• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What does it mean to be a "man"? [W40]

First of all, let me bring you back to earth, "Man's Man." If what it takes to raise a daughter to choose well is part of the definition (and I think it is), you've failed.

Now that I've insulted you . . . ;) . . . a real man is the leader and teacher in his family. He sets the example and models good and strong character. He's fair, he's honest, he can be trusted, he's genuine, and he puts his family before every other priority in his life.

I think that about does it.

Help your son-in-law. Sounds like he needs it. Be his mentor. Your daughter will reap untold benefits.
If his son-in-law, at age-31, wants to sleep til noon and play video games thereafter, Baron's chances of finding success at doing what you propose are slim to none.
 
If his son-in-law, at age-31, wants to sleep til noon and play video games thereafter, Baron's chances of doing that are slim to none.

It's his daughter's husband. Never stop trying. (But I agree...maybe he should work on his daughter.)
 
I would also say, Baron, that women eventually tire of such slacker antics from their man (to steal from calamity a bit). When she does (especially having had a good example of what the opposite is), I'm sure you'll see a quite dramatic and rapid change. Not sure if they have kids yet, but that seems to be the turning point for most.
 
They call it the "slacker". It's a trend made possible by (loosely defined) men having access to sex without having to first be providers. Women today are more often than not the ones with the jobs while the "slacker" gets by putting in the least amount of effort, usually by having a series of menial jobs and living hand to mouth, much like the Baron describes his son-in-law.

Times change. Not always for the best.



Yes, I've heard of "slackers". While their haplessness can make for an amusing movie, seeing so much of it in real life is rather worrisome.
 
Agreed and I taught me daughters (I have two) the same thing and I assure you that I never attempted to get either of them to act like a man.



Not sure I follow. Please explain.



Not at all! I want them to defend themselves.

But I do believe it is the job of their husbands to protect and defend them since, as men, they are physically more capable of doing so.



Do you think that there are some male attributes that are universal?

"Raisings", is the term my mom used when used when she chastised me for not using good manners or common sense with regard to public behavior. "Ain't you had no raisings?" Of course, said that way, it was meant ironically. She is a very well spoken woman but the idea is that even the less well spoken are taught how to behave like ladies and gentlemen.

I just used your examples of male attributes that are universal to both genders. I'm not sure that in this day and age, in this country or most of Western civilization, that you name exclusively male attributes.
 
I believe the OP is seeking an answer that is more about responsibility maturity and humanity than gender.
"Man's man" ... An unfortunate choice of words that can easily bring about a vision that I know he was not thinking about...:lamo
 
"Raisings", is the term my mom used when used when she chastised me for not using good manners or common sense with regard to public behavior. "Ain't you had no raisings?" Of course, said that way, it was meant ironically. She is a very well spoken woman but the idea is that even the less well spoken are taught how to behave like ladies and gentlemen.

A fair point. As I understand his father was / is a alcoholic. I suspect that did not help matters.

I just used your examples of male attributes that are universal to both genders. I'm not sure that in this day and age, in this country or most of Western civilization, that you name exclusively male attributes.

What about exclusive male or female roles such as those stated in the Bible for husbands and wives?
 
I believe the OP is seeking an answer that is more about responsibility maturity and humanity than gender.
"Man's man" ... An unfortunate choice of words that can easily bring about a vision that I know he was not thinking about...:lamo

You're right. I was not thinking about that!
 
I would also say, Baron, that women eventually tire of such slacker antics from their man (to steal from calamity a bit). When she does (especially having had a good example of what the opposite is), I'm sure you'll see a quite dramatic and rapid change. Not sure if they have kids yet, but that seems to be the turning point for most.

I've had the same thought and I really don't wish for divorce as they have two kids.
 
Let me be real clear with everyone.

I have given examples of how my idiot son-in-law falls short of being a man.

I have not discussed how I’ve responded to his abject stupidity.

You do have the full story as I’ve not provided it.

All I was attempting to do was to give a bit of background on why the topic came up so as to get different people’s opinions on what it means to be a man as prompted in the OP when I asked the question, “So how do you define a ‘man’”?


As you can see, it has become unfashionable in certain circles to speak of "manhood" and "manliness' and "what is it to be a Man". Some people choose to take it as some kind of chauvinistic offense or as an anachronism.

Well, I'm a little old-fashioned in some ways, and I don't really care how people take it.


A real man is supposed to be hard working, responsible, and reliable. Those he chooses as his dependents can trust that he will be there for them. His word is his bond; he'd rather break a leg than break his word, so he is slow to give it and quick to honor it. He puts the needs of his family ahead of his own wants.

He is faithful and honorable; he speaks truth and keeps his commitments. A handshake deal from him is as good as a signed contract.

He has real courage; not the fantasy of fearlessness, but the reality of doing what needs done even if you are afraid. He is willing to stand between danger and those less able than himself.

He strives to control his baser impulses and temper his faults with love and generosity. He does not allow himself to be ruled by his fears or his vices, nor will he let those grow out of control in a manner to harm his family. He practices self-restraint and self-sacrifice, and service to others.

He is kindly and protective to women, children and old persons. He will not suffer these to be abused in his presence.

He knows and accepts that his honor and duty as a man may require him to sacrifice his life for his family in a moment; or to spend a lifetime working patiently and diligently for their sake.


These days, any man who fulfills all the above is a Hercules among pygmies, it seems... in my Dad's day, they simply called this what was expected of a man.


If all that sounds like too much, consider this from a previous generation...

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you,
But make allowance for their doubting too;
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream - and not make dreams your master,
If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings - nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you,
If all men count with you, but none too much;
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!
-Kipling, If
 
A fair point. As I understand his father was / is a alcoholic. I suspect that did not help matters.



What about exclusive male or female roles such as those stated in the Bible for husbands and wives?

I'm sure his dad's problems didn't help him at all.

Such as?
 
Not really what I meant.

Genesis 1:27
God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

At this point in the Bible account a “man”= 1 male + 1 female.

When God created man, He made no distinction between them except by gender.

You wanna be a man? You have to first be born that way. There’s nothing to choose.

lol... you're using the Bible as evidence for your ignorant and bigoted views? No point in talking to you then.

Your fixation on what it means to be a man is obviously the old school definition, where men had to suffer in private because they couldn't amount to what gender roles dictated they should be.
 
Despite your best intentions and effort your kids can wind up doing really stupid things.

I had such a son. Fortunately, he is intelligent, and when he saw that we weren't going to save him from himself, he figured out how to use his brain.
 
[So how do you define a “man”?[/FONT][/SIZE]

I define a man as someone who will "man-up", provide for himself (and his family if it's mutually desired), is protective of those he loves, and is a good role model for boys and young men. Unfortunately, you can't teach the SIL any manners, or how to grow up. Only life will teach him that, IF it ever happens, and as long as your daughter goes along with it, nothing will change. He's a bit too old to be acting like that imo. If he were in my house, I would feel compelled to lay the ground rules. I have no tolerance for adults displaying juvenile traits in my home, and taking advantage of my good will.
 
I'm guessing you're going to have a hard time teaching him anything. At 31 unless he wants to change it ain't happening.

Let Him Fail and Starve. Guarantee it will Work Wonders.
 
Gaius46 said:
Despite your best intentions and effort your kids can wind up doing really stupid things.
I had such a son. Fortunately, he is intelligent, and when he saw that we weren't going to save him from himself, he figured out how to use his brain.

....... Mom?
 
lol... you're using the Bible as evidence for your ignorant and bigoted views? No point in talking to you then.

Then why did you bother to post anything, at all? Seems rather unintelligent and self-defeating, does it not?

Your fixation on what it means to be a man is obviously the old school definition…

No doubt about that.

…where men had to suffer in private because they couldn't amount to what gender roles dictated they should be.

If you’d like to take another shot at trying to say this then please do. You’re not making any sense.
 
I define a man as someone who will "man-up", provide for himself (and his family if it's mutually desired), is protective of those he loves, and is a good role model for boys and young men. Unfortunately, you can't teach the SIL any manners, or how to grow up. Only life will teach him that, IF it ever happens, and as long as your daughter goes along with it, nothing will change. He's a bit too old to be acting like that imo. If he were in my house, I would feel compelled to lay the ground rules. I have no tolerance for adults displaying juvenile traits in my home, and taking advantage of my good will.

I agree and believe me, some very definite boundaries have been established.
 
Well maybe a real man wouldn't have raised a daughter who would marry such a loser. Remove the mote from your own eye.

Deleted my comments.
 
Last edited:
Sadly, more and more 'men' are abdicating this basic of historic/cultural roles preferring instead to hand over the reigns of responsibility totally to women.

The American economy is much different than it was in the 1950's. Some people have cited that if minimum wage was translated from past eras it would be equivalent to $23 an hour. If one person could make $23 an hour, I'm sure there would be many stay at home moms or stay at home dads. Without traditional biases clouding that decision I would bet that in most cases it would be stay-at-home moms. Today people need to work 3 jobs between 2 people to have the same standard of living that the older generations enjoyed. It is no surprise that the older generation thinks the younger generation is lazy. I provided my wife and kids with this, this and this and my low-life son-in-law doesn't even give his family this. With that being said I don't think being a man can be defined by his income. It is easy to point out that flawed logic even though a man who earned $23 an hour equivalent his whole life would never listen to any logic.

In my personal situation (I'm 34 by the way) my wife hasn't been required to work out of the home for the first 9 years of our marriage. The last 3 she has been required to shoulder almost 45% of our household income. Does that mean I am less of man than I was during those first 9 years? By some standards people would say yes. (That would include myself.) Can a man be a man in any economic situation or is his manhood entirely dependent upon his environment? It's a puzzle to me.

SBu said:
It is not uncommon now for women to be the bread winner, financial manager, AND child raiser, house keeper, generally responsible party. Is it bad?

It feels wrong as wrong can be. This was not the way I was raised. The lifestyle held by both of my grandparents and my parents allowed the father to be bread winner and financial manager while the mother was child raiser, housekeeper and all the other torments that go along with that. It seems to me that men are suited better for what Americans call the "traditional father figure". It seems to me that women are suited better for what Americans call the "traditional mother figure". The only thing that stays the same is that everything changes. Our global, cultural, financial, political, economic, weather and historical situations have changed and will continue to change. Does this mean that what it means to be a man changes with the wind? I would say, no.

SBu said:
I don't think I can sit here and pass judgement,

Sure you can. We all pass judgement all the time. We have an ideal of what constitutes a good man or what constitutes a good woman. My life has been very harsh the last 3 years. I have been doing some major soul searching and trying to find out how to be a man. In good times, it was easy to be a man. It bad times, the lack of manliness starts to shine through. I would suggest that The Baron would not feel this way if the economy was brimming out of it's ears with jobs. A booming economy can make even the sorriest son-in-law look like a champion. That's why we call these "good times".

My question is this: Does the definition of a man change when the economy is bad? Let's be fair. This son-in-law probably isn't as bad as he is being described.

To answer the original question and this is something that I have learned recently.

A man is an male adult above the age of 18 who maximizes the utility of his environment to the fullest for the benefit of himself and those under his care. A man understands his place in the world. A man understands his status in the world. A man remains strong for the benefit of those under his care. This would include a wife, children, employees, assets or other persons or things for which he has accepted responsibilty. A man also unloads those responsibilities that he knows he is incapable of properly providing care. A man doesn't take on too many responsibilities that he cannot handle. A wife requires a lifelong responsibility. A child requires an 18 year responsibility. A mortgage requires a 30 year responsibility or the commitment to honor the terms. A job doesn't really require a long term commitment unless a contract is involved. A man knows his limitations and doesn't take on what he cannot handle. A man knows himself and is confident enough to disregard any and all criticism. A man is steady and strong regardless of his environment.

Just joking. I dont' really know what a man is. :lol:
 
Last edited:
The American economy is much different than it was in the 1950's. Some people have cited that if minimum wage was translated from past eras it would be equivalent to $23 an hour. If one person could make $23 an hour, I'm sure there would be many stay at home moms or stay at home dads. Without traditional biases clouding that decision I would bet that in most cases it would be stay-at-home moms. Today people need to work 3 jobs between 2 people to have the same standard of living that the older generations enjoyed. It is no surprise that the older generation thinks the younger generation is lazy. I provided my wife and kids with this, this and this and my low-life son-in-law doesn't even give his family this. With that being said I don't think being a man can be defined by his income. It is easy to point out that flawed logic even though a man who earned $23 an hour equivalent his whole life would never listen to any logic.

In my personal situation (I'm 34 by the way) my wife hasn't been required to work out of the home for the first 9 years of our marriage. The last 3 she has been required to shoulder almost 45% of our household income. Does that mean I am less of man than I was during those first 9 years? By some standards people would say yes. (That would include myself.) Can a man be a man in any economic situation or is his manhood entirely dependent upon his environment? It's a puzzle to me.



It feels wrong as wrong can be. This was not the way I was raised. The lifestyle held by both of my grandparents and my parents allowed the father to be bread winner and financial manager while the mother was child raiser, housekeeper and all the other torments that go along with that. It seems to me that men are suited better for what Americans call the "traditional father figure". It seems to me that women are suited better for what Americans call the "traditional mother figure". The only thing that stays the same is that everything changes. Our global, cultural, financial, political, economic, weather and historical situations have changed and will continue to change. Does this mean that what it means to be a man changes with the wind? I would say, no.



Sure you can. We all pass judgement all the time. We have an ideal of what constitutes a good man or what constitutes a good woman. My life has been very harsh the last 3 years. I have been doing some major soul searching and trying to find out how to be a man. In good times, it was easy to be a man. It bad times, the lack of manliness starts to shine through. I would suggest that The Baron would not feel this way if the economy was brimming out of it's ears with jobs. A booming economy can make even the sorriest son-in-law look like a champion. That's why we call these "good times".

My question is this: Does the definition of a man change when the economy is bad? Let's be fair. This son-in-law probably isn't as bad as he is being described.

I'm not saying that a man without a job due to economy is not a man. I'm not saying that a man with a low paying job is not a man. I'm saying that a man without a job, that sits around playing video games all day in a blissful extension of childhood while outsourcing responsibility, child rearing, and effort generally to his wife is not a man. You can be poor as hell, but still be represent the pinnacle of what a 'man' is. Jobs don't define men, principles define men.
 
Back
Top Bottom