A curious era we live in, where young adults are simultaneously called to be both boys and men, frequently dressing as the latter while still acting as the former. I have heard many complaints against the childishness of my generation, and in truth I find many of them well founded. We have quite possibly traveled further down the path of irresponsibility than any previous generation, many still living with their parents into their late 20s as they ‘find themselves’ through various means. Whose fault is it, really? Are we to blame, or perhaps we should decry our parent’s permissiveness, which has allowed this to happen?
I am not interested in finger pointing here. This is, in fact, a far more introspective rant. There are many things I would like to be. I would like to be rich, famous, incredibly good looking, brilliant, devoutly pious, and completely humble, and you can see what a discordant list that is. But most of all there are two factions inside of me, sometimes at conflict and sometimes in accord: I wish to enjoy all the joys of boyhood, but I wish simultaneously to be a man.
Now some might argue that there is not conflict between these two factions; after all, what are men but boys with bigger, more expensive toys and the means to purchase them? But I would argue that this perception is at the heart of the current maturity crisis among males, for there is a very distinct difference.
The most striking difference is the handling of responsibility. For a boy, there is no question, if there is responsibility, it is only his if he so desires it. Otherwise he will turn it over to his parents, or failing that, neglect it entirely. For a man this is not an option. Every responsibility must be met and handled. While being the most striking difference, this is probably the easiest hurdle. The difference is clear, and the independence indicative of manhood clearly denotes which side one should come down on. Now I shall venture into waters more murky.
Social behaviour is a far more delicate subject, encompassing a variety of areas. The man must be both honest and polite, without drifting into the nebula known as political correctness. He is obligated to know enough about any subject to have some sort of opinion, though he must simultaneously be open minded enough to accept if he is in error. The boy holds no such obligations; he may say what he likes and frequently will categorically refuse to accept that he may be wrong. Such is the manner of stubborn child. But this is not always easy to tell. Frequently one will enter the territory where, despite proper discussion, a person will stubbornly hold ground. Such resistance may at times be laudable, and as such, where does it cross over from manly fortitude into childish obstinance?
Then we come to the subset of social behaviour which affects me the most: recreation. In many ways the recreation of men and boys is historically laid out to have certain areas of separation and certain areas of overlap. Intelligent parlour room conversation is located well within the bounds of a man’s recreation, while camping and fishing show clear overlap between the territory of men and boys. Although when both parties are partaking their roles are clearly defined as teacher and student, leader and follower, guide and tenderfoot. But the realm of a child’s recreation contains my greatest dilemma. Things such as slides and swings (especially tire swings) and other such playground equipment is most definitely not in the realm of manly recreation. Yet I find these activities most enjoyable. Does this make me less of a man? At what point do we finally set aside these activities? Perhaps once we have children of our own? Or do we instead use our children as an excuse to continue reveling in such childish delights?
I do not know the answers, although I suspect some. I am not sure how far I would trust such answers if I were told them, because I would not know if their source was in honesty or charity. But you are most welcome to give them anyways, for to ignore such comments outright would be a childish thing indeed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is something with which I have had to come to terms. The question I always ask myself is whether maturity comes at the expense of innocence? Does responsibility come at the expense of freedom? I think that the first instinct of most is that the answer is yes, so whichever one they desire most is the one they retain or sacrifice. Hence, the rise in mind boggling combinations of mature irresponsible persons, responsible immature persons and the like. The true adult sees through the question and chooses maturity while retaining the innocence, chooses responsibility while retaining the freedom. It may be a different form of all of the above than we are used to, but they are nevertheless not mutually exclusive. I like retaining as much of my innocence as possible, while gaining maturity. I like retaining my freedom while accepting the responsibilities and the benefits that come from them.
ReplyDeleteI like recreation. I'm sure that a lot of people do. The problem is that a lot of people think that recreation mean anything that involves drinking and carousing. People raise eyebrows (usually with comments suggesting that I obtain a new hobby) when I say that my hobby, my favourite form of recreation, is mathematics. It is recreation, re-creation, to create something again. Destruction of self, others, and property is not recreation, it is behavioural disorder. Is your recreation, creating something again? If yes, then you are telling yourself the truth. Then the question arises on whether a particular form of recreation is manly or boyish. The real question is whether or not that question should be an issue. I argue that any activity that can be enjoyed by persons of all ages tends to be classifiable as recreation, and any activity that cannot be enjoyed by persons of all ages generally is not recreation. I would go so far as to say that all activities fit into these categories strictly, but I have not had the opportunity to classify all activities. Indeed, you can look at activities that adults engage in and see the roots of childhood intertwined tightly. What is an artist other than a mature three-year old finger painter? What is an spelunker other than a person who expanded their playground to include the bowels of the earth? What is an inventor other than a person who dreamed and made their dreams a reality? Perhaps the separation between childhood play and adult recreation is a matter of proficiency and maturity rather than constructive and destructive behaviour.
Thank you, Tim. I don't think I could have hoped for such a well reasoned response as that.
ReplyDeleteI will never think less of a man for enjoying the simple things in life. Swings are ALWAYS acceptable recreation.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Thoughtful reflection! Both of you. In response to the blur between boyhood and manhood, it seems to me that a boy becomes a man in the existential sense when he is in full possession of himself and being so, is willing to give his life for something totally...whether that be willing to die for something (God, country) or die to self for something (the Church, family). Of course, self-mastery never meant death to spontaneity and thrill, these opportunities just take other forms. But I'd say... go ahead and rock that tire swing.
ReplyDelete