Skip to main content

Who is the manliest man of all?


Even if you have a friendly attitude toward men and manhood and have not been confused by bad feminism or the post-modern posing of "it's all a performance", it's pretty difficult to come up with one man who embodies manhood completely, or even best.



Two thoughts on why.

First, masculinity takes different shapes throughout the life-cycle. When a boy transitions to manhood, it is to young manhood, as is proper. But that has to ripen all through life and keep changing. There is a "fit" for manhood that suits a twenty-five year old but that no longer fits when he is sixty. So manhood is a naturally moving archetype. You might choose a man in his prime or at his peak as your model of The Manliest Man, but it would leave out way too much.

Second, there is not just one kind of real man needed in nature. A soldier, a farmer, a laborer, an artist, an athlete, a brewery worker...My guess is that all real men have some basic things in common but the context in which they play them out, the shape of their particular characters, place, time, etc. makes for a variety of men, all of whom can lay claim to the title of "man".

The image I am using of late is a constellation. It takes several stars to make a constellation, but not all of them are equally bright or central. And not every star is part of this constellation, Orion: the great hunter of Greek mythology, which seems a good choice for
the image.






_________________________________

Popular posts from this blog

What makes a man a man?

"Common to many societies, men must 'impregnate women, protect dependents from danger, and provision kith and kin'." Manhood in the Making: Cultural Concepts of Masculinity David D. Gilmore, 1991 This much seems to be written, as it were, in the male body as its basic syntax, its classic form, in the primal language of testosterone: To make and raise children with females To protect the group from animal predators and other human males. To hunt and thus provide meat/fish. Sounds like it comes down to...well, sex and violence. Or, more alliteratively and less provocatively: Procreation, protection and protein. A place to start. I assume that the evolutionary theory is basically correct and that the hunter-gatherer society is the primal human organization that still fundamentally shapes us as a species. “Reading” the male physically and socially, I am hypothesizing that the male gender is meant for three fundamental purposes: procreating, protecting the group from anim...

Men On Strike Against Marriage

The decreasing numbers of men getting married is a natural response to the changes in the institution. The risks are far higher and the rewards far less reliable than they used to be. Men are not afraid of commitment; they're afraid of being ransacked. Check out this piece. And here's a similar take: