insideMAN

Yoga helps war veterans with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder

by Leave a Comment

By Flora Lisica, this article originally appeared in The Conversation

It’s no secret that yoga can aid mental well-being. What is more, it can help soldiers suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, according to new research.

Some of the most damaging consequences of seeing combat can happen in the mind. Of the 2.3m American veterans who returned from wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, up to 20% go on to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at some point. In a report published by the US Department of Veterans Affairs at least 22 American veterans take their lives every day.

The effects of PTSD can include intrusive memories, heightened anxiety and personality changes. Individuals can also experience hyper-arousal, where they are easily startled, feel “jumpy” and constantly on guard. Standard current treatment for PTSD generally involves prescriptions for antidepressants and psychotherapy, with mixed results.

In a new study published in the Journal of Traumatic Stress, researchers say that yoga can be used to bring better mental balance.

Yoga has previously been shown as valuable in reducing the stress of university students, and depression, anxiety, alcoholism and PTSD in tsunami survivors, as well as helping cancer patients. The charity Yoga for America runs programmes for serving soldiers and war veterans.

Agnieszka Golec de Zavala, senior lecturer in psychology at Goldsmiths, University of London, said the benefits of yoga included moving people away from negative thoughts.

The beneficial effects are due to the increased ability to focus on breathing that, firstly, focuses a person on a present moment and breaks rumination on negative traumatic thoughts, and secondly, increases ability of ‘intraception’ – observing and understanding internal states and the ability to control them, or understanding them as temporal and passing.

But the new study is the first of its kind to provide scientific support for the benefits of yoga’s breathing techniques for PTSD patients in a randomised and controlled (though small) long-term study which monitored effects of yoga over the course of the year.

The study focused on the effects of sudarshan kriya yoga, a practice of breathing-based meditation which has a balancing effect on the autonomic nervous system.


Camp Adder soldiers hit the mats in Iraq.
The National Guard/flickr

Twenty-one male veterans who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan, diagnosed with PTSD, were included in the study: 11 undertook a seven-day programme involving daily three-hour sessions of sudarshan kriya, including meditation, stretching and group discussion, while ten others didn’t take part were used as a control group.

The soldiers’ PTSD symptoms were assessed one week before the beginning of the programme and then a week, a month and a year after its completion. Seven of the 11 involved in the active group continued practising yoga after completing the programme.

The study found that the group who had done yoga demonstrated fewer or less intense PTSD symptoms in comparison. Those who took part in the yoga sessions showed lower anxiety and lower respiration rates. They performed better in tests measuring eye-blink and breathing frequency in response to stimuli such as noise bursts, which are used to measure hyper-arousal and how an well individuals are regulating emotions. The researchers also found that the sessions helped with intrusive memories: patients reported re-experiencing trauma during the exercises, but felt that the impact of the memories was reduced.

“The authors describe their results as ‘promising’ and I think this is what they are,” said Golec de Zavala, who is also a qualified yoga teacher. She emphasised, however, that like many other studies examining the benefits of yoga, this study is limited by the small study groups on which their results are based. “More studies are needed and such studies would be highly valuable regarding low costs of this form of treatment and the initial evidence suggesting its effectiveness,” she added.

Richard Davidson, professor of psychology and psychiatry at the UW-Madison and one of the authors of the study, said he hoped that that the study could be extended to more participants with wider demographic representation. If still promising, then doctors could prescribe yoga as treatment for patients suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder in the future.

A clinician could use a ‘tool box’ of psychological assessments to determine the cognitive and emotional style of the patient, and thereby determine a treatment that would be most effective for that individual. Right now, a large fraction of individuals who are given any one type of therapy are not improving on that therapy. The only way we can improve that is if we determine which kinds of people will benefit most from different types of treatments.

And one of those tools could be yoga.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. Feature imaged: Army Medicine/Flickr

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Why would a female academic want to study masculinity?

by 11 Comments

When it comes to academia, the study of gender has tended to mean the study of women. But there are a growing number of academics who realise that men’s issues and experiences are just as complex and in need of exploration as women’s. One of these is insideMAN reader and University of Derby psychology tutor, Debbie Earnshaw. We asked her why as a female academic, she decided to study men.

Here’s a part of a genuine conversation that I had with two sixth form students:

Student 1 (male): “But you’re a girl.”

Me: “I’m a female yes…and?”

Student 2 (female): “So why are you looking at this? It’s got nothing to do with you!”

Me: “Just because I’m female doesn’t mean I can’t research males and masculinity.”

Student 1: “But what’s the point? You don’t know anything about guys, or masculinity, you’re not one of us.”

‘I got a little fed up of just hearing about women’

I’ve encountered this a lot, and it is a question put forward to me by the editors of InsideMAN as well as numerous other occasions so I’ve decided to answer it. I’m asked by both binary genders why I’m researching masculinity/male psychology when I am a female. What could I possibly bring to the field? Well, for starters, in all honesty, during my undergraduate degree I got a little fed up of just hearing about women in my Gender module.

We had two weeks of ‘male’ psychology, which concentrated on superheroes for one week, and masculine ideals for the next week. And that wasn’t enough for me. I wanted to hear about THEIR life. Do they feel the same sense of shame or pressure about their bodies? Do they feel the same pressure to have families? Do they realise that they’re the ‘standard’ set in a discipline that is to encompass ALL human behaviour? Do they realise they have a voice too?

I realised that I wanted to find their strengths and their weaknesses and research them. I want to know what makes them different to themselves as well as other genders. I want to demonstrate that men still have their problems and shouldn’t be hidden away. I wanted to read a piece of a research that didn’t investigate women, and use a man as standard to be set against. That’s wrong for the women and wrong for the men. It is in no way fair.

‘Grow a pair’

I am a feminist. Not a ‘feminazi’, nor a man-hating individual, but someone who wants equality for all genders.

And you know what, being one has actually opened my eyes. I now see that the way women are portrayed is also hurtful to men. I see that the same sense of social order that has oppressed women also oppresses men, albeit sometimes in different ways. It’s still there. The issue that each gender has does affect each other.

As a feminist I do not want a man to be seen as the ‘bumbling dad’ in adverts, or viewed with suspicion because you happen to be at a play park with your own child. I don’t want men to lose custody of their children because the law assumes women are the better caregivers. I don’t want men to be ridiculed for having depression or suicidal thoughts because they’re seen as ‘weaknesses’ and told to ‘grow a pair’ or ‘stop being such a girl’.

As a female, I won’t even suggest that I understand men completely. I want to begin to understand your processes, your thoughts and your behaviours, and show people that men have problems too and we shouldn’t ignore them. I want to show them your individuality.

Some males might not be happy with that, but helping to have your voice heard to a different set of individuals surely can’t be all that bad, can it?

By Debbie Earnshaw

What do you think? Are there some subjects — like gender — that require lived experience to fully understand? Or are there special insights that one gender can bring to studying the other?

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Are “toxic” ideals of manhood why Jamaican boys are falling behind at school?

by 4 Comments

In January this year UCAS reported that there were now a third more girls applying for university than boys, leading the head of the organisation to call for boys to be treated as “a disadvantaged group”.  But this is not just an issue for the UK.

Here one of our readers, Wayne Campbell, an educator and social commentator from Jamaica, argues that what underpins the crisis in his country is the pressure on boys to reject anything that is deemed “feminine”, right down to the language of learning itself.

From as early as primary school there is concrete evidence which clearly distinguish our girls outperforming our boys in all the national examinations. For example, in Jamaica, the Grade Four Literacy and Numeracy Tests, as well as, the Grade Six Achievement Test (GSAT) clearly points to girls outperforming boys.

The crisis affecting our boys is not unique to Jamaica. Other Caribbean islands are also experiencing similar issues. Societies such as the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Australia are also grappling with the plight of boys and scholastic underachievement as well as how to address the problem.

‘Boys see school as for girls’

In my view, male underachievement is more a socio-political issue than an educational one.  Social and cultural factors have influence and continue to do so the various ways in which masculinity is defined not only in the Jamaican society but societies all over. Masculinity and what it means to be a man does impact on the education of our boys.

Many boys view the school experience as feminine. Our boys’ life choices are severely circumscribed by the dominant notions of masculinity competing with “multiple masculinities” in the society. For many boys especially in a homophobic and transphobic Jamaican society they are forced to remove themselves from any association with the feminine or curriculum areas related to same. One glaring example is the persistent poor performance of our boys in English Language in the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) examination.

Boys who speak or attempt to speak Standard English are called derogatory names and ridiculed almost daily by their peers. The dominant notion of masculinity in the wider Jamaican society is one in which to speak Standard English is tantamount to being isolated by one’s peers and the accompanying question marks which undoubtedly will follow surrounding one’s sexual orientation.

Wayne Campbell is an educator from Jamaica

Our schools mirror the wider society and also suffer from this. Not surprisingly a significant number of our boys do not readily code switch between the languages, instead they prefer to use and remain with the language of what defines a man to be a man.

The school experience for many boys is already traumatic and therefore who can blame that boy for just fitting in, rather than face the hostile treatment and name calling from his friends. Interestingly, even boys from privileged backgrounds and from homes where Standard English is spoken are now struggling with the English Language as we continue to see the intersection of class and gender and how this impacts the school experience for our boys.

This is compounded by the fact that our boys learn from quite early that having an education is not vital to be successful in life. In fact if we assess success in terms of material possessions in the Jamaican context, the overwhelmingly majority of those men who are successful are those who did not excel at scholastic pursuits.

In fact, many of the men in our society who are seen as “successful” in the eyes of teenage boys, are in fact those who have dropped out of school and fallen foul of the law.

By Wayne Campbell

Wayne Campbell is an educator, poet, blogger and social commentator with an interest in development policies as they affect culture and or gender issues.

Lead image: woodleywonderworks

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

 

Early Learning Centre apologises for sexist tweet ridiculing dads

by 2 Comments

The Early Learning Centre (ELC), a UK-based chain of toyshops, courted controversy yesterday by choosing to insult one of its main groups of customers—Dads!

In a poorly considered attempt at corporate humour, the retailer, which operates around 300 stores in 20 countries, shared a branded meme on Twitter and Facebook suggesting that the only role that dads play in childcare is telling their kids where mum is.

Fathers across the UK reacted angrily to the suggestion that mums face a long list of demands from their kids (eg “I’m hungry, “I’m cold”, “she hit me”, “can I have?” etc) while the only demand that dads have to deal with is: “where’s Mum?”.

Sexist, insulting and stereotypical

Tom, a father of two and primary school teacher from Worcestershire, who writes the blog Daddy Daydream, described the meme as: “very, very insulting to all those Dads who look after their families.”

“I work full time but I do try to do as much with my children as I can,” he said. “There is still a lot of people out there who are unaware of the changes that are taking place in the roles of parents. I am just shocked that of all people to hold these old fashioned opinions that the ELC would be one of them.”

Another blogger, Al Jones of The Dad Network (cos dads have babies too) described the Early Learning Centre’s internet meme as “sexist, insulting and stereotypical”.

“It’s a public display of discriminative stereotyping when (a lot) of dads are doing their best for their children,” he said. “My issue is that it makes implications that dads can’t be arsed and just point their children to their mum. That just isn’t the case anymore, and until things like this are stopped, we’ll continue to have Batman and Robin climbing the houses of parliament. It’s an ongoing uphill battle to promote the importance of the role of fathers within family life when massive corporations make two clicks and spread these kind of things all over the web”.

“We are truly sorry!”

According to the campaign group Fathers 4 Justice (F4J), the Early Learning Centre responded to complaints by removing the post and issuing he following apology:

“We truly are sorry and can assure you that it wasn’t our intention to cause any upset. The post has now been removed.”

F4J Campaign Director Nadine O’Connor said, “We welcome the swift apology by the Early Learning Centre and the removal of the offending post.”

“We hope the real lesson ELC will learn is that fathers are not there to be denigrated, but to be valued in the lives of their children. This should be reflected in future social media posts and advertising by the Early Learning Centre.”

 Dads aren’t just support staff

This isn’t first example of a large brand insulting fathers. Earlier this year Clinton Cards donated £500 to the ManKind charity for male victims of domestic violence to atone for their Director, Tim Fairs, referring to dads as “support staff” in the run up to Fathers’ Day. In another case, Huggies was forced to pull a TV ad that ridiculed dads after receiving a barrage of complaints from mums and dads.

According to a survey by Netmums,nine out of ten parents now think that TV dads do not reflect the contribution that fathers make to family life in the real world. Three out of ten went further and said the way dads are portrayed in the media is a “subtle form of discrimination”.

On a positive note, some brands like Cheerios and McDonald’s have recently been praised for promoting positive images of fatherhood in their tv advertising.

If you spot an advert that’s sexist against men or ridicules fathers (or an advert about dads that deserves to be celebrated) please let us know in the comments section or email insideMANeditor@gmail.com.

—Picture discredit: Early Learning Centre

If you liked this post and want to see more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

—Picture Credit: McDonalds 2014

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

Also on insideMAN:

 

Lack of men in childcare driving gender pay gap says UK fatherhood charity

by 5 Comments

Men and boys are being actively excluded from careers in the UK childcare sector and this discrimination against men is contributing to the “gender pay gap”, according to a leading fatherhood charity.

In a briefing paper to the Government, the Fatherhood Institute argues that “women in the UK are still substantially disadvantaged in relation to men” and that “occupational segregation” is a “substantial driver” of the gender inequalities that women experience.

With the childcare sector still overwhelmingly staffed by women, the pro-feminist, fatherhood think tank argues that professionals providing careers advice should be required to “examine their own prejudices……and promote the interests of boys and men in pursuing childcare and caring work” in order to improve “gender balance” in the sector.

Jobs for the girls 

According to the Fatherhood Institute, childcare is still largely seen as a “job for the girls” and this causes women to “internalise the notion that caring is something women ‘do better’ or, even, that such caring comes ‘more naturally’ to women”.

“When professional childcare is defined as ‘women’s work’, women’s identities as carers-for-children are reinforced in the private sphere, both boys and girls see caring as a role for women,” says the charity’s briefing paper.

“All this has direct impact on women’s earnings and on national productivity, as the majority of mothers pursue the ‘mummy track’ of relatively low-paid part-time work. This, above all, drives the gender pay gap.”

Men are scared of what people think

An estimated 98% of childcare workers in the UK are women and recent research by the London Early Years Foundation revealed that 50% of male childcare workers are worried about what others might think of them. They fear facing peer pressure; negativity from parents about issues like nappy changing and the risk of false allegations of child abuse, says the charity.

On the upside, 98% of female nursery workers want male colleagues and 77% of the public are in favour of men becoming early years workers. Research also suggests that a significant minority of 14-15 year old boys are open to childcare work with one in four saying a career in caring “sounds interesting” and one in eight saying they are interested in working with children.

The government must take action

According to the Fatherhood Institute, the Government needs to take a strategic approach to increasing the number and proportion of men and boys who undertake care work. The actions it recommends include recognising that boys and men are actively and passively discouraged from pursuing careers in childcare; making a positive case for how young children benefit from more men looking after them professionally and campaigning to support both men and boys and women and girls to work in non-traditional sectors.

The charity proposes an “Inspiring Men” campaign to introduce male volunteers into schools to talk about being an involved father; working in non-traditional job roles and balancing work with childcare and caring.

The benefit to women, says the institute, is that getting more men into childcare will help address other areas of gender inequality which it says include: “women’s over-representation in low and unpaid work in both public and the private spheres; inequalities in remuneration for equal work or work of equal value; the gender pay gap more widely; and under-representation of women in senior management, local government, national government and on Boards.”

—Photo credit: Flickr/John Benson

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Eight things that Fight Club taught us about masculinity

by 4 Comments

This week the news leaked out that Chuck Palahniuk is working on a sequel to his 1990s novel Fight Club, which will be published as a series of 10 comic books in May 2015. So if Chuck can break the rule that “you do not talk about Fight Club” then so can we. Here’s our list of eight things that the original Fight Club taught us about masculinity.

  1. Men don’t talk about masculinity

Yes you guessed it….the first rule of Masculinity is: Men do not talk about Masculinity. The second rule of Masculinity is: Men do not talk about Masculinity. Well maybe most men don’t and maybe that’s changing, so let’s break a few rules and talk some more about Masculinity……..

  1. Masculinity still doesn’t cry

As a man, Edward Norton’s insomnia-suffering character has no acceptable outlet for his emotional despair. His doctor advises him to visit a support group to see what real suffering looks like. Norton becomes a support group junkie, addicted to the type of emotional release that is socially permissible for women, but only available to men when they have a serious problems like a terminal illness. This catharsis enables him to sleep again until his cover is blown by Marla (Helena Bonham Carter). Without this emotional release he finds himself trapped, once again, inside a notion of masculinity that denies him true expression and his insomnia returns.

  1. Masculinity thinks like Brad Pitt but feels like Edward Norton

Fight Club’s director, David Fincher said: “We’re designed to be hunters and we’re in a society of shopping. There’s nothing to kill anymore, there’s nothing to fight, nothing to overcome, nothing to explore. In that societal emasculation this everyman is created.” The average modern man may not feel like a hero, but somewhere in the collective psyche we still expect masculinity to show up looking more like Brad than Ed.

  1. Masculinity is a thing that is not defined by things

One of the key turning points in Fight Club is when Edward Norton’s character discovers his home and all his possessions have been blown up. Norton is a fairly typical nineties “new man” whose masculinity is defined by the things which are external to him—his job, clothes, car, home, possessions, sex life (or lack of). Only when he loses those external trappings—and lets go of his attachment to these thing—does he begin to access and experience the unexpressed masculinity that resides within him.

  1. Masculinity is competitive

The film’s eponymous Fight Club is a raw and brutal expression of the innate, masculine drive to fight and win. According to Tom Fordy, who recenty broke the first rule of Fight Club by talking about it at Telegraph Men: “men have natural instincts that are sexual, competitive and aggressive—power instincts that are impossible to tame”. In a review of the film, Eivind Figenschau Skjellum of the website Masculinity Movies said: “for many men, fighting a friend can be an expression of love, a challenge for them to tap deeper into their power. This is something many women will never understand. When we men engage in such fighting, we are not being violent as much as we are challenging each other to be all we can be.”

  1. Masculinity is in crisis

Fight Club has come to symbolize the concept of a “crisis of masculinity ” that has left men emasculated. Norton’s character experiences this emasculation—even his imaginary “power animal” in the film is not a wolf, a lion or a bear, but a penguin! The most overt example of this masculinity crisis is Meatloaf’s bodybuilding character, Bob Paulson, with his man boobs and lack of testicles, he is the film’s embodiment of a man who has literally lost his physical masculinity. According to the cultural historian, Robert von Dassanowsky, “Bob has become the extreme metaphor for middle-class, male-led panic in the postmodern era”.

  1. Masculinity might not be the problem (or the solution)

According to the cultural critics Henry Giroux and Imre Szeman, Fight Club presents the crisis of capitalism as a crisis of masculinity, with Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) representing the “redemption of masculinity repackaged as the promise of violence in the interests of social and political anarchy…..Fight Club’s vision of liberation and politics,” they argue “relies on gendered and sexist hierarchies that flow directly from the consumer culture it claims to be criticizing”.

One of Giroux and Szeman’s key criticisms of Fight Club is that it defends “authoritarian masculinity” and ignores how neoliberal capitalism dominates and exploits society. “Fight Club has nothing substantive to say about the structural violence of unemployment, job insecurity, cuts in public spending, and the destruction of institutions capable of defending social provisions and the public good,” they say.

8. Masculinity is not a special snowflake

Towards the end of the film, Tyler Durden tells his Fight Club army: “You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake”. According to Eivind Figenschau Skjellum of Masculinity Movies:

“The illusion that we are special is a huge problem in modern, narcissistic society, and keeps us men apart from our true potential. For when we are “special”, we live for recognition. Only when we embrace that we are just another human being is the humility in place to make us truly special. Only when we embrace that we are not special are we ready for true masculine power, true masculine spirituality”.

Tyler Durden would probably not approve of such talk of “masculine spirituality” as one of his famous lines in the film is: “self-improvement is masturbation”! And of course all men know that you don’t talk about Fight Club, you don’t talk about masculinity and you certainly don’t talk about “self-improvement”. 

Tell us what you think. Are you a fan of the film Fight Club and what do you think it has to say about masculinity, manhood and men’s experiences of the modern world?

—Photo Credit: Dark Horse Comics Promotional Image

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

Are fatherless men lacking in sex, money and power?

by 1 Comment

Men who grow up fatherless or lack a close relationship with their father face an uphill struggle when it comes to sex, money and power, says the author of a new book.

According to Dave Bruskas, young men are not being encouraged to grow up and make a healthy transition into adulthood and this is having a negative impact on their lives and communities.

“I see the same things over and over,” said Bruskas, “many young men..they’ve missed that affectionate fatherly relationship. A lot of times, where I see shortcomings manifest are in the three big categories of money, sex, and power.”

Bruskas believes that young men are not being trained how to handle money in their teens. “A lot of dads have not prepared their boys to go out in the world where at least in our economy, we have a shrinking number of jobs that will really allow a man to provide for his family.”

Young men don’t know how to pursue women

He is also concerned about the negative impact that pornography is having on young men. “A lot of them don’t know how to appropriately, assertively pursue a woman,” he said.

Finally, Bruskas believes that young men are not embracing their power and independence, two characteristics that he says are the cornerstones of masculinity.

“Because most young men don’t enter the world in a very powerful position, power to them looks like independence. They don’t seem to know how to handle their independence in constructive ways. A lot of young men I meet are entirely independent, they’re aimless and trying to find an identity and trying to find a place”.

Men’s lives damaged

According to Bruskas, having a strong, affectionate father or father figure can provide the structure that helps young men make a healthy transition in adulthood rather than adopting destructive lifestyles that can do “enormous damage” to men’s lives and “wreck and ruin” the communities where they live.

Bruskas made his comments in an interview published by the Christian Post following the publication of his book, Dear Son: A Father’s Advice on Being a Son.

What do you think? Do sex, money and power make a man and does the absence of a good father make it difficult for young men to thrive and be healthy in these areas? 

—Picture Credit: filckr/Nolan  O’Brien

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Also on insideMAN:

New book highlights sexism against men in Scotland

by 2 Comments

A new book from Scotland called On Being A Man aims to confront some of the most difficult issues facing men today. 

A new Scottish book published this month will highlight how 21st century society can be sexist against men. The book—On being A Man: Four Scottish Men Speak Out—includes a conversation with John Carnochan, a policeman who formed Scotland’s Violence Reduction Unit, who  told The Scotsman newspaper that men are the victims of sexism. He said:

“From the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 up to October 2010, 43 Scottish service men lost their lives…In the same period 5,624 men in Scotland committed suicide… where is the war being fought? Where are the men most at risk?

“I think many of us men have recognised that women have a good case, we feel a bit guilty about it all, we recognise the unfairness of things and support their cause. But have we allowed this argument debate to be too one-sided?

Feminism is not about equality 

“I’m not suggesting that we should roll back decades of change towards a more gender-equal society, but there are often unforeseen or unexpected outcomes or consequences to such significant changes and maybe what we are sensing as individuals are these outcomes.

“Feminism is not about equality when women think ‘now it’s our turn to do it to them’. There is the obvious sort of sexism where men are largely absent from jobs in nurseries, teaching and social services. But there is the casual sexism directed at men too, every day.”

Carnochan is one of four men interviewed by Gerry Hassan, a political commentator, who is the book’s editor. According to Hassan:

“Men are everywhere in Scotland, in public life, in sport, on television, making a noise in pubs. But the contradiction is that men mostly remain totally silent about what is happening to them. Women have adapted better than men to the economic and social changes over the past 30 to 40 years. This has also led to a tendency to characterise men as more helpless or lost which is a stereotype which can hurt men.”

Masculinity has a dark side

The book’s publishers, Luath, say that On Being A Man brings together four men to consider the condition of Scottish men, reflect on their own backgrounds and experiences, and confront some of the most difficult issues men face. These include the changing roles of men in Scottish society and the role of work and employment.

According to the publishers’ website:

“What it means to be a man today is very different from forty years ago: in terms of expectations, relationships, how men relate to partners, bring up children and what constitutes a modern family. However, there is a dark side of Scottish masculinity – seen in the drinking and the violent, abusive behaviour of some Scots men and this book addresses this directly, getting into issues many of us often shy away from confronting.”

The other men who have contributed to the book are journalist, writer and broadcaster, David Torrance; founder of a youth employment and mentoring charity, Sandy Campbell and public health researcher, Pete Seaman.

To find out more about the book On Being A Man see the Luath’s website.

—Photo credit: flickr/Erich Ferdinand

Article by Glen Poole author of the book Equality For Men

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Further reading:

 

 

Are you a masculine or feminine father—and which one is best?

by 4 Comments

Here’s an interesting question for fathers to ask themselves — are you a masculine father or a feminine father?

If we asked a typical 1950s dad this question the answer would have be more obvious. In an era when most parents operated on the man-work-women-cook model of family life, mums did feminine mum things and dad did masculine dad things.

In the intervening decades the roles of mums and dads have diversified somewhat and become more blurred — mums can win bread and raise children while dads can share the housework with the paid work.

If you’re a modern dad there’s a good chance that you’ll be doing some combination of what used to be considered men’s work and women’s work. So does that make you masculine dad or feminine dad?

Are you a systemizer or an empathizer?

One to find out is to examine your parenting style. Are you more of a typically male systematic father or a typically female empathetic dad?

The systematic approach is more masculine and at its most positive it is a style of parenting that brings order and structure into a child’s life. The negative side of the masculine approach to fathering is that it can become critical or controlling when order and structure is challenged. Is this tendency to control or criticize your children a trait you recognize in yourself?

The empathetic approach is more feminine and at its best it is nurturing and loving but at its worst it can mean spoiling the child and pandering to its tantrums and bad behaviour. Does this sound a bit like you with your children?

If you’re still not sure if you tend more towards masculine or feminine parenting styles then try observing how your children respond to you. A nurturing, positive feminine parent will tend to have children who are free and spontaneous. By contrast a spoiling feminine parent will have an unruly, immature child.

If you’re a masculine, structuring parent you may find your child is co-operative whereas if you have a masculine approach that tips over into being critical and controlling then you generally find your children respond by being resistant or resentfully compliant.

Are you a bit of both?

As men and women can embody both masculine and feminine qualities, it is possible for a dad to be both structured and nurturing (or critical and spoiling even). In fact, it’s not unusual for modern dads to see themselves in all of these descriptions.

By becoming aware of these masculine qualities, in both their positive and negative manifestations, you can honour the qualities you already have and work on developing the areas where there is room for improvement.

Maybe you bring great systemic thinking and order to your parenting, but struggle to respond to the emotional needs of your children? If so then becoming mindful of developing your empathy and your nurturing side, could be a positive way forward for you.

Maybe your nurturing and empathetic side is already well developed, but you struggle to create order and structure for your children? If so then becoming mindful of developing your masculine, systemic side could help you become an even better dad.

How to be an even better dad

So now you’ve had time to consider your parenting style, would you describe yourself as a masculine dad or a feminine father? Or are you a combination of both?

If you want to develop your masculine side you could try a sport, game or activity with your child that requires you to provide the structure and the rules. If it’s your nurturing, feminine side that needs developing, try a creative activity like role play or crafts where you child can express themselves freely and have periods of leading the activity if they want to.

One simple way to remember the difference between masculine and feminine fathering is to consider the difference between masculine play fighting, where you lay down the rules and make sure they are followed—and feminine play acting where you create the rules together by tuning in and responding to each other’s needs.

Remember, developing a new side of your character can be like exercising a muscle you’ve never used before—it may not be easy at first, it may even hurt a little but the rewards can be magnificent so why not give your children an unexpected treat and let them experience a more masculine or more feminine side of your character today?

—Photo: flickr/the_moment

Saying “that’s so gay” doesn’t make young men homophobic

by 6 Comments

Is it homophobic to say “that’s so gay”? There are instances where it isn’t argues Mark McCormack from Durham University in an article orginally published at The Conversation.

The phrase “that’s so gay” has traditionally been understood as homophobic. Stonewall’s School Report argued this position, and it will be discussed in their upcoming Education Conference.

Stonewall argues that the phrase has a harmful effect on young lesbian, gay and bisexual people’s education and well-being. Yet the initial findings from my interviews with 40 gay youth from four universities suggests a more complex picture, with no clear agreement on what the phrase means or its effects.

Consider Joe, a 19-year-old gay student at an elite university. He said: “I think it breaks down barriers between the straight and gay community… I use it a lot.” Similarly, Neil, gay and aged 18, said: “I don’t find it derogatory in any way, probably because I say it as well.”

How are we to understand a phrase that older people find homophobic, but many younger people do not find offensive and even use themselves? We can only get to an answer by listening to the voices of young people and trying to understand their perspectives.

Context, meaning and understanding

My interest in the phrase “that’s so gay” developed when I researched straight male students at sixth form colleges. These young men had openly gay friends, supported gay rights and condemned homophobia. Yet several of them would also say “that’s so gay” when frustrated. Given that labelling these students homophobic would be ridiculous, it was vital to consider how they were using this language and the reasons why.

All of the men in my research insisted that they did not intend to be homophobic when they used the phrase. For them, gay had two distinct meanings which they were able to distinguish between – when it refers to sexual identity and when it refers, separately, to something being “rubbish”. Importantly, linguistic research supports their claims. Language has evolved and “gay” means something different to younger generations in particular contexts.

I argued that straight men’s use of phrases like “that’s so gay” could only be understood by three key factors: first, the intent with which it was said; second, the social context (homophobic or otherwise); and third, the effect it had. In other words, if there is no evidence of harm, it is difficult to argue that it is damaging.

When it comes to language use, context is all-important. “That’s so gay” can be homophobic if it is said with negative intent or within a homophobic environment. But when it is said in settings where sexual minorities are out, proud and socially included, and heterosexual men are friends with their openly gay peers, it takes on different meanings. In such a context it is not homophobic.

This argument was supported by the narratives of many of the 40 young gay people in a study I am undertaking with colleagues at Durham University. Most participants have argued that the context of the phrase determined their opinions of it: it was the manner in which it was said, along with their relationship to the speaker, which influenced how they heard the phrase.

‘I don’t like it, but I also say it’

In the debates about “that’s so gay”, it is important to recognise that gay youths also use the phrase. This was a recurring theme in the interviews, with Fred stating: “I say it all the time, it’s how you say you’re pissed off.” Others had more doubt, with Lee commenting: “I don’t like it, but I also say it.”

Only a minority of participants – less than a third – thought that the phrase was homophobic, and even fewer said that they never used it. Most of the young gay people in my study felt “that’s so gay” would only be homophobic if it was directed at a gay person, and with negative intent.

So there is no easy answer to whether “that’s so gay” is homophobic. It depends on the age of the people saying and hearing it, the intent with which it is said, and the context in which it is said. The meanings and effects of the phrase will also be different if it is aimed at a person or used as a more general expression of frustration.

There is also a clear generational difference, with younger people having markedly different understandings to older people.

Bigger battles

Homophobic hate crimes are classified as such if the victim believes it to be so. It follows that the opposite should also be true. If young gay people are saying that they do not experience the phrase “that’s so gay” as homophobic – and if they are even using the phrase themselves – then perhaps we should accept their arguments and concentrate on other battles.

It is vital that we combat homophobia in schools, and promote equality of sexuality. Stonewall has many resources that are helpful in combatting the privileging of heterosexuality. Straight people and sexual minorities must work together to achieve equality of sexuality.

But focusing on the phrase “that’s so gay” is not the way to achieve that goal. If we spent more time fighting for a holistic sex education in schools, and less time policing the meaning of contested words, our schools would be more inclusive spaces for all students.

Mark McCormack does not work for, consult to, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has no relevant affiliations. He is co-director of the Centre for Sex, Gender and Sexualities at Durham University, a member of the editorial board of the Journal for LGBT Youth and has worked with EACH (Education Actino Challenging Homophobia) co-writing guidelines on homophobic bullying for an English local authority.  

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Tell us what you think? Do you agree with Mark or do you think his line of reasoning is “a bit gay”? 

If you liked this article and want to read more, follow us on Twitter @insideMANmag and Facebook

Further reading:

—Photo credit: flickr/homoerectus