards a girl audience.

 

Alex Rider books, from the cpl I've read, tend to be more action and appeal to both genders.

[Excelsior! Academy]

Bookmarked it for later. Love the booklist!

[elegantlion]

Here's my knee jerk reaction. I'll go back and dissect it later. I totally agree on the wimpy vampire stuff, Twilight makes ds twitchy.

 

However, I don't think every boy is rough and tumble and rugged. My ds is a thinker, talker, not necessarily action oriented in real life. We love action movies, we love Batman movies, we discuss superheros, we like Terminator, but when it comes time to act, he's the thinker of the situation. He doesn't like sports, he hates bugs, but he likes to wrestle and sword fight (we have wooden swords). I don't find him less masculine because he'd rather be in the kitchen than out mowing a lawn.

 

We've read a lot of books listed in the article and we talk a lot about doing "the right thing" and standing up for his own convictions in any given situation. I guess I see THAT more in those books than run-off-to-the-woods boy adventures. I also don't think that is limited to gender. I was a tomboy though and I still like to play with swords, and I still love the examples of King Arthur and Robin Hood and Batman. Maybe some would call them chivalrous, but that's not even the right term for my perspective.

 

I think a man needs to know communication skills, interpersonal skills, lots of logic, and when physical interaction is not the answer. I know a lot of "men" who think they're manly but really they're just physical. They don't know logic, they can't articulate their convictions, and they can't relate to anyone but other "manly men". Some of them, in my experience, end up with addiction issues and anger issues because they're "just being men". That's not that attitude I want for my son, neither does dh.

 

There's nothing wrong with a man who know how to articulate his feelings, to be empathetic, and still knows how to mow the lawn and sweat.

 

I may add more later.

[elegantlion]

I pretty much agree w/the article.

 

I've noticed that a lot of current fiction tends to be slanted towards a girl audience.

 

Alex Rider books, from the cpl I've read, tend to be more action and appeal to both genders.

 

Yes, we love Alex Rider books here. :D

[8circles]

Here's my knee jerk reaction. I'll go back and dissect it later. I totally agree on the wimpy vampire stuff, Twilight makes ds twitchy.

 

However, I don't think every boy is rough and tumble and rugged. My ds is a thinker, talker, not necessarily action oriented in real life. We love action movies, we love Batman movies, we discuss superheros, we like Terminator, but when it comes time to act, he's the thinker of the situation. He doesn't like sports, he hates bugs, but he likes to wrestle and sword fight (we have wooden swords). I don't find him less masculine because he'd rather be in the kitchen than out mowing a lawn.

 

We've read a lot of books listed in the article and we talk a lot about doing "the right thing" and standing up for his own convictions in any given situation. I guess I see THAT more in those books than run-off-to-the-woods boy adventures. I also don't think that is limited to gender. I was a tomboy though and I still like to play with swords, and I still love the examples of King Arthur and Robin Hood and Batman. Maybe some would call them chivalrous, but that's not even the right term for my perspective.

 

I think a man needs to know communication skills, interpersonal skills, lots of logic, and when physical interaction is not the answer. I know a lot of "men" who think they're manly but really they're just physical. They don't know logic, they can't articulate their convictions, and they can't relate to anyone but other "manly men". Some of them, in my experience, end up with addiction issues and anger issues because they're "just being men". That's not that attitude I want for my son, neither does dh.

 

There's nothing wrong with a man who know how to articulate his feelings, to be empathetic, and still knows how to mow the lawn and sweat.

 

I may add more later.

 

Really well said. I agree.

[Soror]

I think the problem is that these days there is no room for the rough and tumble boy(or girl for that matter), we've went too far in the opposite direction. I agree as well we can have logic and intelligence in all of that as well, dh loves logic and latin but is more of a manly man (which to me doesn't mean aggressive or just physical).

 

Dh HATES Twilight with a passion, anytime it comes up he goes off about the vampires sparkling and how ridiculous it is.

[merry gardens]

Thanks for sharing. I love the book list too.

As the mother of a boy with dyslexia, I found this comment about words particularly interesting:

They respect words only to the extent that they see them followed by actions. Tell them (in mere words) what the right thing to do is, and they will look at you suspiciously and walk away. Do the right thing—preferably at the risk of your own person or reputation, and they will follow you in zealous allegiance.

My son's struggle with words has been beyond normal so I wouldn't say it's just typical boy, but still the comment strikes home. I pick his books very carefully since reading is such a struggle for him. That book list looks like things he's either already read or would want to read someday.

[elegantlion]

I think the problem is that these days there is no room for the rough and tumble boy(or girl for that matter), we've went too far in the opposite direction. I agree as well we can have logic and intelligence in all of that as well, dh loves logic and latin but is more of a manly man (which to me doesn't mean aggressive or just physical).

 

Dh HATES Twilight with a passion, anytime it comes up he goes off about the vampires sparkling and how ridiculous it is.

 

Yeah, we don't get the sparkling thing either. It has led to some long discussions here. :lol:

 

I don't think a real man has to be aggressive either, but maybe it's a balance issue. Maybe it's also a matter of what you see around you. In my case, I've had a lot of examples of doofs who do think expressing an emotion means you aren't manly. I guess the rough and tumble boy (or girl) is not foreign to me, it's still allowed and encouraged. Granted, I haven't peered into the classrooms here, so I don't know how that plays out in that setting.

 

Historically there is also the more rigid, standoffish, not-quite-patriarchal view of fatherhood here. It's only in my generation that you would see a father expressing emotion and support in public for their child outside of a sporting event.

 

My dh is very manly, very emotional as well, and tends to do rather than talk. I just wonder how much of this is a function of personality and gender rather than gender alone.

[angela in ohio]

I think a man needs to know communication skills, interpersonal skills, lots of logic, and when physical interaction is not the answer.

 

I think that these qualities are also shown in the types of heroes he describes and the books he lists. I reluctantly watched some old Westerns with dh and ds, for example, and was suprised at the depth in the heroes: articulate, logical, reserved.

 

Dh and I read the article last night and enjoyed it very much. I think that you have to read it understanding he makes certain assumptions about the worldview of the reader, and that means that the value of certain character qualities is already assumed (temperance, thoughfulness, etc.) I can't see it as a call to empty-headed "manliness."

Edited August 16, 2012 by angela in ohio

[elegantlion]

Thanks for sharing. I love the book list too.

As the mother of a boy with dyslexia, I found this comment about words particularly interesting: My son's struggle with words has been beyond normal so I wouldn't say it's just typical boy, but still the comment strikes home. I pick his books very carefully since reading is such a struggle for him. That book list looks like things he's either already read or would want to read someday.

 

Many of those books ds and I read together, they were wonderful. He was a delayed reader. Adam of the Road was one of the first longer books he read on his own. It took him like 3 months to finish it, a little bit each day.

[FairProspects]

Maybe it's also a matter of what you see around you. In my case, I've had a lot of examples of doofs who do think expressing an emotion means you aren't manly. I guess the rough and tumble boy (or girl) is not foreign to me, it's still allowed and encouraged. Granted, I haven't peered into the classrooms here, so I don't know how that plays out in that setting.

 

Geez, it is not okay here. We have some friends who also have 2 highly active, highly creative boys, and both families have had significant issues with the kids in social situations. Churches refusing to allow the boys to attend Sunday School, or requiring childcare for our kids at home before we could attend gatherings, schools suggesting medications for conditions that were not identified by professionals. Granted, we live in an area where it rains 9-10 months a year and most activities are indoors which may be part of it, but the rough and tumble boy is not at all accepted in many of my circles and it has been a problem over the years. I definitely identified with that part of the article.

[elegantlion]

I think that these qualities are also shown in the types of heroes he describes and the books he lists. I reluctantly watched some old Westerns with dh and ds, for example, and was suprised at the depth in the heroes: articulate, logical, reserved.

 

Dh and I read the article last night and enjoyed it very much. I think that you have to read it understanding he makes certain assumptions about the worldview of the reader, and that means that the value of certain character qualities is already assumed (temperance, thoughfulness, etc.)

 

good point.

 

Aside from a few episodes of Gunsmoke, I have a hard time watching westerns anymore and I grew up playing cowboys and Indians.

[FairProspects]

Thanks for sharing. I love the book list too.

As the mother of a boy with dyslexia, I found this comment about words particularly interesting: My son's struggle with words has been beyond normal so I wouldn't say it's just typical boy, but still the comment strikes home. I pick his books very carefully since reading is such a struggle for him. That book list looks like things he's either already read or would want to read someday.

 

Wow, do I agree with this comment. In fact, I think I've posted threads before asking for book recommendations with lots of adventure. There is something about those types of books that really motivates ds to read and pay attention.

[elegantlion]

Geez, it is not okay here. We have some friends who also have 2 highly active, highly creative boys, and both families have had significant issues with the kids in social situations. Churches refusing to allow the boys to attend Sunday School, or requiring childcare for our kids at home before we could attend gatherings, schools suggesting medications for conditions that were not identified by professionals. Granted, we live in an area where it rains 9-10 months a year and most activities are indoors which may be part of it, but the rough and tumble boy is not at all accepted in many of my circles and it has been a problem over the years. I definitely identified with that part of the article.

 

:svengo: Wow.

 

Thanks for sharing. It's still common in our area to get your child an ATV and take them hunting by age 7 type area. Okay, not everyone, but it's certainly not uncommon.

[VeritasMama]

I enjoyed the insights in this article. I had four boys in a row, and I grew up with three younger sisters and an older brother, so I was not used to boys. I was a tomboy growing up, but that meant I played sports and climbed trees, I never was that personally competetive The amount of competition and physical play my boys engages in still surprises me at times. They really just love to wrestle, and I dont know where it came from since my dh is not overly "manly " or athletic, he is a stereotypical engineer. Part of it is what I call the pack mentality, it seems the more boys you have the more they end up competing for the alpha dog spot. Just my observations raising four boys close in age.

 

My kids are also very thoughtful, emotional, and articulate. My oldest is truning out ro be more and more like his father, very logical. So I do believe that physicality is a normal part of growing up boy, and my kids loving to wrestle must serve some sort of developmental purpose :)

[jennsmile]

Why is it they only mention fiction. Growing up as a. Girl yes that was what I read. My boys pick up nonfiction more often and learn facts. Just because it isn't fiction doesn't mean it isn't reading.

[Onceuponatime]

Here's my knee jerk reaction. I'll go back and dissect it later. I totally agree on the wimpy vampire stuff, Twilight makes ds twitchy.

 

However, I don't think every boy is rough and tumble and rugged. My ds is a thinker, talker, not necessarily action oriented in real life. We love action movies, we love Batman movies, we discuss superheros, we like Terminator, but when it comes time to act, he's the thinker of the situation. He doesn't like sports, he hates bugs, but he likes to wrestle and sword fight (we have wooden swords). I don't find him less masculine because he'd rather be in the kitchen than out mowing a lawn.

 

We've read a lot of books listed in the article and we talk a lot about doing "the right thing" and standing up for his own convictions in any given situation. I guess I see THAT more in those books than run-off-to-the-woods boy adventures. I also don't think that is limited to gender. I was a tomboy though and I still like to play with swords, and I still love the examples of King Arthur and Robin Hood and Batman. Maybe some would call them chivalrous, but that's not even the right term for my perspective.

 

I think a man needs to know communication skills, interpersonal skills, lots of logic, and when physical interaction is not the answer. I know a lot of "men" who think they're manly but really they're just physical. They don't know logic, they can't articulate their convictions, and they can't relate to anyone but other "manly men". Some of them, in my experience, end up with addiction issues and anger issues because they're "just being men". That's not that attitude I want for my son, neither does dh.

 

There's nothing wrong with a man who know how to articulate his feelings, to be empathetic, and still knows how to mow the lawn and sweat.

 

I may add more later.

 

:iagree:

 

I also agree that there is often too much touchy feely psycho-babble, but not just in boys books, in girls books, too. Girls in older girl's books used to DO things and have adventures as well.

 

I wonder about the author's "great men" concept, though. What about MLK, Ghandi, Edison, George Washington Carver, etc. Being great doesn't necessarily mean showing your physical prowess. Men and boys do need things to do, things that occupy their minds and bodies. However, I don't see anything wrong with questioning how particular activities and decisions will affect their psyches. Doing the right thing can also include choosing a path of non-violence or non-agression. That doesn't automatically make someone a wimp.

 

Plus, some of those historical type adventure books about "heroic" men don't tell the whole story. They are missing a lot of the ignorance, prejudice, greed, and the lifestyle of violence and immorality. Those stories have been cleaned up. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, but it's not real.

 

That said, we have read and enjoyed most of the books on his list. My boys also liked HP, Artemis Fowl, various Star Wars books, Redwall, Series of Unfortunate Events, Kon Tiki, Private Yankee Doodle, just to name a few.

[redsquirrel]

Well, it is a rather limited vision of gender. My husband and my sons are very gentle and deeply emotional. I get dragged into lots of 'processing' conversations around here. That is really not my thing, but what are you going to do?

 

My older son has read an enjoyed many of the books on that list, but I can't imagine him reading a western of his own free will. Does Sherlock Holmes count in the same vein?

 

And while reading all those books, my boys also love Anne of Greene Gables, the little house books about Laura, and The Penderwicks. A big favorite around here has been the entire Swallows and Amazons series. It is marketed as a series for boys, but half the characters are girls. My son's best friend is a girl and she loved that series as well. It would never occur to them that a book is 'for girls' any more than a book is only for boys.

[celticmom]

I added that article to my favorites for the booklist for my dd7. She is definitely rowdy and I have had to seek out activities that allow her to get that out of her system. Dh is a typical computer nerd so I have no idea where this came from. I was a bit of a tomboy but not to the extent she is.

[Sugarfoot]

I agree with some of this, not all of it. Interesting read none the less.

 

http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/dangerous-article-boys.html

 

 

That was interesting.

 

One thing I've noticed for my oldest, probably because he's dyslexic, is that he really needs to be able to create a picture in his mind from a book. He likes to be able to see the characters and what they're doing. Many times he'll even draw them. :)

 

So if the characters just talk and talk and talk, or if they're not the kind of people that he could admire, he's just not interested.

 

He's a quiet, deep thinking kind of guy, and there's not an aggressive bone in his body. He's a 2nd degree black belt who never liked sparring because he was always afraid he might hurt someone else.

 

He loves Jules Verne because there tends to be a lot of action combined with thinking and science, as well as characters who face some sort of dilemma and must decide what to do.

 

He also reads a lot of non-fiction, but that's a whole, 'nother thing...;)

[yslek]

Well, it is a rather limited vision of gender. My husband and my sons are very gentle and deeply emotional. I get dragged into lots of 'processing' conversations around here. That is really not my thing, but what are you going to do?

 

My older son has read an enjoyed many of the books on that list, but I can't imagine him reading a western of his own free will. Does Sherlock Holmes count in the same vein?

 

And while reading all those books, my boys also love Anne of Greene Gables, the little house books about Laura, and The Penderwicks. A big favorite around here has been the entire Swallows and Amazons series. It is marketed as a series for boys, but half the characters are girls. My son's best friend is a girl and she loved that series as well. It would never occur to them that a book is 'for girls' any more than a book is only for boys.

 

:iagree:

 

I've enjoyed most of the articles put out by MP, but had mixed feelings on this one. I like that he's sticking up for the action-oriented boys who (he feels) are being squashed by our culture, but get the sense that he dismisses the presence of emotionally-sensitive boys (or lables such boys "effeminate", which I think is unfair.) There has to be a way to advocate for "typical boy"-pleasing literature without demeaning boys who appreciate more psychological-searching type lit.

 

I'm a bit of an MBTI junkie, and one thing that struck me early on in reading about temperament & gender, is that the majority of men are T (Thinking), and the majority of women F (Feeling), and that our culutural ideals are centered around men=T/women=F. However, some men have an F preference and some women a T (I'm one of them! :D) Doesn't make them less manly/womanly. Many of the marriage-advice books out there don't speak to me at all, because they're built around the idea that women are Feelers (and usually ESFJs at that--see my siggy; I'm the exact opposite. :tongue_smilie:) Maybe because of that, I'm a bit sensitive to the whole gender-stereotyping thing. Not in a deny-there-all-action-boys way (I have several of those!) but in a don't-assume-everyone-is-just-like-you way.

 

Um, guess that turned into a rant. :001_huh: Guess I'd better step off my soapbox! :D

[elegantlion]

He's a quiet, deep thinking kind of guy, and there's not an aggressive bone in his body. He's a 2nd degree black belt who never liked sparring because he was always afraid he might hurt someone else.

 

He loves Jules Verne because there tends to be a lot of action combined with thinking and science, as well as characters who face some sort of dilemma and must decide what to do.

 

 

I'll be digging out the Verne, we'll see how ds responds to it.

 

 

thank you for everyone chiming in. I'm not quoting everyone as I'm trying to eat lunch, but I appreciate the conversation.

 

I guess I have a certain distaste for anything that resembles patriarchal dynamics. I don't think Cothran is in that vein, but I probably see gender in general a little differently than he does.

[Catwoman]

However, I don't think every boy is rough and tumble and rugged. My ds is a thinker, talker, not necessarily action oriented in real life. We love action movies, we love Batman movies, we discuss superheros, we like Terminator, but when it comes time to act, he's the thinker of the situation. He doesn't like sports, he hates bugs, but he likes to wrestle and sword fight (we have wooden swords). I don't find him less masculine because he'd rather be in the kitchen than out mowing a lawn.

 

I wish we lived near each other because your ds and my ds12 would be best friends! :001_smile:

[elegantlion]

I wish we lived near each other because your ds and my ds12 would be best friends! :001_smile:

 

:D That would be awesome.

[KrissiK]

I completely agree with the article and have held these sentiments for a long time. We don't have cable, but get Me-TV and on Saturdays they have the old westerns on, which my boys can watch to their hearts' content. Sure ther is violence, but in those shows right is right and wrong is wrong and women were respected (and respectable). No ambiguous morality like in almost everything you get out there these days.

[stripe]

Why is it they only mention fiction. Growing up as a. Girl yes that was what I read. My boys pick up nonfiction more often and learn facts. Just because it isn't fiction doesn't mean it isn't reading.

 

I'm with you -- and in fact, I think this is another facet of the problem.

 

That being said, I think "boyish" fiction is often just plain smarter than a lot of the garbage that gets pawned off on girls. I think girls' stuff needs an overhaul. It's so stupid, and mostly about princesses, hair, boys, clothes, breasts, shoes, boys, shopping, boys, cute panties, and so on. Blech. Read any magazine aimed at girls -- including the counterculture type ones that are not about boys and hair. Then compare to a boys' magazine, like Boys' Life. The reading level is vastly higher -- and font size about half the size! -- than anything for girls. And the not-about-boys-and-clothes magazines are just about food -- preparing snacks for friends, etc.

 

I appreciate the suggestions for good boys' books and the spark for thought. I think we need to seriously deepen our understanding of maleness. It is even more pathetic and limiting for African American boys compared to white American boys, and the only masculinity that is held up is often destructive (to self or others).