Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Is there anything wrong with manly weeping?

#1
C C Offline
http://aeon.co/magazine/society/is-there...n-who-cry/

EXCERPT: One of our most firmly entrenched ideas of masculinity is that men don’t cry. Although he might shed a discreet tear at a funeral, and it’s acceptable for him to well up when he slams his fingers in a car door, a real man is expected to quickly regain control. Sobbing openly is strictly for girls.

This isn’t just a social expectation; it’s a scientific fact. All the research to date finds that women cry significantly more than men. [...] The discrepancy is such a commonplace, we tend to assume it’s biologically hard-wired [...]

But actually, the gender gap in crying seems to be a recent development. Historical and literary evidence suggests that, in the past, not only did men cry in public, but no one saw it as feminine or shameful. In fact, male weeping was regarded as normal in almost every part of the world for most of recorded history.

[...] Some might object that these are all public, ceremonial expressions of grief. Men might cry in this ritual manner over weighty issues of death, war and politics, but surely personal tears of love and frustration were still confined to women? In a word, no. In medieval romances, we find innumerable instance of knights crying purely because they miss their girlfriends.

[...] Still more remarkably, there’s no mention of the men in these stories trying to restrain or hide their tears. [...] They cry in a crowded hall with their heads held high. Nor do their companions make fun of this public blubbing; it’s universally regarded as an admirable expression of feeling. The Bible is full of similar references to demonstrative weeping by kings, entire peoples, and God Himself [...]

[...] So where did all the male tears go? The truth is, we don’t know for certain. There was no anti-crying movement. No treatises were written against men’s tears [...]

The most obvious possibility is that this shift is the result of changes that took place as we moved from a feudal, agrarian society to one that was urban and industrial. In the Middle Ages, most people spent their lives among those they had known since birth. [...] Medieval courts were also environments of extreme intimacy, where courtiers spent entire days in each other’s company, year after year.

[...] But from the 18th through the 20th centuries, the population became increasingly urbanised; soon, people were living in the midst of thousands of strangers. Furthermore, changes in the economy required men to work together in factories and offices where emotional expression and even private conversation were discouraged as time-wasting. As Tom Lutz writes in "Crying: The Natural and Cultural History of Tears" (1999), factory managers deliberately trained their workers to suppress emotion with the aim of boosting productivity: ‘You don’t want emotions interfering with the smooth running of things.’

Although some women worked in factories too, they were far more likely to remain in the home. [...] When a housewife or housemaid burst into tears, she was witnessed only by the members of her household. Often she wasn’t witnessed at all. Instead of being shouted at by a foreman, she could sob into her own laundry tub in peace.

Such contexts are known to have a significant effect on how rewarding it is to cry. [...] The question remains whether our culture’s suppression of men’s tears is harmful or beneficial. On the plus side, most of us are grateful not to have to regularly deal with weeping co-workers. [...] It can be an unwanted intimacy, the emotional equivalent of a groping hand. Most people’s gut reaction is to do whatever it takes to make the tears stop.

Furthermore, you don’t have to be paranoid to think that the power of tears opens the door to their use as manipulation. Psychologists recognise the role of manipulative tears, and even consider them to be innate. [...] social prohibitions against crying are arguably useful. [...] However, human beings weren’t designed to swallow their emotions, and there’s reason to believe that suppressing tears can be hazardous to your wellbeing....
Reply
#2
Magical Realist Offline
Quote:But from the 18th through the 20th centuries, the population became increasingly urbanised; soon, people were living in the midst of thousands of strangers. Furthermore, changes in the economy required men to work together in factories and offices where emotional expression and even private conversation were discouraged as time-wasting. As Tom Lutz writes in "Crying: The Natural and Cultural History of Tears" (1999), factory managers deliberately trained their workers to suppress emotion with the aim of boosting productivity: ‘You don’t want emotions interfering with the smooth running of things.’

The industrial age then as the driver to the ideal of the industrial man: the hard working, automatic, repressed, Victorian, self-disciplined, and rational creature of the late 19th century. A rationality furthermore of not being distracted by trivialities nor being derailed by emotional sensitivity to loss. The cold impassive operator behind the body. An ethic of proper performance at all times, with no allowance for the expression of inner needs or desires. Man the automaton, as void of feeling as the machinery he is an extention of 50 hours a week.
Reply
#3
elte Offline
That looks like the Calvinism that I was just reminded of a few minutes ago.

(Oct 9, 2015 06:20 PM)C C Wrote: http://aeon.co/magazine/society/is-there...n-who-cry/

EXCERPT: One of our most firmly entrenched ideas of masculinity is that men don’t cry. Although he might shed a discreet tear at a funeral, and it’s acceptable for him to well up when he slams his fingers in a car door, a real man is expected to quickly regain control. Sobbing openly is strictly for girls.

This isn’t just a social expectation; it’s a scientific fact. All the research to date finds that women cry significantly more than men. [...] The discrepancy is such a commonplace, we tend to assume it’s biologically hard-wired [...]

But actually, the gender gap in crying seems to be a recent development. Historical and literary evidence suggests that, in the past, not only did men cry in public, but no one saw it as feminine or shameful. In fact, male weeping was regarded as normal in almost every part of the world for most of recorded history.

[...] Some might object that these are all public, ceremonial expressions of grief. Men might cry in this ritual manner over weighty issues of death, war and politics, but surely personal tears of love and frustration were still confined to women? In a word, no. In medieval romances, we find innumerable instance of knights crying purely because they miss their girlfriends.

[...] Still more remarkably, there’s no mention of the men in these stories trying to restrain or hide their tears. [...] They cry in a crowded hall with their heads held high. Nor do their companions make fun of this public blubbing; it’s universally regarded as an admirable expression of feeling. The Bible is full of similar references to demonstrative weeping by kings, entire peoples, and God Himself [...]

[...] So where did all the male tears go? The truth is, we don’t know for certain. There was no anti-crying movement. No treatises were written against men’s tears [...]

The most obvious possibility is that this shift is the result of changes that took place as we moved from a feudal, agrarian society to one that was urban and industrial. In the Middle Ages, most people spent their lives among those they had known since birth.  [...] Medieval courts were also environments of extreme intimacy, where courtiers spent entire days in each other’s company, year after year.

[...] But from the 18th through the 20th centuries, the population became increasingly urbanised; soon, people were living in the midst of thousands of strangers. Furthermore, changes in the economy required men to work together in factories and offices where emotional expression and even private conversation were discouraged as time-wasting. As Tom Lutz writes in "Crying: The Natural and Cultural History of Tears" (1999), factory managers deliberately trained their workers to suppress emotion with the aim of boosting productivity: ‘You don’t want emotions interfering with the smooth running of things.’

Although some women worked in factories too, they were far more likely to remain in the home. [...] When a housewife or housemaid burst into tears, she was witnessed only by the members of her household. Often she wasn’t witnessed at all. Instead of being shouted at by a foreman, she could sob into her own laundry tub in peace.

Such contexts are known to have a significant effect on how rewarding it is to cry. [...] The question remains whether our culture’s suppression of men’s tears is harmful or beneficial. On the plus side, most of us are grateful not to have to regularly deal with weeping co-workers. [...] It can be an unwanted intimacy, the emotional equivalent of a groping hand. Most people’s gut reaction is to do whatever it takes to make the tears stop.

Furthermore, you don’t have to be paranoid to think that the power of tears opens the door to their use as manipulation. Psychologists recognise the role of manipulative tears, and even consider them to be innate. [...] social prohibitions against crying are arguably useful. [...] However, human beings weren’t designed to swallow their emotions, and there’s reason to believe that suppressing tears can be hazardous to your wellbeing....

I recently heard that John Boehner and some Republicans were literally crying about his resignation.   I've had some good cries.  I was the only one I know of that cried at my dad's funeral service.  I cried like crazy over the circumstances of a friend's suicide.
Reply
#4
C C Offline
At one time I would have thought the blame went all the way back to stoicism for the West, and some of the dispassionate meditations and practices of psychological invincibility in the East. But I guess history does substantiate it being a more recent development.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)