"'men are expected to produce' more than they consume. "

A reader sent me an interesting New York Times article on single men becoming disenchanted with homeownership. I can understand that, homes are a pain and seem to be a never ending source of expense. As I read the article, this comment by psychologist Roy Baumeister got me pondering on what kind of deal men are getting these days:

Men have no monopoly on domestic discontent. There are also women who wish they had signed their mortgage with disappearing ink. But for men, rejecting homeownership may involve broader questions of manhood, said Dr. Roy Baumeister, a psychology professor at Florida State University.

“There are a lot of extra stresses that men have,” he said, a claim he advances in a book to be published in the summer, “Is There Anything Good About Men?” (Short answer: probably.)

In almost every culture, Dr. Baumeister said, “men are expected to produce” more than they consume. In a similar fashion, men naturally compete for status. Buying a home, he said, is often tied up with those pressures.

Maybe like giving up on home ownership, it's time for men to give up on being the producers in society and let others fend for themselves. It seems that's what many of the younger guys in the next generation are doing. What do you think, should men continue to produce for a society that devalues them and their work? Or, should they produce for themselves and let others pick up the slack?

BBC show on psychological violence ban

I will be on the BBC radio (along with other guests) show "Have your say" today between 1:30 and 2:30 eastern time talking about the new law in France banning psychological violence. There will be people from around the world calling in to discuss this topic. If you want to listen live, you can go to the BBC website and click on "Listen live" on your far right to hear the show.

Update: Well, I only got a few minutes in but learned a lot. I made the point that if this law was enforced fairly, a lot of women would end up in jail. A french lawyer came on to talk about how the law is written so that men would be included-- that is, a man could also bring charges against his wife if she was emotionally abusive. I pointed out that this sounded good legally but wondered if it would work out this way in practice. How many women would really end up in jail? A man from Kenya heard what I said about men and stated that since women were more expressive, they might end up being the ones charged. It was really interesting to hear perspectives from around the world.

Go directly to jail: Women are the worst perpetrators of verbal violence against men

"In the sea of conflict, men sink and women swim"--Researcher John Gottman

Many of you have been emailing me about France's new law banning "psychological violence" against one's spouse (wife is more like it, I'm sure). Apparently, jail time might even be involved for perpetrators who dare to mock their spouse (wife). Fausta emailed me a post she had written on the topic and asked if I thought women were more likely to be the perpetrators of insults against their husbands. My answer, "absolutely."

The research bears this out. In psychologist Richard Driscoll's book Opposites as Equals, there is a section called "Women are more confrontive." Driscoll discusses the work of John Gottman who observed that women are freer and more open in expressing their anger than are men:

While we might expect men to be more forceful than women in marital arguments, the research shows just the opposite, surprising our expectations.

Women tend to be more insistent, according to various researchers including John Gottman [i] at the University of Washington. Women argue more forcefully in almost twice as many marriages as men.

In the most lopsided arguments where only one argues and the other remains silent, by a ratio of 6 to 1, it is the woman who continues to argue and the man who remains silent. ....

Men are typically more stressed and confused in arguments with women and remain bitter for longer afterward, while women are more comfortable amid verbal jousts, recover from them more quickly, in our ready for another round. Generally, it is fair to say that men are more intimidated in confrontations with women than the other way around.

So, if men are more stressed and confused by arguments, meaning that they suffer more psychological harm than women, it seems fair to say that women are the ones who should suffer because of this law.

I should note that I do not believe the government has any right to interfere this way in people's marriages. However, given that these statist laws seem to abound, it seems only fair that women should be held accountable. And lest you think this an impossibility, remember that more and more women are being arrested for assaults, one reason being that due to feminism, women are no longer getting away with their crimes as often.

"The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women"

A number of you have written (and commented) to tell me about an excellent post called "The Misandry Bubble" by the Futurist blog which you can find here. The post is long but has a very good take on why American society is on the decline:

Why does it seem that American society is in decline, that fairness and decorum are receding, that that socialism and tyranny are becoming malignant despite the majority of the public being averse to such philosophies, yet the true root cause seems elusive? What if everything from unsustainable health care and social security costs, to stagnant home prices and wage stagnation, to crumbling infrastructure and metastasizing socialism, to the utter decimation of major US cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, could all be traced to a common origin that is extremely pervasive yet is all but absent from the national dialog, indeed from the dialog of the entire Western world? ....

Executive Summary : The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women, where the state forcibly transfers resources from men to women creating various perverse incentives for otherwise good women to conduct great evil against men and children, and where male nature is vilified but female nature is celebrated. This is unfair to both genders, and is a recipe for a rapid civilizational decline and displacement, the costs of which will ultimately be borne by a subsequent generation of innocent women, rather than men, as soon as 2020.

I just read the whole thing. I suggest you do too. There are many gems of wisdom in this essay.

The Little Black Book of Violence

I spent part of New Year's Eve reading a book Glenn ordered (after seeing it on Jules Crittenden's blog) entitled The Little Black Book of Violence: What Every Young Man Needs to Know About Fighting. With a title like that, how could I stay away?

The first thing that struck me about the book is that it states it is focused on young men as men commit about 80% of violent crime and are the recipients of violent crime at twice the rate of women. Funny then, that the authors give an example a few pages later of a male friend of theirs whose sister snuck up behind him while he was doing the dishes and tried to kill him with a steak knife. "One moment he was leaning over the dishwasher and the next there was a wedge of razor-sharp steel whistling toward his lower back. Why? She simply wanted to know what it would be like to murder someone..." Uh, okay.

Do authors ever read what they are writing when they are trying to make points? If you are going to talk about how men are the ones who are violent and this is why they need your book, stick with the program. But okay, enough with my pet peeves. This is a book for guys, hence the title, and it is actually pretty good.

It begins with a section entitled, "Before Violence Occurs" that shares a good first rule of self defense: "Don't get hit." The authors talk about how to avoid situations or locations where violence is more likely to occur. These places include traveling through the wrong neighborhoods, hanging out with the wrong people, or frequenting the wrong night spots, and/or acting inappropriately in these places. The authors--two experienced martial artists--point out that there is almost always a build-up to violence, one that many people are not aware of. They teach you to have situational awareness without being paranoid or mentally exhausting yourself. They discuss simple tips like when it's time to leave a party before violence escalates. It's good advice, especially for young men who often have to learn how to deal with aggression, even if they don't want to.

The next section gives advice on what to do during a violent encounter. This chapter is full of information on how to deal with drunks. Their advice? "Never argue with a drunk....They can be unpredictable, violent, and very difficult to corral....Hitting a drunk really doesn't work all that well most of the time....A better strategy is to either dodge his blows in order to let him overbalance himself and facilitate your escape or spin him to cause disorientation and make him fall. Once he's down,you can control him or move to safety."

In the same section, they state, "Never hit a girl...Unless she's armed." They smartly state that, "In today's world, distinctions of gender are made by friends, family, police, and courts. The role of combatant is, oftentimes, secondary." They give advice on how to deal with women, though I would have liked to see more. They do say that if "she is armed with some sort of weapon, all bets are off."

Finally, the last section is on the "Aftermath of Violence" where there is good info on how to perform first aid, handle blows to your self-esteem, deal with psychological trauma, and deal with the police without getting yourself hurt or shot. They even give advice on how to avoid a domestic violence charge and suggest that you conduct a background check on your prospective partner to protect yourself before she moves in. They at least suggest you listen to any warning bells you have and take them seriously. It seems to me that if you feel the need to hire a private investigator as they suggest or conduct a background check on your partner, you already have the answer you need about the relationship.

Anyway, the book is a good one to give to a young man (or read yourself) to fine tune his knowledge of what to do before, during and after a violent encounter. I will definitely keep it on my bookshelf.