Excellence is an art won by training and habituation. We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have those because we have acted rightly. We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.
Introduction
tl;dr: Masculinity is often discussed as an abstract and timeless concept. This is not a useful approach to discussing masculinity. Rather, it should be rooted in the problems men face and the solutions they choose.
Masculinity is a contentious issue fraught with subtle rhetorical traps and zealous ideological ownership. When we talk about masculinity, we often fall victim to these pitfalls and argue at cross purposes without awareness. So, please forgive me for delaying the discussion of what I want to talk about to first frame the discussion. The purpose is to ensure that we are talking about the same thing.
Contemporary discussions of masculinity tend to be juxtaposed or contrasted with traditional hegemonic masculinity, which is deeply rooted in Christianity. My experience is that defenders of the latter make no distinction between men addressing modern problems, men handling Middle Age problems, nor men making sense of ancient problems. For them, manliness is a timeless ahistorical and acultural concept. This, I believe, stems from Christianity's enduring legacy.
However, I am no Christian and I pray to no god. When I discuss manliness, I am not appealing to religious ideals. While I will appeal to ancient history for conceptual insight, and other may appeals to religion for the same reason, my understanding of masculinity is rooted in the problems of today that men face, atheists and believe alike. The concept of masculinity I will shortly introduce is meant for the men of today, whatever "man" means and whatever today brings.
With that, let's begin.
Eudaimonia
tl;dr: Eudaimonia is about doing well. It's a morality of functional excellence that leads to a life well-lived and fulfillment.
Hopefully, many of us have heard of virtue ethics. In short, it's a morality of functional excellence. For Aristotle, its originator, virtue ethics was the study and careful application of traits of character that led to a life well-lived. This doesn't necessarily mean a pleasurable life, though pleasure is an important part. For example, eudaimonia rejects a life spent on video games, as fun as they might be. But a life spent pursuing ends that undermine the capacity of others to live eudaimonically is not virtuous either. Superb murderers are also not paradigms of virtue. Neither pure pleasure nor excellence in every capacity is the goal of life.
Aristotle believed that the virtues were practiced habits that became so ingrained in us that we'd have to put some effort into deviating from it. For example, I think back to when I was first working in a restaurant and could barely follow a recipe. I put considerable thought into making the menu's offerings. Over time, though, mashed potatoes could be made routinely while I thought about other things. I'd eventually receive compliments on a run o' the mill side dish like it was the main course. I became a virtuous mashed potato maker. For Aristotle, the practice of one's profession could lead to virtue in it. Virtuous shoemakers supplied virtuous soldiers and virtuous merchants alike.
Back to what I said above: virtue ethics is a morality of functional excellence. It answers the question of "How do I do this with excellence?"
Eudaimonic Masculinity
tl;dr: Eudaimonic masculinity is about performing masculinity in such a way that it leads to a life well-lived and fulfillment. The concept is specific to time and place, outcome-oriented, and relational. It's not answer but a framework to help guide men's judgements.
How, then, do we perform as excellent men?
This is the core question of my idea of masculinity. Note that this is a performative concept of masculinity. We are men because of how we act, not because of who we are. Nor is our manhood derived from unchangeable biological or genealogical characteristics. While such conceptions of masculinity exist, they do not provide useful guidance.
For a man to act, he must do so in the presently where he is. My concept of masculinity is specific to time and place and everything associated with those things. To live well as a man in modern America will differ both between ancient Spain and even 50 years ago in modern America. The problems men face vary in each case and addressing them such that solutions leads to a sense of fulfillment and happiness is what eudaimonic masculinity is all about. It is outcome-oriented.
My concept of masculinity is also relational. Just as new line cook learns his trade-specific virtue by cooking and being provided feedback from his supervisor and the restaurant's customers, a man must learn to navigate his life with feedback from his own sense of self and from others with whom he interacts. Contrary to popular belief, men need other people, especially other men, on which to lean and from which to learn.
Ultimately, eudaimonic masculinity is an overarching framework to help men make decisions about to how to live a good life. It won't provide easy answers, but helps guide thinking and weigh considerations. Being a man is difficult these days, especially as our culture changes rapidly, but that's no excuse for failure. As men, we should always strive for excellence.
It Starts with Problems
tl;dr: To live well must answer today's problems with solutions tailored for it. And men have many problems today.
Problems are the bread and butter of masculinity, and men have many. Before I layout some, I'd like to re-emphasize that your experience as a man is both individual to you, your culture, your country, your socio-economic status, expectations of you, etc. The problems I lay out are general trends but I'll point out some of mine personal problems as an example.
Generally, young boys and men in America lack education achievements; our wages have declined and we're more likely to experience job losses during recessions; we're lonely and isolated, which leads to deaths of despair that disproportionately affect white men who have not earned college degrees. Some young men are so fed up with the employment contest that they've become NEETs, removing themselves entirely from the workforce. Within each of the previously described categories of problems, there are a bunch of smaller problems that give rise to the overall trends. And still, there are other general trends that I have not mentioned.
Personally, I'm a married man that has felt both lonely and isolated within my relationship and outside of it. In my thirty-sixth year, I have zero friends outside of work and one friend at work. And while I could pursue that friendship outside of work, I for whatever reason do not. As for my marriage, many times I find it difficult to empathize with my partner. While I have no problem doing the "gendered" work of cleaning and cooking, I find myself often weighing my contributions to the relationship and its maintenance over her seeming lack of achievable action items, as if the strength of our relationship is dependent on who cleans the house and how clean it is. And then, of course, I have other personal problems of my own.
Answering the problems in our lives as men, searching for the solutions, or more likely on-going approaches, that fit our circumstances is where eudaimonic masculinity starts.
Applying Eudaimonic Masculinity
tl;dr: Men can find guidance in role models, religion, or science, or just choose to roll with the punches. And men can also just talk with others.
To recount, we have general problems affecting men and personal problems, and there may be considerable overlap. Having at least identified them, now we can look to the eudaimonic masculinity framework for how to navigate those problems. But just as there are many ways to become a virtuous mashed potato maker, there are many ways of becoming an excellent man.
One of the most reliable ways is to find yourself a good role model, fictional or real. Our evaluation of other men as role models should focus firstly, on what problems they have and, secondly, the outcomes of their solutions. Back to the fundamental question of my concept of masculinity, did the problems they face lead to performing an excellent version of manhood? One way to know is if whether they are likely to end up in jail or otherwise on the wrong side of the law. Generally, time spent in jail is due to social transgressions. This is why I cannot recommend Andrew Tate as a role model. On other hand, the recommendation against jail is not universal. Perhaps you can think of circumstances where jail time is both justified and fulfilling?
Of course, merely not going to jail isn't enough to make someone a virtuous man. They need to be fulfilled and living well. Happiness is a component of that, but it's not everything. Does a man have regrets about how they acted even if it led to a happy outcome? How do others feel about how he faced his problems with them? Do they have regrets or other problems deriving from his decision?
Men young and old alike may find that they have many role models, each for a different situation or problem. For example, I aspire to write like Obama's speechwriters to develop thoughtful eloquence; I aspire to be as knowledgeable as Noam Chomsky; I aspire to do rhetorical analysis like a blogger I read religiously; I aspire to look like my 26 year-old self one day again, when I was neither particularly fat nor muscular; I aspire to have the peace of mind of a Buddha and the open heart of Guanyin. In no way will I ever meet all of these aspirations, but that was never the point. The point is striving to live well.
Another way is to seek out the science and other guidance. My concept of masculinity does not privilege science over religion or vice versa. Religion is a valuable and enduring source of comfort and guidance to many, including myself. I just mentioned Buddha. When science and religious teachings differ, a man must choose for himself which he believes is more valuable. However, religious guidance often focuses achieving a desirable afterlife, while eudaimonic masculinity is concerned with this life. But ultimately, it is up to the man to choose.
To endure the consequences of our actions is ultimately the only way for us to improve as men and develop our virtues. Whether we choose to model ourselves after others, look for expertise, or make a choice and roll with the punches, we must face the repercussions. What separates eudaimonic masculinity from some other approaches is that my concept is both prudent before, critical during, and reflective after our choices. Are we thinking 'correctly' about the situation to begin with? Are we responding 'appropriately'? Is this what we expected? What could we have done better? How do others feel about my decision and what is the appropriate weight of their concerns and feelings? Thought processes like these are what lead to a life well lived.
One of the biggest decisions I made when I was young was moving out of my father's house. When I brought it up to him he said it would be a huge mistake because I couldn't save as much money if I were paying rent. Technically, he was 100% correct. But I realized that I wasn't concerned with saving money so much as just getting away from the parent-child relationship that subordinated my concerns to his. I moved out and it was everything I thought it'd be. I could make my own choices without the anxiety of his oversight. That's not say that I didn't love my father, but that as a young man, I had to make a choice that seemed monumental at the time and experience the consequences for myself.
One more thing, though. This section has focused on making choices individually, but that's not how men must make choices; there's no law of individual decision-making for us. We can always ask others, especially other men, about what they think, how they'd approach our situation. As married men, some of us probably should ask our partner what they think, too. While they may few and far between, men's groups may also offer places to seek advice. Personally, I'm increasingly coming to understand I am not alone as a man, and should be far more active in turning to others for insight. I wholeheartedly recommend it for others as well. But, again, how do you feel about my advice and how much do you think you should weight it?
Developing the Eudaimonic Masculinity
tl;dr: I didn't mention specific virtues intentionally. What're you stories? What do you think of the concept?
I've tried to avoid mentioning specific virtues. As I said earlier, we face different problems and our solutions should be tailored to our situation. What matters is that we act in ways that we are ultimately fulfilled and pleased with how we've lived. The less we talk about masculinity as a timeless abstract concept, the more I think we can get to developing into virtuous men.
This is where I'd like to ask for your stories as men, whatever that means to you. What was your problem? How did you think about it? What approach did you take to that problem? What was the outcome? Was it effective in the way you thought it'd be? Do you think any general virtues can be drawn from your experience?
In any case, if you read this entire post, thank you. I'd also like your input on what you think of the concept itself.
It takes you here to a page titled "Antisemitism on campus surges as agitators take over", with the pinned post from Bradford Betz saying what the front page says.
Well, you asked if I was arguing against improving safety when compared to fatality rates for any activity.
But for me to have made that argument, I'd have to have said that there is no rate of fatality that would justify improving safety. So, I was asking if you think that's true:
But I sucked at wording it clearly. That's on me.
In short, no, I'm not arguing that. Really, I was just clarifying what the person you responded to was saying. I'm not making an argument either way.