If you feel like your values and your very nature are under assault — they are.
Two things happened on the same day last week that provide ample evidence that values and life-ways we cleave to here at Running Iron Report are under concerted and deliberate attack.
The American Psychological Association has released new guidelines for psychological practice with men and boys. Surprising no one, the APA concludes that “Traditional Masculinity Ideology” which by the APA definition includes “anti-femininity, achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk, and violence” can be psychologically harmful to men and boys.
On the same day these guidelines were released, Oregon Senate Bill 501 was unveiled. This bill would require Oregonians to obtain a permit before buying a gun, limit the amount of ammunition a person could buy, outlaw magazines with a capacity of more than five rounds, and create gun locking and storage requirements. If passed, Senate Bill 501 would make Oregon’s firearms regulations among the strictest in the U.S.
As always, we encourage you to read the source material for yourself rather than relying on media coverage — or our interpretation. Draw your own conclusions.
We will take up both of these matters in detail in coming posts. I am traveling this week and must attend to other duties, so consider this an alert and a pin in the map.
*
The proponents of redefining masculinity and of gun control share numerous characteristics and I suspect there is considerable overlap in their political and cultural Venn diagrams. Tactically, they both engage in misdirection. Extreme gun control that makes felons out of law abiding, socially constructive citizens is pitched as “gun safety” or “common sense gun reform.” The conflation of “traditional masculinity” with “toxic masculinity” allows the “redefiners” to pretend that they are not attacking “good men” while simultaneously undermining much that is good in them.
In the case of the APA guidelines, the estimable David French has identified this misdirection as a classic “motte and bailey argument.” French writes:
The APA issues guidelines that do indeed target traditional masculinity as commonly understood. Then, under pressure, they issue a statement that redefines the term. This is a form of “motte-and-bailey” argument. It’s a concept based on an ancient form of fortification. The “bailey” was the place where you lived and worked. The “motte” is the fortress you retreated to when attacked.
Motte-and-bailey argumentation works like this — begin by making wide, sweeping, and stereotypical arguments. That’s your bailey. In the identity-politics context, that’s where you see activists condemn “whiteness,” make broad attacks on Christianity, and (yes) express anger at “masculinity.” Then, when called out for a level of bigotry they’d never tolerate in others, they retreat to the motte — claiming all they’re really concerned about are the truly bad actors. They don’t actually mean to attack everyone, just the bad people.
And so it is here. Called out for the sweeping denunciation of traditional masculinity, the APA’s statement retreats to the motte. Oh no, they say, they’re just concerned with “extreme behaviors that harm self and others.”
Well then, say that on the front end. Revise the guidelines to make that explicit. And, above all, do not equate those “extreme behaviors” with traditional masculinity. In fact, traditional masculinity rejects harmful extremes. A man properly brought up to be traditionally masculine seeks to protect others from those harmful extremes.
Truth.
More to come.
Matthew says
Just part of the increasing domestication of our society. I remember reading a post by someone online about their neighbor kid. The kid’s parents tried to raise without any violent influences. Couldn’t watch violent cartoons, couldn’t pretend to be a soldier et cetera. Kid got in a lot of fights in school.
And likely lost them, even further jacking up his mind. They sure didn’t do the kid any favors.
Matthew says
Probably
TJ says
My oldest of four boys currently stationed at a USCG surf rescue station told me about a year ago, “Dad, my generation doesn’t bend, suck it up, or get stronger — they just fold.”
The current popular culture depiction of and message to the young American male is a lie. A significant percentage of the authors do not have kids (sons) and are not big fans of boys, or men in general.
Been going on for a solid decade or more.
It’s tempting to go too far with the snowflake generalizations. Proof that there remains hope resides in your son, rare as he may be, and in what I saw with the young Marines in Germany a while back. But, having said that, there is a noticeable cultural swing in favor of emasculation. Which might help explain the new Apple television add, which depicts herds of neutered Americans in variously colored jumpsuits leaping around in herd formations. A weird vision of the future.
TJ says
True words Craig and I should have qualified that. Thousands of outstanding young men coming up from all over the globe. I have the privilege of working with and supervising some of them.
Matthew says
I agree there is a cultural swing to emasculation. At the same time, some people are way to smug about it. They remind me of the kid I knew in junior high who say girls shouldn’t play sports and then would fake an injury to get out of PE. That’s one of the things feminists get wrong. It’s not traditionally masculine men who most believe women belong in the kitchen, but unmasculine men who like to think they are masculine.
Apple computers are going through weird things right now. Fewer people are buying their new I‑phones and they are panicking.
tom says
in my tour of duty it was “search and destroy”, my two sons served in the usmc (both infantry) in Iraq where they “sweep and clear”. sounds like janitor duty?!
These poetic lines does come to mind lately;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
It’s a constant refrain.
Traven Torsvan says
Speaking of the docilization of american youth, now AZ lawmakers want to ban “controversial ideas” from being spread in classrooms
https://tucson.com/news/local/arizona-lawmaker-would-fire-teachers-who-discuss-politics-controversial-issues/article_c2d5456a-1cde-5692-b42c-2088d7e6f779.html
Another from the “Couldn’t Resist File”
Notes from a screenplay:
El Presidente: “Whatever we do, let’s not have any controversial ideas in the schools.”
Prime Minister: “Or food.”
El Presidente: “Right. No food either.”
Attorney General: (sheepishly) “Isn’t that controversial?”
El Presidente: (Rises, unholsters pistola, shoots Attorney General in the face. Sits back down as body slumps over in chair and thuds to floor. “No, I don’t think it is.”
Ugly Hombre says
The APA is a toxic and deranged organization- sometime back their position was that if you wanted to go “Glenn to Glenda” you needed head shrinker help. Now its A‑OK with them and they are all for it.
And now “toxic masculinity” needs to be addressed.
Sure it does- you crazy bastards.
What about “poisonous bitch” snydrome ? 독한년
When is your news flash psy op paper coming out on that?
I feel sorry for young men growing up today with all this new lefts anti man propaganda aimed at them 24–7. It has to be GD hard for them. It must be tedious for women as well. Long run it will hurt them to, it already has IMO.
Labeling people who don’t fit into the lefts arena as “mentally ill” it a time worn tactic of theirs. Now its aimed at 50 percent of the American population.
Not much new under the sun…
RLT says
Hmm, read through the APA pretty carefully. Their definition certainly gets some of it right—as much as it can, I suspect, given the broad scope of all American men and boys. I’d also agree that traditional masculinity can be destructive to men and boys—but only if it’s forced on men and boys who don’t want to be that way.
I also get that as medical professionals, there’s some behavior—violence specifically—that they ain’t never gonna gel with. Me and the APA are just gonna have to disagree on that one.
And some of their guidelines are downright smart; I love the bit about encouraging men (especially young men of color) to explore their heritage and perhaps find their place in tradition. Heck, that’s not too far from our own mission statement.
In my own experience, the problems arise when these incredible general guidelines are misinterpreted by the “boots on the ground” who then discourage boys exhibiting traditionally masculine behaviors. But for many (I’d even say most) boys, that’s a healthy and normal thing. I’m not sure the APA would disagree with me, either.
It’s also heavily regional. Where I live, the culture generally encourages those traditional behaviors. A rowdy kid is probably going to be fine. But a gay, trans, or even just effeminate kid might not be allowed to “do their own thing,” and could easily become a target of violence themselves.
If a kid likes GI Joes, good on him. If he likes Barbies, good on him. I just don’t want to see either kid get told there’s something wrong with them. If we do our jobs right, they’ll both find their own tribe. Until then, live and let live.
Buddha say: What if kid like GI Joe AND Barbie?
Couldn’t resist. It is a campfire, after all 🙂
RLT says
It is indeed. I’ll let Buddha figure that one out.
TJ says
I’m feeling the urge to drink.
I guess I could just punch something instead?
RLT says
TJ, better query Buddha about that one, too. As the APA’s unofficial spokesman on this thread (by default of not thinking they’re *completely* nuts), I’d hazard a guess they’ll discourage both.
I’ll go a step further and issue you a prescription—a good long range session followed by a stout dose of whiskey. My approach is a holistic one ; )
I think that is an excellent remedy, as prescribed. 🙂
I can think of a particular member of the command staff who could use a fist to the face.…oh, wait.
Not far off the mark, Craig. My daughter loves superheroes AND her American princess dolls.
In fact, she knew about Wonder Woman as a superhero and then we watched (the animated series) Justice League and she said, “Wow. She’s a princess *too*!”
Matthew says
Girls tend to be more interested in boy things than boys in girl things. That’s one of the problems with the whole “toxic masculinity” thing. The boys won’t have a natural outlet and that’s going to mess them up.
I loved that Justice League cartoon.
lane batot says
I’ve always wanted to get some Barbies and Kens AND G.I. Joes, and along with my ferrets(which I’ve kept for decades now), make an “Attack Of The Killer Ferrets” movie in the style of Mr. Bill on the old Saturday Night Lives. Did I just date myself there?
TJ says
Don’t forget Big Jim and the Wolf Pack!
Breaker Morant says
I have never seen a movie that captures traditional masculinity better than “The Lighthorsemen.” While “Second Hand Lions” (possibly my favorite movie) also captures it-The Lighthorsemen captures the world of adult men, in a way that I have never seen in any other film.
X‑ring. Hadn’t thought of that and you are right. Would you consider a doing a guest post expounding on that?
Breaker Morant says
Yes, I will work on that pronto as I have been thinking about it. Thanks for asking.
Saddle Tramp says
I was clearly brought up during a time of more clearly defined traditional roles for men and women but that started to change very quickly so I was amenable to it (sort of). At that time it was so much in the hyper stage. Now we have the emasculation and de defeminization (for lack of a better term) if you will. What is a natural course or not mystifies the hell out of me to be honest. Is it a free and natural choice or unfair social pressures. I had a girl in my Industrial Arts woodworking class in high school.The only one in the class and first I one I was ever aware of. She was damn good too. Never heard of a boy in Home Economics class until I was long graduated from High School. What determines it? Is giving boys Barbie Dolls (not that I did or would have) any different than giving girls Tonka Trucks. What about what could be viewed by some as the masculinity of some females in the military let’s say or any formerly non-traditional roles. Personally I do not find it feminine or attractive to see a muscle bound woman. My personal taste and not a judgement. Do most women feel the same in the opposite? For an example just the other day when I was having a lunch of Udon Noodle Chicken Soup at a very good Japanese Restaurant in the leafy Village of Claremont eating at the table next to me was a young couple clearly male and female except he had black fingernail polish which for me is disconcerting. Of course that is very mild compared to so much else out there. Of course Pirates wore ear rings. As guess as long as you have a knife between your teeth it’s ok. Transgender and all those other away from the norms identities open an entirely different chapter. Norms are established from the extremes and are not static. I am not always happy about it. Some times a mind can be so open the mind falls out. Not adviseabl either.
I say this respectfully but somewhat ruefully as well that I have had trouble keeping up with the current acronyms. I also struggle with what is or should be considered normal. Forcing someone to comply to my view or ridiculing them may not be the solution. I see a lot of strange stuff out there that I cannot imagine is good for anyone. Reprehensible in fact. There is a broad perspective. Femininity or masculinity are not mutually inclusive or exclusive to what is good or bad. Patriarchy and Matriarchy both hold equal potential for disaster. What is the perfect blend. I guess we will find out. Surely RIR will be on the scene when we do…
Also, my theological exposure leads me to understand that [G]od is neither male or female and also in the immortal words of Ray Wylie Hubbard “Buddha was not a Christian, but Jesus would have made a good Buddhist.”
lane batot says
Yeah, I’d say anybody with a knife between his/her teeth can wear earrings wherever they want! And the whole G. I. Joe vs. Barbie thing is RIDICULOUS! I found out as a young kid that they BOTH can be blown up with firecrackers equally well!
TJ says
Also, Big Jim from the Wolf Pack can repeatedly “accidentally” run over your little sister’s Barbie in his commando motor home when they are camping.
Somehow I would always convince her to play again. Poor girl.…
Big Jim was probably on the juice. When you bent his arm, his bicep would flex. Plus he had wolf prints on the bottom of his boots. Kinda wanted to be like Big Jim.
https://www.google.com/search?q=big+jim+and+the+wolf+pack&client=safari&hl=en-us&prmd=sivn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiSy9O41_vfAhWIEXwKHTZnA9cQ_AUoAnoECAwQAg&biw=375&bih=553#imgrc=HYjRluJeWjN1cM
Cuz who doesn’t want wolf prints on the bottom of their boots, right?
lane batot says
Dang. I’m not familiar with Big Jim and the Wolf Pack? Maybe too late for me? I had a co-worker that revealed she and her friends used to play “Whorehouse Barbie” with their doll collections! Ahhh, the imitative imaginations of children! She only told me that after I had revealed I used to stage farm animal revolutions with my toy farm set, after reading and being inspired by George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” at a very young age! I had to constantly replenish my plastic farmhands, so many of which came to gruesome ends! And I STILL have my comrade plastic pigs, including Napoleon and Snowball! Two legs bad, four legs good! At the time, I had no idea I was symbolically recreating communist revolutions in play! Later, in High School, when Orwell was required reading, I impressed my then English teacher with my obvious familiarity with that satirical novel–although I never actually told her perzackly WHY !
You are a font of wonderful tales Lane Batot.
Saddle Tramp says
Never fails:
Should be: At that time it was “not” so much in the hyper stage.
Other glaring typo’s but this one was a structural flaw to my point. That was a more revolutionary stage but not the hyper extremes as today. There has been a major change of directions.…
Thanks!
Kevin Kay says
Last summer I was with my boys at Boy Scout summer camp. On the second or third night they held the welcoming campfire at the ampitheater. At the end was a root beer float party at which current dance music was played. Now remember that these are first year Scouts up to guys about to age out; we’re talking 12 to 18 year olds, and probably close to 500 of them. They flooded the stage and danced like goofy kids for an hour. I took a video to show my wife because I was overwhelmed by the spontaneity and willingness to behave crazily without fear of embarassment. This is what happens when young people are given room to be free. This is also why traditional/ primitive cultures have mens’ and womens’ societies; they recognize that there are differences and that the young benefit from close association with mentors and peers of their own sex. I believe that there should be integration between boys and girls and that both should be given instruction and freedom to choose their path because that is how our culture is organized and we all benefit from each person’s individual talents in an industrial society. It is crucial, however, to have the safety of single sex organization. Boys and girls need to be boys and girls and be able to learn how to be men and women without the distractions of sexual competition. The onus is on us to be mentors and exemplars of masculinity and that includes achievement, humble strength, adventure, risk, and violence, if the circumstances warrant it. That is simply being human, and “toxic” only when used to take advantage of others.
Thanks Kevin. There is absolutely a need for single-sex spaces. I understand why the walls were broken down, because exclusion from outfits like the Jonathan Club in LA probably really were inhibiting economic opportunities for women, etc. But the pendulum — as it does — swung out too far and we’ve lost valuable things in pursuit of equity. And it’s inequitable in itself, because exclusively female spaces are looked upon as beneficial and exclusively male spaces are looked upon as discriminatory and toxic.
lane batot says
Radical feminists are all whiny about all-male activities and get-togethers until the guys insist on accompanying girls-night-out!
RJ says
The ownership of rifles and pistols are basic to the culture of this country. I belonged to a Rifle Club and learned the “safe handling” of firearms at a young age. I believe we would benefit from these Clubs today. I learned on my own when helping a farmer clear his property of critters, going to check a kill shot from over 100 yards, that I didn’t like what I saw and choose to not do that anymore. It did not stop me from the enjoyment of being in a Rifle Club or owning firearms.
I remain after 78 years baffled when people want to blame cold steel for the actions of men and women’s poor choices with firearms. I think back to my grade school years watching Tom Mix and others show us how to shoot Indians to solve problems. Those game we played. Each year the movies got more expressive on how to use firearms against other people as war broke out and stopped. By College, we were taking bets on how many would die on each Untouchable episode. This escalated into Video Games where rewards were given for more kills with firearms. In movies and video games, the escalation progressed from not showing the gun shoot to vivid machine gun blasts and much blood and body parts in an area. I have the belief now that our media outlets from news, movies and video games have taught a generation how to enjoy solving problems with firearms. We have paid this industry billions of dollars for this education. Have anti-gun folks ever considered dealing with real cause to human action and reaction? It is overstated but guns require a human choice to use them against another human. Is there a way for us to affect the pocketbooks of those who glorify killing our fellow man? Gun control as part of the solution, simply does what you have pointed out. Criminalize us.
Have we lost the Morals and Ethics making us a civilized community? How do we make our choices we must be responsible for?
Professionally I believe in treating etiology of the disease. The gun is not the etiology of needing Gun Control Legislation, it seems many don’t know that. A well-publicized voluntary boycott of any gun based entertainment by a sizeable group would have a monetary impact on the Industry. Can it be done? Just saying and asking.….…
Many of us are in support of the outrage of poor thinking concerning SB 501, vote it down ASAP.
RJ says
The ownership of rifles and pistols are basic to the culture of this country. I belonged to a Rifle Club and learned the “safe handling” of firearms at a young age. I believe we would benefit from these Clubs today. I learned on my own when helping a farmer clear his property of critters, going to check a kill shot from over 100 yards, that I didn’t like what I saw and choose to not do that anymore. It did not stop me from the enjoyment of being in a Rifle Club or owning firearms.
I remain after 78 years baffled when people want to blame cold steel for the actions of men and women’s poor choices with firearms. I think back to my grade school years watching Tom Mix and others show us how to shoot Indians to solve problems. Those game we played. Each year the movies got more expressive on how to use firearms against other people as war broke out and stopped. By College, we were taking bets on how many would die on each Untouchable episode. This escalated into Video Games where rewards were given for more kills with firearms. In movies and video games, the escalation progressed from not showing the gun shoot to vivid machine gun blasts and much blood and body parts in an area. I have the belief now that our media outlets from news, movies and video games have taught a generation how to enjoy solving problems with firearms. We have paid this industry billions of dollars for this education. Have anti-gun folks ever considered dealing with real cause to human action and reaction? It is overstated but guns require a human choice to use them against another human. Is there a way for us to affect the pocketbooks of those who glorify killing our fellow man? Gun control as part of the solution, simply does what you have pointed out. Criminalize us.
Have we lost the Morals and Ethics making us a civilized community? How do we make our choices we must be responsible for?
Professionally I believe in treating etiology of the disease. The gun is not the etiology of needing Gun Control Legislation, it seems many don’t know that. A well-publicized voluntary boycott of any gun based entertainment by a sizeable group would have a monetary impact on the Industry. Can it be done? Just saying and asking.….…
Many of us are in support of the outrage of poor thinking concerning SB 501, vote it down ASAP.
Saddle Tramp says
I say this with utmost respect and with no hyperbole intended. Perhaps to some or many’s dissatisfaction I have often brought up nuclear weapons as the extreme (but nonetheless) a real threat. The analogy could be made that only people kill with nuclear weapons not the nukes themselves. We have already reached the capacity to destroy the planet. More nukes and more guns are not the answer. Who blinks first? Who decides who the “bad” guy is. Who is the bad guy? I assume nothing. The number one rule I follow (obviously) is that not everybody in the world thinks like me. That is as it should be. As for accusations of toxic masculinity by reverse discrimations I stand firmly against it. How we determine the gradients is a very sticky wicket indeed. I am taking a break from my visit to the Orange Empire Railway Museum. Museum is somewhat of a misnomer someone who has been would know. There is a BUFFALO SPRINGFIELD SCARIFIER on display. This is the namesake of the group by the way. Anyway, I would venture that not too many today would have a snowball’s chance in hell of riding this uncushioned beast day after day. Plowing behind a mule all day probably the same. They have done a helluva job out here resurrecting and renovating everything from steam to electric and diesel. This is the behind the scenes day. The nitty and gritty. Boneyards and all the rest. They have a mail train that was active from 1924 until 1967. The Fast Mail Express. A 16 “man” crew. All 16 had .45’s and the boss had a shotgun as well, just in case the others tried him on. It ran from Chicago to L.A. and delivered mail on the fly by hook. Gold and Silver were on board many times. They sorted the mail as they went which was around 300 tons a run. The crew never got off and slept in short shifts. Not a comfortable job. I don’t think we will see that again. This mail car looks just like when the last crew walked off in 1967. Car No. RPO60.
You have to trust your crew…
Breaker Morant says
It may have been mentioned, but when I first saw the title of the thread‑I thought it was going to be on the Winter War between Finland and Russia-circa 1940.
I think “Motte” was the name for the tactic of the Finns when the cut the Russian columns into ever smaller pieces.
My wife is of full Finnish descent-so whenever my kids complain of the cold‑I tell them they can’t do that because their people killed a million Russians in the snow.
Saddle Tramp says
At the risk of addressing a venial sin of omissision, and for proper historical context I thought I would mention this since no one else has because I do feel that it is important. I thought someone else might have by now but that is not the case. Maybe a little more than an exaggeration as to the number of casualties. Statistics not withstanding it was a frozen hell of a resistance the Finns put up preventing what could have been much, much worse. However it did not end in victory as the Russians regrouped and took ground as a result. Later we Americans had an unholy marriage of convenience with the Stalin and we know the rest of that story. Patton did not get his way. You cannot prove a negative so we can never know for sure. Not the first time or the last we have made these devil’s bargains. I recall an apt description of Stalin just so you know where I stand on him and Bolshevikism. Some totalitarians prefer to conceal themselves behind the machinery of state, but like the cannibal who lovingly cradles his victim as he digs around for his heart, Stalin liked conversing with his terrorized children. He was an intimate murderer and he held on for a very long reign of terror. I would also mention that Bulgakov also wrote THE WHITE GUARD which has been regarded as being among the truest depictions of war in all of literature. Of course as always I abhor lists that rank anything. Each to their own personal taste of course. Russians write some pretty damn good prison novels too, not that I would advise going there for source material…
Saddle Tramp says
Perhaps a recommendation for some winter reading. Mikhail Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita comes to mind. Ah, those Russians. They do make good writers and it might just fit in quite snugly here. The uncensored version of course but with the translator of your choosing…
I’ve been told several times that I should read that…