Soft and Aimless or Strong and Calculating?

Dr. Melissa thinks a href=”http://drmelissaclouthier.blogspot.com/2008/05/men-need-to-butch-up.html””Men Need to Butch Up”:/abr /br /blockquoteSocietally, it seems like men don’t value or seem to be valued for manliness. A strong, hard-working, driven guy has been replaced with a soft, unmotivated, aimless man who can’t make a declarative sentence or find the will to do what needs to be done. Basically, too many men have become pansies. /blockquotebr /br /I have a question for you, Dr. Melissa. “Why should men–in your words–butch up?” Certainly women don’t seem to value manliness as they once did.br /br /I have a different take on things. Say that a man works hard, and “acts like a man,” rarely complaining and doing “man things.” What is his reward? In your mind, it is self-worth. This is nonsense. Self-worth comes from working hard and being rewarded. Today, that man is regarded as a “chump.” If a man works hard to get ahead, he puts it all at risk by having a family, in a society that says that his working means that he is now responsible for everything in a way that a woman will never be–if that man gets divorced. If he has kids, he is now responsible for their standard of living no matter what. No matter if he gets sick, no matter if his ex-wife is a spendthrift, no matter if his pay goes down, no matter what. The state puts him into indentured servitude to a family that no longer wants him as a member or wants him for four weekends a month. His life is toast, unless…he never “butches up” as you suggest. Your strategy can end in early death and a lifetime of servitude. “Soft and aimless” often ends with freedom. Which would you choose? br /br /Say, instead, a man sits around or get some half-assed job where he doesn’t make much. His wife is working and supporting the family or at least pays for more than half. He no longer has to worry about working himself into an early grave, his wife can take that risk. He can spend more time with the kids and if the marriage goes bad, he has every right to claim he was around them more and had more hands on time with them–thus gaining him a greater chance at custody or at least more visitation time. If the marriage goes well, the man wins since he gets to spend more time with his kids and avoid an early heart attack. If he does head to divorce court, even a chivalrous judge will have to admit that the father is the primary caregiver. Thus, he has more rights and privileges than his wife at that point, or at least as many. I have seen this strategy work for men firsthand. br /br /Have men become “pansies” (your words, not mine) using this strategy? I don’t think so. They have become strategic. This is different than aimless. Aimless suggests no purpose. Men may look aimless but underneath it all they actually have a purpose–to protect themselves from a society that considers men responsible for the welfare of women and children but offers them little or nothing in return. Who can blame them?br /br /Update: Vox Day has a href=”http://voxday.blogspot.com/2008/05/dr-helen-highlights-hausfrauhrer.html”further thoughts on the topic. /a