clue-by-four » Blog Archive » Men’s Monday: where DO nice guys finish?

»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«

Men’s Monday: where DO nice guys finish?

October 6th, 2008 by Paul Daniel Ash

It’s not as easy to be a guy as it once was. I mean, I hear that enough that I can only assume that it’s true. I’ve only known this way. Men are expected to be strong, but not psychotic assholes. You should be in touch with your feelings, but be able to suck it up and move on.

This all came up for me as i was reading a recent Salon Books review of a new study about 16-26 year old men called Guyland: The Perilous World Where Boys Become Men. Written by Manhood in America author Michael Kimmel, the book (which could be its whole own Men’s Monday post) takes a look at some of the grotesquely distorted “values” of young men coming up today. The author looks at the rise in bullying, porn addiction, binge drinking, gay-bashing, date rape, etc. – and points to the need for a strong, positive charismatic role model in young guys’ lives.

All good stuff, but what got me was not the article itself but the reaction to it in the letters thread. The whining – about how it’s all women’s fault, because they like bad boys and the nice guys never get laid – was so irritating that I had to write a reply (which won Editor’s Choice yeah me!).

There’s no question that women (and men) prefer guys who are confident. As a skinny guy, I learned early that if you don’t project confidence, other guys would walk all over you. And since I was never a good fighter, I had to do it with bluster and humor.

The study referred to a sense of “thwarted entitlement” among today’s misogynistic young men. And in that letters thread, I saw it all over the place – saying “aggressive behavior is rewarded by women” and that “sensitive guys never get any female attention.” But it just seemed like basically whining to me, from guys who either tried to be tough once and got their ass kicked, or tried to be sensitive once and it went down wrong.

Am I kidding myself? Is the charismatic factor confidence itself – even if sometimes expressed as aggression, danger, unpredictability?

Or do chicks really dig psychos?

3 Responses

michelle of bleeding espresso writes:

October 6th, 2008 at 11:37 am

When you consider how many of today’s 20, 30, and 40-something women grew up in abusive or otherwise, let’s say, non-model, homes, it’s not surprising that at least some of them would be drawn to that. The Cycle of Violence is very real.

But I agree with you that it’s up to men to develop confidence and express it without threat/danger/violence–and the best place to learn that is at home, so dads have an extra special role in this process, both with sons in teaching them how to behave and with daughters in showing them how they should be treated by men.

Now can dads do and teach what they, themselves may not have been taught growing up? Many do, thank goodness, which is why I think there probably *are* more “nice” guys today than 20 years ago. At least I hope so.

Paul Daniel Ash writes:

October 6th, 2008 at 11:48 am

yeeaahh… the book, though, seems to sort of point towards the OPPOSITE conclusion. And, for whatever it’s worth, my own non-scientific, anecdotal, take-it-with-a-grain-of-salt experience kind of leads me to believe there’s a higher prevalence of douchebaggery among this age cohort. J’s baby-daddy, for instance: irresponsible, Peter Pan, could give a shit about his kid (I’m a bit biased there).

Hadn’t thought about the cycle of violence aspect. I’m sure that’s very real.

michelle of bleeding espresso writes:

October 6th, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Well there’s certainly a lot of irresponsibility in every generation–unfortunately men have been leaving their families forever. I know quite a few good, nice, responsible guys, so maybe I and most my friends are just lucky (one friend wasn’t so lucky and married (and then divorced) a major DB).