#3 Men...the agents of and the path to cultural metanoia
So….after looking at the history of “male” design,
framing and authorship of many of the “west’s” cultural underpinnings, let’s
turn our eyes to the concept of “fixing” as one of the predictable, necessary
and yet potentially entrapping modalities, and even identifying traits of masculinity.
Work, of whatever kind, dimension, application, or
venue has been at the forefront of the known civilization from the beginning.
How else would people protect themselves from the elements, feed themselves
from the adjacent flora and fauna, fend off enemy attacks, fend off sickness
and even death and feed the thrust of their curiosity if not by rubbing sticks
together, for example, to make fire. Both men and women have persistently been
engaged in acts both to create and to repair.
To fix, to repair, to mend, to solder, to re-connect,
to plug, to replace, to remove, to accuse, to defend, to edit, to exhort, to
demand, to motivate, to energize, to placate, to serve….all “action” verbs
invoked whenever a “need” is identified, perceived, diagnosed and exposed. Similar
and parallel framing pertains to the words/acts “to built,” “to design,” “to
create,” “to construct”….in most instances again to fix a larger gap in human
aspiration.
And the premise for all “fixings” is that something/someone
is wrong, broken, leaking, sinister, evil, life-threatening, inappropriate,
loose, removed, offended…There is also the underlying perception and belief
that by “fixing” the “fixer” will be considered “heroic” no matter how loud and
large will be the championing chorus. All acts of fixing follow some kind of “problem”
and preclude the notion of “prevention” of the problem.
Fixing/building acts are visible, audible, discernible
immediately to both the fixer and the one for whom the problem is “righted”. There
is almost no time lapse between the “fix” and the affirmation of the act, so there
is no need for delayed gratification, reward or recognition. The “problem” is
also visible, discernible to the senses, and usually requires and elicits
corroborating witness testimony, agreement, and perhaps even consent. Skills
too, many of a highly sophisticated, complex and dependent on laws of such
profound and complex matters as human anatomy, physics, chemistry, mathematics,
biology, and even the issues of ethics and morality in the provision of the
solutions. Schools, colleges, universities and raw life experience too
participate in the dissemination, training and development of proficiency in
the performance of the skills needed for the “fix.”
Immediate gratification, even relatively after large
numbers of workers take a protracted time to finish, follows “hands-on”
interventions based on clearly understood templates and hours of supervised
rehearsal of the skills needed. A sense of personal satisfaction of “fixing”
something/one in need underpins the efficacy, ethics, psychology and the human
relationship of the “fix”. This cultural attention to the details of the
extrinsic world, the world of the senses, the world of things, the world of rewards
and failures in a social context is a prominent feature of western culture. And
both men and women participate in its challenges and rewards.
Whether or not these acts constitute the whole of one’s
existence, however, seems to illustrate
a difference between the perceptions, attitudes and the relationships of men
and women. It says here that men,
traditionally and stereotypically find comfort and engagement in their garages,
the workshops, their labs, with their respective and usually mastered tools,
instruments, devices and the skillful deployment of those devices. It is even
reasonable to assert that men have led the process to design, build, manufacture,
distribute and then sell whatever they make, as an effort to solve a problem. Less
thought and consideration, too often, about the perceptions, needs, attitudes and
tendencies of women have undergirded the processes from beginning to end. Along
the way, of course (at least to our contemporary sensibilities) have been built
in specific, measureable and even required production quotas, and the
concomitant rewards.
A vast complicated and deeply rooted system of building,
trading, deploying various tools, including the tools of war, pillage and
ambitious expansion of domain. And, it says here, this system has directly
mimicked and rewarded the masculine traits who generated it. Would there have
been fewer and less lethal instruments of war, had women been in charge of the defense
of the community? One can only guess, without absolute certainty.
Would there have been more artists, poets, musicians
and care givers had women been designing their various communities? Again, one
can only guess.
Would the needs, perceptions, dimensions and comfort
of women have been more integral to the design and build and
manufacture/distribution of things had women been at the centre of these
processes? Undoubtedly. There seems to be a gushing cataract of forces determined
to right this oversight today.
Nevertheless, it is still relevant to note that the
cultural guideposts of and for men, to act instantly and often impulsively and
also competitively, to fix, to design, to construct in both the literal
physical and the more abstract notions of how to govern, how to protect, how to
frame need and response were, are and will continue to be “immediate,” “tough,”
“punitive,” “judgemental” and “vindictive” as compared with what research and common
knowledge now knows and accepts would be more premised on a much more useful,
effective and humane remediative, investigative, and restrained response to
human offense. The pattern deployed in the making of tools transferred to the
matter of making rules, enforcing them, and prosecuting the offenders, for
example, has been reduced to the simplistic and short-sighted “removal” of the
offender, as if safety and security were as easily and readily attained through
muscular, testosterone-induced attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of the men in
charge of the civil culture.
Even the “fix” of the soul, as envisioned by many
church fathers, revolved around a conversion from a natural state of “evil”
(All have sinned and come short of the glory of God!... and all are invited to
accept the forgiveness offered by the sacrifice of the Cross and Crucifixion) Matters
of the life and death of the human soul to be compacted into such a crucible of
the masculine mind, conviction and attitude of “amending a fundamental and innate
evil (or lack, or absence or failure)….all in the name of the propagation of
the faith, to the thousands of innocents from whom ever scripture was withheld
until the arrival of the printing press.
A mechanistic Manicheanism, so readily and easily grasped
and implemented, as the basis of a much more complex, nuanced and life-giving,
fulfilling theology and relationship with God renders itself impotent,
oxymoronic and self-defeating. And yet, an ecclesial and civil culture that,
feeling required and expected to comply, dominated by the masculine tenets and beliefs,
perceptions and attitudes, also grounded on a kind of fear, insecurity and
impatience so endemic to the mind and spirit of masculinity fell into line.
A male deity, with exclusively male disciples, based
on oral traditions transcribed by fallible and incomplete men, and then subjected
to a meat-grinder of literalism, consistent with the literal Manicheanism of
the mechanic, the plumber, the surgeon
and the contemporary marketer/advertiser is and has been for centuries at the
core of what can legitimately be considered the self-sabotaging faith tenets
and dogma on which the west has been impaled for centuries. The literalism, and
the impatience, and the dependence on the senses and the cognition based on the
empirical universe needing to be fixed were and are essential to provide men
with the requisite opportunities for self-satisfaction and gratification, ( as
opposed to the much more ambiguous, amorphous, complex, ephemeral, and imaginative
soul).
And, preferring to avoid the trap of the binary choice
of empiricism v. soul/spirit, it is incumbent upon the male gender to come face
to face with our (men) shared
participation and complicity, (certainly not to be regarded as conspiratorial, contrived and deliberately
malicious as so many women today prefer to believe!) in the design, construction
and perpetration of a cultural edifice indebted primarily to the male psyche,
at the expense of the female psyche, spirit and needs.
Competition, the pursuit of power, and the rewards of
winning as compared with the shame of losing, (also of being weak, of failing, of
being small, of being effeminate, of being indiscreet, even of being “too
intense,” of being artistic, certainly of being LGBTQ) taken together comprise
the fossil fuel burning in the furnaces of our male hearts, resulting, not surprisingly
in the rampage against those very pumps, as well as the ethos of a culture
suffocating under the elephant hoofs of capitalism, competition, transaction,
zero-sum games, and the shaming of those who push back against this religious
and holy creed. The wave of civil rights cases, both inside the courts and on
the front pages (e.g. the cases of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and
Girls and the murdered black youth shot by law enforcement agents) threatens
the very core of the masculine “power base” encapsulated in the “cult” currently
genuflecting at the altar of the United States president.
Built on a papier-mache edifice of immediate, manual,
simplistic fixes (of all materials, rules, conventions, beliefs, metaphysics,
institutions, establishments, practices and processes of the abuse of power,
the distribution of wealth, the dissemination of lethal gases, the spread of
anti-bacterial-resistant viruses) this cultural monstrosity is quickly sliding
into the ocean of its own designers, builders, creators, disseminators, and
propagators. And the history of abused masculinity, from our own denial, avoidance,
and attempted and failed faux-infallibility is the cancer threatening to engulf
us all.
Note how men, traditionally, stereotypically, and predictably,
refuse to acknowledge their own “illness,” “pain,” “discomfort,” and “blocked
arteries”…appearing in their doctors’ offices only after the situation/condition
has become “emergent”. Similarly, and tragically in a parallel universe, many
men, especially men holding the power of wealth, law, even medicine, and
certainly theology view the “body” of the earth perceive the current climate
crisis as less than emergent. Some heroic and self-deluded leaders believe it
is still feasible and necessary to combine the continued production of fossil
fuels with the preservation of the planet.
Indeed, it is the model of the male hero, that well-armoured,
traditionally highly espoused, intellectually incurious, power-driven-and-starved,
whose voracious appetite for enhancing his own power, and based on a veneer of “success,”
“achievements,” “corner offices,” “BMW’s,” and the hollow spectre of a
crumbling future of their own making, that has to be sacrificed on the altar of
the survival of the planet.
And the flood of depression, denial, avoidance and
repression, not to mention the reversion to pain-killing medications will only
grow exponentially as the realization of the vacuity of the dream dawns on the
psyches of the millions of men, and their families who depend on their “status-and-power-dream”
for their own sense of worth and esteem. The women whose dreams have been “siamesed”
to their male partners, too, will endure much heartache and loss as the bloom
comes off the rose.
One question that surfaces from this scenario is whether
or not the “safety-net” of support and recovery will be available and strong
enough for the task.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home