No one in the public eye is currently driving
more media attention and polarized debate than presidential aspirant, reality
TV star, and billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump. His arrogance inspires
rabid admiration and visceral disgust in equal measure. Many are horrified by
the prospect that, as President, the bullying Trump might prove to be a Putin-style
authoritarian; many find that same cocky aggressiveness to be electrifyingly,
refreshingly virile. This raises an interesting, overlooked question: as a man, what kind of a role model
would a President Trump be for our sons?
In her recent City Journal article “Coarsener in Chief,”
Heather MacDonald addresses that very question. She is not a fan; after condemning
Trump as “the most gratuitously nasty public figure that this country has seen
in living memory” and “the very definition of a bully,” she urges his conservative
supporters to consider Trump’s “effect on civilized mores”:
Boys in particular need to be civilized. That
task will be more difficult with Trump in the White House... Any parent trying
to raise a boy to be respectful, courteous, and at least occasionally
self-effacing will have a hard time doing so when our national leader is so
reflexively impolite, just as it is harder to raise girls to be sexually
prudent when they are surrounded by media role models promoting promiscuity.
The culture has been coarsened enough already. It doesn’t need further
degradation from a president.
Amid quite a few uncivil ad feminam responses from Trump supporters that followed
MacDonald’s article were comments along these lines: “For seven years, my
family and friends have been waiting for a big, strong man to take center stage
and say, "This way, men!" — a man who can provide inspiring
leadership for America.” And this one, which seemed to sum things up nicely:
I wish Ms. Mac Donald had avoided making this
into an issue where nasty, loutish boys must be “civilized.” Frankly, one of
the problems we have been facing for the last half-century is the feminization
of society... Because the pendulum has swung so far in that direction, a
loudmouth buffoon like Trump seems authentic to a surprising number of people.
Those commenters
won’t get any argument from me about the feminization of America, a
half-century process (since the beginning of second wave feminism) which has
left too many young American men in a state of confusion and helplessness about
the definition and proper ideals of manhood. Nor would I deny that America is
sorely in need of an inspirational leader in the White House who exudes
strength and confidence and can restore American superpower. But are they
correct that our current state of affairs makes a “loudmouth buffoon like Trump”
seem authentically masculine? Is boorishness the mark of a leader of men? While
I don’t think Trump’s quiet competition for the presidency, Dr. Ben Carson, is
presidential material, is he any less manly because he doesn’t resort to
bullying or trumpeting (pun intended) his impressive achievements?
Manliness
is many things, and a fair subject for debate, but at its core, the basic ideals
of manliness are simple: it is confidence, not loudmouthed cockiness. It is
humility – not weakness, but humility
– and service, not egotism and self-aggrandizement. It is chivalry, not
bullying. It is leadership, not demagoguery. It is maturity and wisdom, not
pettiness. Navy SEALs, whom no one would argue are feminized or unmanly or
pushovers, are the epitome of such masculine characteristics.
These
qualities today, along with manners and gentlemanliness, are too often
considered old-fashioned and passé, and they are confused with weakness. Pop
culture today, from the concert arena to the sports arena, sadly celebrates the
brash, the egotistical, and the self-promoting, while the strong but quietly
humble get overlooked. That doesn’t make the former manlier. Arrogance does not
equate to masculine strength. If anything, arrogance proves to be nothing more
substantial than bluster when the chips are down.
Heather MacDonald
is correct that boys need to be
civilized as they are raised (although these days girls, who are surrounded by
all the wrong kinds of feminist role models, seem to need a strong civilizing
influence themselves). But while our culture currently strives to sand
down the rough edges of boys too far, there is a difference between civilizing boys
and feminizing them. Too many of the commenters beneath MacDonald’s article,
who seem eager to have a crass American Putin in the Oval Office, don’t seem to
understand that, and that is an alarming commentary on our cultural confusion
about manhood.
From Acculturated, 2/5/16
