Is it politically incorrect to question someone’s manhood? According to Merriam-Webster, the term means “conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities (as in matters of sex or race) should be eliminated.”
Is referring to someone as “unmanly” offensive to his political or personal sensibilities? Is it politically incorrect to even speak of “manhood” at all? We could spend all day on that one.
Anyway, I ran across this article by Duncan Maxwell Anderson, “A Time For Manhood.” He writes many things I believe about manhood and defending one’s family and country against enemies.
This November’s election is about something everyone is thinking about, and almost no one is talking about. Words like “national security” are fig-leaves for the real subject: manhood.Why does manhood matter? Because we’re at war. What kind of leader do you want when armed lunatics are trying to kill you and your family? Do you need a master of nuance or a leader of men? Do you want Alan Alda or Braveheart? (Hmm. Let me think.)
You might wonder why the recent Democratic convention was the gaudiest display of militarism and macho talk since the Berlin Olympics of 1936 — this, from the party that successfully ran a draft-dodger for president twice, and which won’t fund a candidate who doesn’t bow to the feminist abortion-god….
Martial men are always eager to believe it’s time for action, that the enemy is at the gates. It can make them seem crude and scary. But on 9/11, it was suddenly obvious that the everyday heroism of soldiers, firemen and cops was indispensable.
Meanwhile, the stock of intellectuals goes down in a life-or-death crisis, especially for those who weren’t that brilliant to begin with. Some men claim the status of artists simply because they don’t know how to change a tire. Men from the arty class can become parasites, making their try for greatness simply by throwing muck at men who are truly great.
Read the rest. It’s a classic.
Right after 9-11, in my social circle at least, all the guys were he-men — they talked big and sounded strong and protective. As the 9-11 fear and anger faded for some, they reverted to form. Perhaps it’s biology, my prejudice or an impossibly high standard, but I expect a man to be a man. That is, when enemies attack, foreign or domestic, I expect him to defend, crush, kill — whatever is necessary — and ask questions later.
For instance, I hope I don’t know any men who’d attempt to learn from his wife’s potential rapist exactly why he wants to violate her or try to find a way to appease the pervert. I hope he’d rip out his heart first, then ask questions.
This is one of the topics on my mind this morning. I have others. I’ll leave you with this:
For these times, in place of Kerry’s limp salute and tedious 55-minute acceptance speech, I prefer Bush’s terser words, on the phone to Vice President Dick Cheney on Sept. 11, 2001, on his way to the airport: “I heard about the Pentagon. We’re at war. Somebody’s gonna pay.”
I agree with you, Duncan. I guess I’m just an old-fashioned, politically incorrect, non-liberated, reactionary little woman.
