It's Dangerous to Be a Boy NYT article

[Toni]

As an offshoot from another thread, I thought I'd post a link to this article about how immersed boys are in violence from childhood forward. This article appeared in the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/opinion/sunday/boys-men-violence.html

Boyhood immerses boys in violence and the bullying that leads to it. High school boys are more likely than girls to have been in a physical fight in the past year and male children are more likely to have been victims of violence. Three types of male violence — violence against women, violence against other men and violence against themselves — are deeply interwoven.

Violence springs from what boys learn about what it means to be a man. One researcher observed a small group of preschool boys and noticed how, over two years, they adapted to cultural cues. The ways they dressed, played and related to one another and to their parents changed significantly. They even formed a “Mean Team” to harass girls in their classroom. Another researcher interviewed elementary-school boys and captured their brutally frank stories of punishing other boys who failed to conform.

Boys take their experiences to heart, feeling weak and ashamed when they need comfort. Plan International USA, a nonprofit group focused on children’s rights, commissioned a study among 10- to 19-year-olds that found nearly three-quarters of boys said they felt pressure to be physically strong and nearly half of the 14- to 19 year-old male respondents felt pressure to be “willing to punch someone if provoked.”

As a note: When I googled 'why are men violent' what I got was about 3 pages of article titles, almost all of which were about men perpetrating violence against women. Data tells us that men are much more likely to be victims of violence and that violence is much more likely to be at the hands of other men.

Most often on this forum, we discuss violence, particularly rape, of men against women. It's rare that we talk about violence against men, except as an aside.

I'm posting this to hopefully start some conversations about what it is that makes boys and men more violent and how we can stop the damage that violence does to men and boys.

 

[Trausti]

Aren’t most male primates more violent than females? Nature is your cause.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Up until a few generations ago, wasn't it a distinct advantage for males to be more violent than those around them? In many cases today, is that not still a distinct advantage?

 

[Gun Nut]

In the modern world, only cultural norms reward or punish behavior... not nature. Nature loaded the gun, society pulls the trigger.

 

[Trausti]

In the modern world, only cultural norms reward or punish behavior... not nature. Nature loaded the gun, society pulls the trigger.

Ah, the blank slate.

 

[Toni]

Is aggression the same thing as violence?

Is dominance the same thing as violence?

Is dominance achieved only through violence?

 

[Trausti]

Is aggression the same thing as violence?

Is dominance the same thing as violence?

Is dominance achieved only through violence?

Maybe yes. Maybe no. But it’s how nature made us.

 

[abaddon]

Is aggression the same thing as violence?

Is dominance the same thing as violence?

Is dominance achieved only through violence?

Among adolescent males, the answer is usually YES. Violence or the threat of violence is aggression. Dominance is the goal to be achieved.

Females use shame and 'reputation management' to compete and establish their cliques and hierarchies. Males use violence or, more usually, the threat of violence to negotiate the same. The need to establish you're not the monkey at the bottom of the troop's hierarchy is intense. You negotiated a place among your peers or you fell down the hierarchy and became a target.

Yeah it's how nature made us. But it can and should be modified by culture.

 

[Toni]

Is aggression the same thing as violence?

Is dominance the same thing as violence?

Is dominance achieved only through violence?

Maybe yes. Maybe no. But it’s how nature made us.

Do you think culture/society and societal/cultural norms play any role? Is this hopeless or can society do better by men and boys?

 

[Gun Nut]

In the modern world, only cultural norms reward or punish behavior... not nature. Nature loaded the gun, society pulls the trigger.

Ah, the blank slate.

'splain.

Nothing "blank" about being pre-programmed / predisposed by nature, and then fine-tuned / activated by the environment / society.

 

[Lion IRC]

As an offshoot from another thread, I thought I'd post a link to this article about how immersed boys are in violence from childhood forward. This article appeared in the NYT:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/opinion/sunday/boys-men-violence.html

Boyhood immerses boys in violence and the bullying that leads to it. High school boys are more likely than girls to have been in a physical fight in the past year and male children are more likely to have been victims of violence. Three types of male violence — violence against women, violence against other men and violence against themselves — are deeply interwoven.

Violence springs from what boys learn about what it means to be a man. One researcher observed a small group of preschool boys and noticed how, over two years, they adapted to cultural cues. The ways they dressed, played and related to one another and to their parents changed significantly. They even formed a “Mean Team” to harass girls in their classroom. Another researcher interviewed elementary-school boys and captured their brutally frank stories of punishing other boys who failed to conform.

Boys take their experiences to heart, feeling weak and ashamed when they need comfort. Plan International USA, a nonprofit group focused on children’s rights, commissioned a study among 10- to 19-year-olds that found nearly three-quarters of boys said they felt pressure to be physically strong and nearly half of the 14- to 19 year-old male respondents felt pressure to be “willing to punch someone if provoked.”

As a note: When I googled 'why are men violent' what I got was about 3 pages of article titles, almost all of which were about men perpetrating violence against women. Data tells us that men are much more likely to be victims of violence and that violence is much more likely to be at the hands of other men.

Most often on this forum, we discuss violence, particularly rape, of men against women. It's rare that we talk about violence against men, except as an aside.

I'm posting this to hopefully start some conversations about what it is that makes boys and men more violent and how we can stop the damage that violence does to men and boys.

 

[RVonse]

Is aggression the same thing as violence?

Is dominance the same thing as violence?

Is dominance achieved only through violence?

Maybe yes. Maybe no. But it’s how nature made us.

Do you think culture/society and societal/cultural norms play any role?

Perhaps, but it will never happen until the military industrial complex is taken down. And that will never ever happen, because when some rare anti war politician like Trump does finally get into office, it is the people like yourself and Nancy Peloci who do their best to end his time in office.

Everything related to our culture begins at the top and filters down. If the sec state Clinton and Obama feel the compulsion to wipe an entire country like Libya out of existence, those extreme violent norms become our norms. There is absolutely no point at all to try to fix societies ills at the lower level when our military kills and wipes out innocent civilians on a daily basis.

People like yourself want a violent society because people like yourself elect violent leaders like Obama. He is by far holding the record for the most civilian kills by military drones.

Is this hopeless or can society do better by men and boys?

It is hopeless if you and others continue to support the military complex by electing democrats like Obama and Hillary Clinton. Yes we can do better and yes we should do better. Join Occupy Peace. https://occupypeace.com/

 

[Toni]

Do you think culture/society and societal/cultural norms play any role?

Perhaps, but it will never happen until the military industrial complex is taken down. And that will never ever happen, because when some rare anti war politician like Trump does finally get into office, it is the people like yourself and Nancy Peloci who do their best to end his time in office.

Everything related to our culture begins at the top and filters down. If the sec state Clinton and Obama feel the compulsion to wipe an entire country like Libya out of existence, those extreme violent norms become our norms. There is absolutely no point at all to try to fix societies ills at the lower level when our military kills and wipes out innocent civilians on a daily basis.

People like yourself want a violent society because people like yourself elect violent leaders like Obama. He is by far holding the record for the most civilian kills by military drones.

Is this hopeless or can society do better by men and boys?

It is hopeless if you and others continue to support the military complex by electing democrats like Obama and Hillary Clinton. Yes we can do better and yes we should do better. Join Occupy Peace. https://occupypeace.com/

I don't actually see Trump as being 'anti-war' or anti-killing or anti-violence. There are a couple of his publicly stated stances that I have found attractive: his stated intent to invest heavily in infrastructure and his anti-war stance. Unfortunately, I see both as huge frauds.

 

[RVonse]

Perhaps, but it will never happen until the military industrial complex is taken down. And that will never ever happen, because when some rare anti war politician like Trump does finally get into office, it is the people like yourself and Nancy Peloci who do their best to end his time in office.

Everything related to our culture begins at the top and filters down. If the sec state Clinton and Obama feel the compulsion to wipe an entire country like Libya out of existence, those extreme violent norms become our norms. There is absolutely no point at all to try to fix societies ills at the lower level when our military kills and wipes out innocent civilians on a daily basis.

People like yourself want a violent society because people like yourself elect violent leaders like Obama. He is by far holding the record for the most civilian kills by military drones.


It is hopeless if you and others continue to support the military complex by electing democrats like Obama and Hillary Clinton. Yes we can do better and yes we should do better. Join Occupy Peace. https://occupypeace.com/

I don't actually see Trump as being 'anti-war' or anti-killing or anti-violence. There are a couple of his publicly stated stances that I have found attractive: his stated intent to invest heavily in infrastructure and his anti-war stance. Unfortunately, I see both as huge frauds.

But......at least he has the decency to lie about what should be the correct policy.

Politicians like Hillary do not even do that. They say they want war and killing. And we vote for them anyway.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The cultural forces that lead men towards violence also shames them for being the victims of violence. As was rightly noted in the OP, we usually hear about violence against women, but violence against men is more common. Prostate cancer is also quite common, but we hear almost exclusively about breast cancer instead. There is pressure (from society; including both men and women) for men and boys to be tough and not to cry or complain about being victims. They are told to "man up" and be strong. I do think there has been some change to this and that it will continue to change as we erode gender roles generally. Growing up bisexual did mean a lot of bullying against me for being gay. That's no longer much of a thing anymore. One way in which society here grew.

To encourage this, first and foremost we need to all stop with the "boys are like this" and "girls are like that" stuff. Girls can be tough. Boys can be sensitive. It would also help if people would stop with the gender wars. Just because a male brings up an issue affecting males, doesn't mean he should be attacked or vilified as attacking women. That side of "feminism" does a lot more damage than most people realize.

 

[laughing dog]

The cultural forces that lead men towards violence also shames them for being the victims of violence. As was rightly noted in the OP, we usually hear about violence against women, but violence against men is more common. Prostate cancer is also quite common, but we hear almost exclusively about breast cancer instead.

The mortality rate for breast cancer is higher than that for prostate cancer. And the treatments for prostate cancer are usually do not involve changing the physical exterior. So your example fails.

There is pressure (from society; including both men and women) for men and boys to be tough and not to cry or complain about being victims. They are told to "man up" and be strong. I do think there has been some change to this and that it will continue to change as we erode gender roles generally. Growing up bisexual did mean a lot of bullying against me for being gay. That's no longer much of a thing anymore. One way in which society here grew.

To encourage this, first and foremost we need to all stop with the "boys are like this" and "girls are like that" stuff. Girls can be tough. Boys can be sensitive. It would also help if people would stop with the gender wars. Just because a male brings up an issue affecting males, doesn't mean he should be attacked or vilified as attacking women. That side of "feminism" does a lot more damage than most people realize.

Nor does it mean that when a women brings up an issue affecting women, that she should attacked or vilified or as attacking or ignoring men. That side of "MRA" does a lot more damage than most people realize.

 

[southernhybrid]

Out of curiosity, I read a bunch of articles, most based on science and research as to why males tend to be more violent than females. One that I found very interesting was about a part of the brain that is very different in males and females. It said that since ( sorry I can't remember all of the details, I read a lot ) this part of the brain was better developed in females, it's likely that boys are the ones who need a lot more nurturing, and love than girls. But, in most cultures, we do the exact opposite. We tell boys not to cry, to man up, to be strong etc. That may have a very detrimental impact on their development.

Another long piece of research that I read, that was completed in 1997, but was a study of thousands of people who were born in the late 50s and early 60s, mentioned lead intoxication as a problem more associated with male violence. It also said that moving frequently, having a mother with little education or oddly enough a father with a high amount of education, as well as abuse in the home, was more likely to influence boys to be more prone to violence.

Then I read about two genetic traits that are associated with a higher degree of violence, but not everyone with those traits is violent.

That's all I can remember right now, but it made me think that we really don't know exactly why males are statistically far more violent than females. I did think that the part of the brains differences in girls and boys and the fact that boys aren't usually taught to hide their emotions, made a lot of sense. I only had one male child. I didn't tell him to hide his emotions. I never let him play with guns or violent toys. I have no idea is this helped him grow into a very calm, peaceful person, who is also a very nurturing father. It might just be that he inherited those traits from my mother, who has a similar personality.

My guess is that there are some biological differenced that cause men to be more violent along with environmental factors.

 

[Toni]

The cultural forces that lead men towards violence also shames them for being the victims of violence. As was rightly noted in the OP, we usually hear about violence against women, but violence against men is more common. Prostate cancer is also quite common, but we hear almost exclusively about breast cancer instead.

The mortality rate for breast cancer is higher than that for prostate cancer. And the treatments for prostate cancer are usually do not involve changing the physical exterior. So your example fails.

There is pressure (from society; including both men and women) for men and boys to be tough and not to cry or complain about being victims. They are told to "man up" and be strong. I do think there has been some change to this and that it will continue to change as we erode gender roles generally. Growing up bisexual did mean a lot of bullying against me for being gay. That's no longer much of a thing anymore. One way in which society here grew.

To encourage this, first and foremost we need to all stop with the "boys are like this" and "girls are like that" stuff. Girls can be tough. Boys can be sensitive. It would also help if people would stop with the gender wars. Just because a male brings up an issue affecting males, doesn't mean he should be attacked or vilified as attacking women. That side of "feminism" does a lot more damage than most people realize.

Nor does it mean that when a women brings up an issue affecting women, that she should attacked or vilified or as attacking or ignoring men. That side of "MRA" does a lot more damage than most people realize.

Actually, many more men die of prostate cancer than women die of breast cancer. There are a number of reasons: early diagnosis and advances in treatment of breast cancer have vastly improved survival rates. Women are more likely to be diagnosed earlier with breast cancer than are men. Prostate cancer tends to be multi-focal: having more than one tumor while breast cancer is usually found with an initial tumor. Breast cancer screenings via mammograms are widely promoted. Most men are extremely squeamish about getting a digital rectal exam which may not detect early prostate cancer anyway. PSA tests for prostate cancer are notoriously inaccurate. It is often said that most men, if they live long enough, will develop prostate cancer and that if one looked for signs of prostate cancer in the cadavers of old men, most would show some degree of prostate cancer, although that is probably not the cause of death.

IMO, there are some contributing factors to the disparities in outcomes. One is biology: breasts are more prominent on the body than are prostates and it is easier to palpate a tumor on a breast than on a prostate. Mammograms are extremely good at detecting early breast cancer and women are heavily encouraged to get annual gynecological exams and breast exams after age 50. Men are not nearly as likely to be encouraged to get prostate exams and there are not nearly so good a test to detect early prostate cancer as for women. Also, I don't know of any man who has been counseled to avoid sex for 72 hrs. prior to a PSA exam in order to get the most accurate results yet abstinence is important for accuracy.

In both types of cancer, it is possible to survive without any treatment for some patients for many years. Other patients have more aggressive forms of cancer and die within a number of years even with excellent treatment options.

We certainly do need better screening tests for prostate cancer.

Probably because women need a medical exam and prescription for most birth control, they are more likely to be seen by a physician and screened for breast and cervical cancer on an annual basis. Men are much less likely to get annual exams of any kind and are less likely to be aware of any family history of prostate cancer or issues in their families.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The cultural forces that lead men towards violence also shames them for being the victims of violence. As was rightly noted in the OP, we usually hear about violence against women, but violence against men is more common. Prostate cancer is also quite common, but we hear almost exclusively about breast cancer instead.

The mortality rate for breast cancer is higher than that for prostate cancer. And the treatments for prostate cancer are usually do not involve changing the physical exterior. So your example fails.

Even were what you claim true, that would not make the example fail. Note I didn't say that prostate cancer has higher mortality than breast cancer, nor did I say anything about their treatments. I was talking about the fact that breast cancer is talked about frequently and prostate cancer is almost never talked about. Men are not encouraged to see themselves as victims and are less likely to get themselves checked, nor are the victims as likely to draw as much empathy. It is much easier to sell women and children as victims. Men are considered more expendable. That's probably got a lot to do with biology (1 man can fertilize dozens of women; so women are biologically more valuable than men when it comes to breeding and keeping the species going). It may also partly explain why males are more violent towards other males.

 

[Toni]

The cultural forces that lead men towards violence also shames them for being the victims of violence. As was rightly noted in the OP, we usually hear about violence against women, but violence against men is more common. Prostate cancer is also quite common, but we hear almost exclusively about breast cancer instead.

The mortality rate for breast cancer is higher than that for prostate cancer. And the treatments for prostate cancer are usually do not involve changing the physical exterior. So your example fails.

Even were what you claim true, that would not make the example fail. Note I didn't say that prostate cancer has higher mortality than breast cancer, nor did I say anything about their treatments. I was talking about the fact that breast cancer is talked about frequently and prostate cancer is almost never talked about. Men are not encouraged to see themselves as victims and are less likely to get themselves checked, nor are the victims as likely to draw as much empathy. It is much easier to sell women and children as victims. Men are considered more expendable. That's probably got a lot to do with biology (1 man can fertilize dozens of women; so women are biologically more valuable than men when it comes to breeding and keeping the species going). It may also partly explain why males are more violent towards other males.

I do agree that there are large disparities about how frequently breast cancer vs prostate cancer are discussed. I agree that men are not encouraged to take their reproductive health as seriously as are women. My sense is that it is because most men (my observation) are much less likely to discuss or entertain the idea of being screened via a DRE and most refuse to entertain the thought of prostate cancer because of many misconceptions, including that having prostate cancer or being treated for prostate cancer makes one unable to perform sexually--which sometimes is true but often not true, particularly with less advanced cancer and with more modern nerve sparing treatment options. I think this is a cultural/societal issue: men must be sexually potent in order to be considered men.

A century ago and even less than that, many women died from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth. Advances in prenatal and labor and delivery care have cut those deaths considerably--although they are rising again, alarmingly so--even among healthy women with no known medical issues or history of drug/alcohol use/abuse. Because of maternal and new born deaths, maternal/neonate care was given more attention--and got better results.

Men could fertilize as many women as they liked but if too many of them died instead of raising offspring to maturity/independence, it didn't help the man out at all.