This was originally supposed to be a response to *this* – a synopsis by one Ms. Brigitte Dale regarding an article discussing the growing trend of guys taking ever longer to “grow up”
….Honestly though, this whole thing as a societal phenomenon is pretty interesting. It’s easy on the one hand to simply dismiss it as the inevitable negative outcome of widespread wealth and entitlement and a superficial media culture, and it’s entirely possible that that would make up the bulk of the correct analysis.
It is also possible, however that there is more to it than that. In the animal kingdom, generally the longer it takes for an animal to reach adulthood, often the more complicated the the requirements are of integrating into that species’ social structure. i.e. the longer one spends learning how to be part of the group before taking their ultimate place in the herd, the better one’s chances of success are. Acquiring “adult” status in human society is tad bit more complex than in a herd of elephants or a troop of monkeys but the benefits of spending more time in a formative state of flux are likely similar. In our parent’s time, and even more so their parent’s time, “Growing up” was a necessity. If you weren’t reasonably successful then you were either out on the streets or a step above that in some soul-crushing factory type job. There certainly weren’t student loans and forgiving parents and government assistance to make your twenties easy and fun. Pretty much finding a corporate ladder and climbing it as soon as possible was the only way to vastly improve your standard of living beyond a few steps away from poverty. Now though it’s easy to get away with not starting a career until late in your twenties, and maybe it’s even a good thing to do so. Presumably we all have inherent talents as well as inherent desires regarding what we would be satisfied having achieved with our lives. If you can spend ten years or so kicking the tires o’ life, maybe you end up with a much clearer picture of who you are and what you want than if you just dove in right away with whatever career and family were readily available and just buckled in for the long haul.
On second thought, maybe this whole thing is entirely women’s fault. (everything else is….amirite? anybody? high-five?anybody?) Before the pill, if people wanted to do what people always have done and always will do, which is engage in significant and insignificant sexual relationships, they would inevitably have to deal with what was always the outcome of such doings – babies. Once there was a baby involved, barring total assholery by the male (or occasionally the female), the outcome is pretty much instant adulthood. Job, wife and kids. As this was the norm, the culture grew up around it and shunned bachelors largely as aberrations. Now that people can have relationships without making lifelong commitments, once the exuberance of the initial discovery passed in the “hey let’s have sex with everybody” 60’s, a general pattern and culture of extended adolescence seemed to grow and solidify eventually building to what it is today. But who’s to say that that is necessarily a bad thing? In the absence of biological necessity, the late twenties might just be the more natural and appropriate time to stop gathering the pieces and to finally put yourself together in the role of an “adult”.
The interesting thing is that yours is probably as good a take on the situation as anyone’s, even if someone made it his life’s work and had multiple advanced degrees in everything from anthropology to zoology. (a to z, get it? I love the smell of whatever- laptops-are-made-of in the morning!)
Since I generally agree, I’ll focus on what might be different or add to what you have said. Otherwise, I might as well send a freakin’ Hallmark.
I can only guess, but I don’t think men have changed that much in their “promiscuity”, except in accepting the same behavior (as theirs) in women. Women were once called sluts if they behaved like men. It is only fair that it has changed. Especially fair that it had changed a lot while I was single and in my 20s! I could have been bitter. (Although… I notice that loose women are still not knocking on my front door on a regular basis.)
I didn’t want to get into “sex” in the blog to which you referred (Brigitte’s) but the opening was there. (no pun intended, dammit!!) I can get angry and otherwise upset at what “nature” has done to women, and what they have to put up with. Not enough men would put up with it to sustain the species, I believe. (this is probably why women who can’t be brainwashed into thinking that child-bearing is only a minor inconvenience and “look at all the cute gifts you get!” are forced into it by societal norms. (that Norm sure gets around. Sorry, I couldn’t help myself. That’s what Norm said.)
One of my grandmothers died in childbirth, the other of breast cancer. Men could just find another pretty one and keep going. And my grandfathers did.
I’ll try to conclude. I think it is better for men and women, to a point. If we can decrease serial monogamy because of this longer period of “freedom”, so much the better. I hope fewer people will have kids only because they are expected to. The little buggers – lovable as they can be – are a disease that can be prevented. My telethon will accept iTunes gift cards.
Peace,
C.R.
I think Societal Norm gets more credit than is due him. He talks big but carries an, um, small stick. I’ve personally been on an – evolutionary pressures can and do seem to explain almost everything about us – kick for the last several years. I.e. if a baby human boy and a baby human girl were raised on an alien planet, they would pretty much end up acting more or less like averageish human boys and girls. Albeit on an alien planet.
You are definitely right about the serial monogamy issue though. Or if you’re my Mormon great grandfather – parallel monogamy or, I guess, pentagamy. Nature definitely seems to have given women the harder role to play in the species survival game. And if society has made it possible to decide and plan for, when where and with whom to procreate, so much the better for everyone, but particularly women.
Sometimes I wonder though if women might, in the end, have it better than men. Even though we seem to enjoy most of the material and status advantages and good things according to how we have defined good, sometimes it seems like women get to experience a more sharp and realized and possibly more rewarding version of reality that maybe I should be envious of; where things are actually worth crying about, and slaving over, and fiercely attaching yourself to – even if it sometimes makes you a little crazy.
In contrast, this whole detached, ambivalent, emotional-flatness thing is starting to get pretty boring.
You make a good case for sending babies into space.
End of message.
(Not really the end.)
It seems unfair that men are stereotyped as straight or gay partly being judged by their outward display of emotion. We can be boisterous, but gentler emotions are frowned upon. By men. Women (generalizing) are much more accepting. If you have ever teared up in the presence of a woman, you probably found an emotional acceptance, empathy, sympathy — not just “get over it.” They play that role well, and I think that is part of what men are looking for. I guess women want that, too. Men are just so poorly trained.
Always, there are tons of exceptions. Though, for the life of me, I can’t find anything feminine in a woman getting off shooting a moose.
Consider. Man and woman come upon a patch of flowers. The man inwardly acknowledges that they are a beautiful wonder of nature, and perhaps mumbles assent when the woman verbally expresses how pretty they are, touches them, smells them, perhaps picks some to take for extending the joy of nature. As she turns her beaming smile to the man to share the moment —we can only hope he is not checking game scores on his iPhone.He would have screwed up what should have been the easiest – and maybe best – part of a relationship.
You didn’t have to read this, but I know you will. Thanks.