Now is Not the Time, Or is It. . .

When the Universe Fails to Provide the "Right" Conditions.

Addendum. . .

Yes. I know. Technically, you can’t start with an addendum. In my defense, I didn’t and I’m not. Despite appearances.

I originally crafted this piece as a long footnote to an objection I couldn’t figure out how to include in my previous piece, “I Come in Peace: But I’m Likely to Leave in Pieces.” I provided three links to it in there. Despite (there’s that word again) my hopes and dreams, almost no one clicked on it.

I get it. We’re all busy. Shit, I appreciate that anyone takes the time to read anything I write, so I’m not complaining.

But, I wanted to include it in the “public record” because it’s relevant, as well as get some more eyes on it. I think it’s contributive to the overall discussion (despite relying on some earlier cultural references). I’m also in the throes of writing my next piece. It’s going to be about the “man cold,” and it’s taking some serious crafting. So, this can serve as a place holder until then.

And finally, I’m recording the first episode of a potential podcast idea I’ve cooked up with a colleague tomorrow entitled “Two Angry Men.” If it ever sees the light of day, I’ll let you know, but there’s a good chance I’ll reference some of the ideas I discuss herein, and it’d be good to have this out there in that case.

With no further ado, here’s the original piece.

I Wanted to Let You Know. . .

I agree. And I disagree.

I know things are tense right now.

Some of that tension is completely legit. For instance, the fact that all the seasonal firefighters hired by the Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife, and Park Service were summarily fired, or more accurately un-hired, is going to turn out to be a huge fucking problem when the American West catches on fire in a few short months.

I’m sure there are other examples. (The proximity of WWIII being one of them.)

Some of the tension is not. Anything to do with what we’re currently calling large bodies of water, or mountains, or the latest Tweet doesn’t mean shit. But, true to form, it’s these things which seem to occupy our minds and attention. They used to say, “if it bleeds, it leads.” Does anyone remember the shock and dismay portrayed in that Madmen scene when the plane goes down? Their feelings seem so quaint, and antiquated at the same time.

We’ve been completely desensitized to blood and gore however, so maybe it’s more accurate to say something along the lines, “If it outrages, put it on the front pages.” The issue is that outrage is subjective whereas blood is visceral. The latter has substance, whereas the former is what we make of it. And true to form, what we make of it says as much, or more, about us than the thing itself.

I See You, I Hear You, I Believe You. . .

There’s a very real, very palpable feeling of a tide pulling us back out to sea, especially as concerns women right now. Hell, we can’t even agree on a definition of what “one” is. It doesn’t get more foundational than that. From who counts, to what they can do or can’t do with their bodies and minds, it all seems less stable than a couple of months ago (which begs the question, how stable was it really?).

And here I come trotting along saying, “Y’all, it’s time we pay attention to men.”

I appreciate how tone deaf that may appear. I’m not unsympathetic to the sentiment.

But, if you’ll allow me a story.

Many, many years ago (okay, maybe only 30 or so...which in the grand scheme isn’t a lot), I attended the March for the Animals in Washington, D.C. I was a young, opinionated straight-edge, vegan, hardcore kid (young man really) and considered it my duty to be the voice of the voiceless (which goes to show, the more things change the more they stay the same).

At that march, there were a lot of speakers. They’d get up and tell us about their focus in animal rights. More often than not, they’d also tell the crowd why their area of concern was the most pressing, most relevant, and most crucial part of the movement.

I specifically remember a lone woman who climbed onto stage and implored us, begged us for a good five minutes, to focus our collective attention on ending something or other regarding horses. The subject of her appeal, even at the time, didn’t stick with me, but her sincerity and emphasis did. I remember her saying over and over again, “If we could all just come together on *insert issue* for a very short period of time, then we can end *insert practice.*” She went on to add, once we accomplished this, whatever group she represented would be willing to put all their support behind whomever (exactly how that would get decided remained a bit vague).

I was struck by the logic of her thinking. I even thought it had merit, but zero chance of success.

I feel similarly about the idea that given the current environment, now is not the time to turn our attention to the masculinity crisis.

And, I’m With You (in My Own Way). . .

Here’s why.

There’s often this idea that in order to accomplish a task it’s best to have all hands on deck doing the same thing. Many hands making light work and all that. When it comes to picking up kids’ toys, it’s solid advice. There are many examples where this is not the case. Did you know that if you’re forced to fight multiple attackers, it’s better to square off against five than two? The reason being that the more attackers there are, the more likely they are to get in each other’s way (all things being equal probably best not to test this one out in reality).

It’s most certainly not true when the goal requires multiple steps, say as in cooking a four course meal, or putting in a fire line. When I fought fire I was always impressed how a crew working in coordination was able to accomplish something much bigger than its parts. To this day, I’m flabbergasted when I find myself in a situation where someone thinks we should be doing the same thing when it’s obvious multiple steps are required. Divide and conquer as they say.

To the degree that I get any criticism, it’s that I’m overly critical of the Left. In today’s world, that must mean I’m part of the Right. But, I’m not. I’m actually thinking about adopting a “Centrical Humanist” label, but that’s beside the point. Which is?

It’s crucial we turn our critical eyes inward before worrying about those other “guys” over there, and their problems. Turns out, I’m a man, and I don’t think anyone’s going to disagree with me on this, but men are the problem here. Well, not men per se, but the structures around them which encourage, reward, and require certain types of behavior. So, it makes sense that this where I’d focus my attention. Arguably, this is where I can have the most positive impact on achieving the broader goal of a truly decent society. It’s my part of the job.

Which brings me to my last point. Setting the current environment aside, the “masculinity crisis” lies at the heart of misogyny. A confident, secure, well-balanced kid doesn’t prowl the school yard looking for other kids to bully. Likewise, a confident, secure, well-balanced man doesn’t hate women. He doesn’t subjugate women. He doesn’t demean women. He doesn’t feel a need to. He tries to lift them up because he knows they’re an equal part of the whole.

If we simply focus our attention on the short-term, on the issues of here and now, then the best we’ll be able to offer are temporary band-aids. This is important work. There are no shortage of people doing it. But, if we don’t address the root cause, if we don’t address what’s “wrong” with men, while we might stem the bleeding for a bit, we won’t fix the wound.

That’s what I’m trying to do.