Ancient Tabs
These have been hanging around for a while.
Over the last several weeks I have been either very busy, on a lovely vacation to New England, or now recovering from my souvenir from that trip, COVID-19 (I’m on the mend). As such, I am just now catching up on some old open tabs:
- Via the NYT: The Beekeepers Who Don’t Want You to Buy More Bees. “There are now more honey bees on the planet than there have ever been in human history.”
- The headline is perhaps a bit over the top, but the piece is worth a read (via Salon): Lauren Boebert’s sexy adventure: Blame conservatives’ push for “traditional marriage”.
- This one is over a month old, but worth it. Via WaPo: Freedom is beer!
- This just isn’t normal and shouldn’t just be one more crazy thing Trump said (via The Atlantic): Trump Floats the Idea of Executing Joint Chiefs Chairman Milley.
- Via Pew Research: Majority of Americans continue to favor moving away from Electoral College‘.
- Via The Atlantic: The Young Conservatives Trying to Make Eugenics Respectable Again. I commend the piece in full, but will also quote the following.
There is no great mystery as to why eugenics has exerted such a magnetic attraction on the wealthy. From god emperors, through the divine right of kings, to social Darwinism, the rich have always sought an uncontestable explanation for why they have so much more money and power than everyone else. In a modern, relatively secular nation whose inequalities of race and class have been shaped by slavery and its legacies, the justifications tend toward the pseudoscience of an unalterable genetic aristocracy with white people at the top and Black people at the bottom.
Oh snap, doc! From beyond the blue line, he shoots, he scores!
@Flat Earth Luddite:
See also the English Tory conviction that the inherited standing of the upper middle class, and the natural grateful subordination of the working class, is ordained by nature, history, and a benevolent Anglican God.
The landscaper for my townhouse area was really fond of some medium-sized bush that is covered with little blue flowers most of the summer. Also covered in honey bees, who apparently love the flowers. I don’t know where they live, I haven’t seen any hives anywhere within a couple of miles. But these bees, at least, are thriving.
Great article on the overpopulation status of Honey Bees. Years back I read a book about how integral pollinators are to the health of the planet, and it is easy for the public to forget that honeybees are just one of thousands of pollinators that need to thrive in nature to help us continue to grow food, trees, and flowers.
The thing is, I get it….for the most part honeybees do not frighten folks and with very little effort a sting can be avoided even if they are tons on honeybees working on your garden vegetable or flowers, so folks will rally behind the honeybee, and I am one of those folks who is frightened by what can be some very scary looking bumblebees (such as the classic black bumblebee, so big that you can pretty much see a wicked looking stinger without having to get up close and personal with the bumblebee).
And then there are some wicked looking wasps, pollinators, but the type of insect where many folks let out a whelp if they stumble into the orbit of such an insect (including the black bumblebee) and if possible jump away from the insect. I am a live and let live guy most of the time, but if I cannot easily put a spider under a glass with a piece of paper to hold it in so I can take it outside, then the critter needs to die.
I have no problem with renewed efforts to educate people like myself, so other pollinators are not squeezed out from territory that has been overtaken by honeybees, and am sympathetic that it will be an arduous uphill hike to make progress in creating some love for less glamourous looking insects that are dutifully pollinating our plants, flowers, and trees all year round (quite the thankless task these insects have taken-on).
That piece on Boebert is probably the best I’ve read. Also, I recall reading Amanda Marcotte years ago and being unimpressed. This is better. It has actual insight, rather than simple dogma.
That whole Boebert story amuses me in the sense that it could be the tale of one of my sister’s high school pals. I could totally believe that.
I have long felt that if 70% of the voting population want something to happen, it happens. Eliminating the Electoral College is, in fact, close to that range, at 65%. Interesting.
@Jay L Gischer:
Let me preface by saying: I’m not interested in Boebert. At all.
I am interested in boys, men, and masculinity (insert hopefully unnecessary clarification here). To me, Marcotte spent too much time impugning the motives of others. And not enough time grappling with important issues. And data.
The first paragraph sets the tone, and Marcotte carries this theme throughout:
Andrew Tate et al. do, in fact, do this. Most people writing about and grappling with this issue are nothing like Andrew Tate. One may disagree with them, their conclusions, etc. Please do. I do. I just get weary of the straw(wo)manning of their positions.
Marcotte links to a lot of articles. Read those links. And judge for yourself how fairly she represents them.
For example, Marcotte writes:
There’s lots to agree/disagree with in Emba’s article. It is lengthy and covers a lot of territory. Here it is, read it for yourself. Then ask yourself how well Marcotte distilled it.
I also get weary of stuff like this:
Toxic masculinity is a thing. And it’s a problem that we ought address. But to handwave away real problems, supported by real data, is just so very tiresome. The “real cause”…explaining all the problems facing boys/men today…is this one thing? Ugh.
@Mimai: First of all, thanks. For your thoughts, for the link. I’m gonna go read it when I get a moment.
Second, I said that it was probably the best Marcotte I’ve read, and I stand by that. But it was kind of a low bar. She has been, historically, pretty strong on polemic and dogma, and not so good on people. This is better.
I am curious about something. What are the behaviors and attitudes that we group together under the heading “Toxic Masculinity”. Can we identify them specifically? I think a lot of it is authoritarian, but I’d like to know what other people think. What do you think?
@Jay L Gischer:
Would that it were so. Somewhere between 80-90% of the public polls was wanting universal background checks on all gun purchases. And yet…
@Jay L Gischer:
To clarify, my comments weren’t directed at you specifically. AND (heh) they kinda were, as I find you to be one of the most consistently thoughtful and fair commenters around here.
You ask an essential question:
Indeed, this is one of the problems with many (most?) discussions of this. What exactly are we talking about?
Unfortunately, the academic literature is short on answers. I forgot the exact statistic, but it’s something like half of scholarly articles on “toxic masculinity” fail to operationalize it.
Rather, it seems to me that the term is primarily functional in its use, serving to express displeasure and signal group allegiances.
Note, I’m not saying that such uses are wrong or bad. They just don’t really get us anywhere in terms of social progress. Assuming that is one’s goal.
Relatedly, it’s interesting to consider how the term has been applied over time. Specifically, to whom it has been applied. And by whom. Eg, “gangstas” vs. “alt-righters”
But to return to your question, violence and aggression come immediately to mind. Which seem related to an authoritarian temperament* and will to dominance. Also, homophobia (mostly against males), transphobia, misogyny, and related.
*This is a topic of debate in the (there is no one field). Is toxic masculinity an essence, something one does, intra- vs. inter- personal, a culture, etc?
@Mimai:
Uh… yeah, I guess.
Certainly, the reality that (some) women are no longer dependent on marriage has changed the equation (to some degree that may not actually be measurable). Salaries that (some cohorts of) men earn compared to the fixed costs of marriage and family have contributed to the dependency gap. Changing attitudes about the virtues of raising children have played a role. The ease of dissolving marriages (and in some cases, families by extension) has played a role, too. Lots of stuff plays roles in lots of social phenomena. To single one out as the carrier of “the blame” seems extravagant to me.
Ugh, indeed!
@Just nutha ignint cracker: And yet, the question that I was most often asked while I was teaching in Korea was
We’re always looking for definition, for certainty, for the one best practice. I think it evolves out of teaching students higher math with the same mindset we teach arithmetic–equations are usually either right or wrong (at least as far as I progressed).
Ayup, that’s definitely the answer. 😉
@Mimai:
Thanks. It seems very pertinent to mention that this is one of the planks of my own masculinity. In the piece you linked, “emotional stability” is offered as a component. I value it highly, though it doesn’t come naturally to me. I’ve had to work at it a lot. I also value knowing things, and understanding things better. Is that masculine? I kinda doubt that it has gender.
I read that piece, it is really good. She hits many, if not all, of the points that have been in my head, looking for a way to be expressed. (I consider it a positive development that Marcotte, who I have traditionally seen as fronting slogans and ideology rather than thoughtfulness would even link to it.)
As a martial arts instructor, I have engaged with a lot of teens and young men. We have a way to make them feel like they are adults. We award them belts, which are a rite of passage to adulthood. The funny thing is, we don’t teach the women/girls anything different. The most senior person in the dojo is a woman. She’s a badass, for sure, and puts it all in context.
So I think the most important step for someone to heal their masculinity, or their femininity, or their whatever, is that whenever the gender police come around and say, “that’s not manly, or womanly, or whatever” is to tell them to fuck off. I have literally said this, “Fuck you, I am a man”. Weirdly enough, in a man, this reads as manly.
I can also say that when a woman stands up straight, looks me in the eye and tells me what’s on her mind, I don’t find that less appealing. (For the record, I’m pretty sure I’m hetero, and I have 40 years of data that backs that up.) It can be disappointing, of course. That’s life for ya.
Anyway, thanks for that link.
@Jay L Gischer:
I too thought the Emba piece (“that piece”) rich and nuanced. Which isn’t to say that I agree with all of it. I guess I have a different take on Marcotte linking to it. Here is what Marcotte wrote:
She did link to Emba’s article, yes. And that might be a positive IF folks went on to click and read the link (which is long and behind a paywall). I’m skeptical that many did.
Rather, I suspect the median reader of Marcotte’s article took Marcotte at her word, dismissed Emba as another one of the typical woman-blaming commenters in this space, and walked away “knowing” that most (all) discussions of the challenges facing boys/men/masculinity are garbage…meant to absolve boys/men and blame girls/women.
Because, as all “we” all know, there aren’t any “real” problems facing boys/men. And to the extent that there are, “we” all know that there is one and only one “real” explanation.
It’s striking to me the competing messages that are sent to boys/men: “embrace and express your feelings” AND “fuck your feelings!”
Anyway, shaking that off, I respect what you’re doing. Here and offline. I see it. And you. (to the extent that I can in this arena)
I especially appreciate your nod to rituals (awarding of belts), though you didn’t use that term. We have lost many of such rituals in our current era. And this contributes to the problems facing boys/men. Especially so.
@Mimai: You have put your finger on a core problem with the rhetoric of people like Marcotte. They both are unhappy with male stoicism, and angry when men do speak up about their feelings. (I have, by the way, seen this double bind show up on the editorial pages of the NY Times, which I mostly don’t read, but it’s hard to avoid it.) Which is why I mostly ignore her. She isn’t useful to me in any concrete way.