ah, I see what you mean now - and I take your point. well done--yes, with a plurality of masculinities, a "good man" can really _only_ make sense in the context of the certain things that only a man can be -- husband, father, son, brother. ⭐️👁
Aug 12, 2023·edited Aug 12, 2023Liked by Bowen Dwelle
A vigorous and courageous essay, Bowen. Thanks for tagging me. Also, hilarious: “I know not one loser, zero, failure to launch, 4chan troll, or basement-dwelling incel.” I did meet some Bernie bros in 2016, but largely I agree with you.
As for your discussion questions... It's cliche to say it, but I think Barack Obama is a great model of positive masculinity. Ambitious, driven, sexy, but also a consummate family man. Not a whiff of scandal about his presidency, which is really saying something these days. I'm sure there is plenty about the Obama family that we don't see or haven't seen. But by nearly all accounts, Barack is a fine target to aim at.
I have a poor relationship with my father (slowly getting better, but still troubled), and I've often gravitated to women mentors. My graduate advisor, Sue, transformed my life. Many of my closest friends are women. But I've known some fine men who are not celebrities. Paul Olson, a Shakespeare scholar at the University of Nebraska, was like a father to me during my PhD program -- and he's still an affirming presence in my life in his early 90s. Two of my undergraduate professors still keep in touch and cheer me on in their own way (I need that sometimes). And I find much to admire in two of my uncles who have each weathered great personal misery yet have found very different sources of resilience. One is a devout Christian, an eminently gracious and accepting man. The other is gay and an atheist, but ironically the best practitioner of unconditional love that I know. It was great to connect with each of them -- and to give them a manly hug -- during my recent trip to Montana.
Your first question is, I think, unanswerable if we accept a plurality of masculinities. There can't be a singular definition of "good" or "man." In that case, I think we're likely talking about less gender-specific qualities, like compassion and honesty and generosity. But I've wondered, for instance, about the very one-sided narratives we get in a series like Rebel Girls, which sometimes mentions "good" men as allies, but often glosses over their importance. For instance, I've wondered if a truly progressive version of the RGB story might give equal weight to her husband Marty, who made some sacrifices to allow Ruth's rise, but also seemed to find a way to be happy. He was no repressed dominator. Presumably Ruth also helped him feel that way, despite the fact that it was always her star in ascendancy. It's unfortunate that the feminist alternative to patriarchy often feels zero sum. Marty isn't an historic figure, and I'm not arguing that he ought to be given equal space in American lore, but I think he could be a role model for other men if his story were better understood.
Increasingly, I find that I don't really want to go down in history. But I would like to be remembered as a good father and family member. As you say, it's up to me to tell that story myself. But I could also use other stories like Marty's to orient my own.
Just read your comment in more detail, thank you Josh, and great to see you hold some examples up. I love your example about RGB and her husband Marty.
"It's unfortunate that the feminist alternative to patriarchy often feels zero sum." → I agree, but I would also say that that is a popularized & simplistic view of "feminism" in much the same way that I've challenged the popularized & simplistic view of "patriarchy." All of the feminist writers that I name above articulate a "feminist" vision that is not only not zero sum but go on to acknowledge that such the future we are aiming for goes beyond just 'including' men in some or any feminist vision — because it's not just about women, it's about all of us. We can't expect feminism to solve it, nor can we fairly criticize feminism for not solving it.
Aug 13, 2023·edited Aug 13, 2023Liked by Bowen Dwelle
Bowen, I agree with most of what you've said. I do want to challenge the notion that critiquing a series like Rebel Girls is itself an oversimplification. Theory is one thing (what you're talking about, I think), practice is another. Michael has called out this kind of discourse online, and I think it's got to be part of this thread, or we're talking past each other. Take, for instance, this kind of thing: https://jessica.substack.com/p/a-few-good-men. Talk about an oversimplification. And that's not including the comment thread.
I take your point to heart that progress requires not just critique, but also a positive articulation of a different story. This is in fact the heart of the fatherhood essays I've begun, and so I hope the conversation will continue.
Oh hey, I wasn't referring to what you said about Rebel Girls, I'm not familiar with that show... I wasn't saying what you said was an oversimplification, just that if I'm going to talk about feminist alternatives to patriarchy, for my part, I would want to be sure not to gloss over what those actually are (or not), vs. characterizing feminism as zero sum for the future of masculinity — because I don't think it is, but also, again, it's not really their job...
The successfully marketed concept of Barack Obama is appealing for the reasons you mentioned, yes.
The reality is probably much darker - Would any "good" person have ambition for such power? "Not a whiff of scandal about his presidency" - besides being complicit in funding and providing arms to terrorist groups in other countries, killing children and other civilians, presiding over a hugely problematic system of domestic incarceration, profiting off of war and mass-murder via the military industrial complex?
Yeah I'm sure he's a great guy and a real family man, bud.
Barack Obama? I guess if you appease the military industrial complex they leave you alone. Scandal free except this little Paddleboard incident thingy? A fine target to aim at should read- He's fine at aiming at targets.
I also rubbed me the wrong way when Reeves and Emba talked about the need for a new masculinity. Why create a new category that will certainly have its own exclusions? Why not just focus on being good people who do good and let a million flowers bloom as people develop their particular strengths?
How to be a good person? We could do worse than aim for the Stoic virtues from 2000 years ago — a guide that, given the recent Stoic renaissance, seems to be resonating.
Well done Bowen, you outdid yourself on this essay. As the mom of two adult sons, I am thankful there are more and more folks stepping up to be great mentors and role models to them.
You mentioned you prefer the word culture and this resonates with me. We can say patriarchy, establishment, or whatever but, as you point out, there are so many layers to what that means and how we came to be at this point in history that we need a more encompassing word. Culture means a lot of things.
So much to unpack here BD. Kudos for taking this on. I love this quote from Kim Stanley Robinson you referenced: “that we were all doing our best at the time, we got what we got as we went along, and rather than spend more time lamenting the past, we’d be better served by working what’s next.”
Thanks for reading, Dee -- just to be clear, that wasn't quite a quote from KSR, I was paraphrasing b/c I'm remote and didn't have the exact reference noted -- but now I've remembered that it wasn't from The High Sierra -- it was from my podcast interview with him!
I will answer question #1. A "good man" is all men. Some are connected well to their creational design, others not so. However, a man who honors God, His Word, and all women (dominant or not) is highly regarded in my book. When one respects their creational design, this man honors the primary male - God the Father.
I've always believed being a good human is more important than the polarity of sex to define one's role models. Which might be why I've never understood the whining by all those toxic masculinity types. My ex-brother-in-law was one, and my god, what a petulant, arrogant ass. I tried to dissuade my nephew from idolizing the jackass but to no avail. Sadly his mother (my sister) was so damaged by that marriage that she was also of no help to show her son the error in his beliefs. Therefore in the small circle of family, all one can do to is try and be the best decent person one can be, then hopefully others in the family will take note as they blunder their way in and out of bad life choices.
Choosing a role model is no easy task since everyone is a human prone to mistakes. But if pressed I'd have to say mine have always been various friends I've met along the road of life. None were famous. Just regular folks uplifting others.
Perhaps there is no dearth of good men to emulate, but still a struggle to find them thanks to, among other things, backwards looking recommendation algorithms and other systemic rewards bestowed on adherents to the Default models you’ve described.
I’m only a few chapters into The Will to Change by Bell Hooks, but the thesis so far has been that impersonal cultural forces indoctrinate men toward becoming repressed dominators. It stands to reason some of those forces are just ideas of “what sells” that make it a little harder to find people like those on your list.
So thanks for making a list and making it a little easier!
My point is that there's no point in emphasizing that it can be difficult to find them (and, I do recognize that it can be). It's much more interesting to put our emphasis, and energy, into _being_ those men ourselves, finding them, and holding each other up, so that others may find us.
Yeah exactly. “Be the change!” The Algorithms only really reflect back to us what we already are. If a cohort of sensitive but self-confident ice bathers emerges and connects with each other, maybe the machines will stop promoting the toxic manosphere that is constantly whining about the “crisis of masculinity” that they identify in the proliferation of “the beta male soyboy cucks” which are also promoted.
Personally, I like the idea of a third way, liminal to the two on offer. A strong but compassionate, and preeminently connection-driven man who wants to get the most out of life.
The best example that comes to mind, to answer the question your article poses, is Duncan Trussell, the podcaster from the Duncan Trussell Family Hour and Netflix series the Midnight Gospel.
Duncan is a “good man” because--at least publicly--he balances the active and receptive qualities of his personality, often thought of as the masculine and feminine aspects of a human.
Perhaps most importantly, he’s able to trace everything back to Love and exhibit compassion and acceptance to people from all walks of life.
But maybe that makes him a good person, rather than a good man.
thank for writing in Geoffe - and for the pointer to Duncan's work, I hadn't come across him...
I heard the question about the difference (if any) put in a particularly provocative way not long ago (although at the moment I can't recall the reference):
Name one quality associated with being a good person, or a good woman—for example, "resilience"—and then substitute "man" for person or woman, and see how it resonates. The challenge is to find even _one_ quality, _any_ quality, that resonates _more_ positively in the context of masculinity than it does in a feminine or genderless context.
Great read Bowen! It compels me to comment. I grew up in an environment of working class undereducated alcoholics-save for my brother that probably saved me. I read a piece long ago about young successful entrepreneurs. One said, make a list of all your friends, identify the deadbeats and lose their numbers. My life flashed before my eyes. As an adolescent, I admired those who were the toughest fighters and heaviest drinkers. My turnaround came when I joined my brother in martial arts at thirteen. He is now a fifth degree blackbelt-I quit three years later at brown belt level. I'll get to the questions eventually after my critique and question for you. Are you California sober? The likes of the Deep Reset retreats are great for those with the financial means and I'm suspicious they attract the already indoctrinated-more like a love-in than therapy. I suggest buy a sauna, some good books and take a cold shower. As for citing an essay in that legacy media rag Wapo? I'm sure the qualification for a female journalist is 'man-hater'. Yes the term patriarchy does have negative connotations and the term gentrification really means moving into poorer core areas because I can't afford to live in the burb's. And Leave Karl Marx alone already FFS, he's been dead for well over a hundred years. If he lived in the 60's he'd be smoking weed, protesting the Vietnam war and hanging around with the merry pranksters. Congrats on the Evryman Retreat for hosting GBTQ+ men. Not sure how the Q differs from GBT and have no clue WTF + is! Sure adds new meaning to we got your back. They also left out the A which could be considered discriminatory in Canada these days-BTW Bowen your essay clearly defining men could land you in the hoosegow here in Kanucistan. I looked up Headwaters Outdoor School. In 2023 they are still testing for covid, suggesting you take the jab, recommending distancing and requiring masks (nice thick ones to rebreathe you co2) in certain situations. Maybe they should rename it Camp Fear? I'm really sincerely joking here-Tim would make a good role model for a kid aspiring to be a certain iconic figure at Macy's during the Christmas holidays. Again, enjoying your writing. To the moon Bowen!
1. Literally, having a penis. A good person could be either sex
2. Jordan Peterson. I don't agree with him on all points but I think he is an admirable template. Interestingly, Bill Maher said he looked like the Marlborough Man
love you buddy, but I can't really make any sense of what you're writing here. You seem to be full of backhanded and nonsensical criticisms about things that I've mentioned that you very likely have no personal experience with, e.g. EVRYMAN, HWOS. Take your own advice perhaps, CTFO mate and get off the keyboard ;)
Men have always been my biggest supporters throughout life: running, military, promotions, continued schooling. I think they are great! :)
A good man is a good husband, a good father, a good son, and a good brother.
It's that simple.
I hear you, but I don't really think it is just that simple. If it was, then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I'm not saying it's easy or simple to be good at those roles. Instead I was offering a definition of a good man.
ah, I see what you mean now - and I take your point. well done--yes, with a plurality of masculinities, a "good man" can really _only_ make sense in the context of the certain things that only a man can be -- husband, father, son, brother. ⭐️👁
I could have been more clear!
A vigorous and courageous essay, Bowen. Thanks for tagging me. Also, hilarious: “I know not one loser, zero, failure to launch, 4chan troll, or basement-dwelling incel.” I did meet some Bernie bros in 2016, but largely I agree with you.
As for your discussion questions... It's cliche to say it, but I think Barack Obama is a great model of positive masculinity. Ambitious, driven, sexy, but also a consummate family man. Not a whiff of scandal about his presidency, which is really saying something these days. I'm sure there is plenty about the Obama family that we don't see or haven't seen. But by nearly all accounts, Barack is a fine target to aim at.
I have a poor relationship with my father (slowly getting better, but still troubled), and I've often gravitated to women mentors. My graduate advisor, Sue, transformed my life. Many of my closest friends are women. But I've known some fine men who are not celebrities. Paul Olson, a Shakespeare scholar at the University of Nebraska, was like a father to me during my PhD program -- and he's still an affirming presence in my life in his early 90s. Two of my undergraduate professors still keep in touch and cheer me on in their own way (I need that sometimes). And I find much to admire in two of my uncles who have each weathered great personal misery yet have found very different sources of resilience. One is a devout Christian, an eminently gracious and accepting man. The other is gay and an atheist, but ironically the best practitioner of unconditional love that I know. It was great to connect with each of them -- and to give them a manly hug -- during my recent trip to Montana.
Your first question is, I think, unanswerable if we accept a plurality of masculinities. There can't be a singular definition of "good" or "man." In that case, I think we're likely talking about less gender-specific qualities, like compassion and honesty and generosity. But I've wondered, for instance, about the very one-sided narratives we get in a series like Rebel Girls, which sometimes mentions "good" men as allies, but often glosses over their importance. For instance, I've wondered if a truly progressive version of the RGB story might give equal weight to her husband Marty, who made some sacrifices to allow Ruth's rise, but also seemed to find a way to be happy. He was no repressed dominator. Presumably Ruth also helped him feel that way, despite the fact that it was always her star in ascendancy. It's unfortunate that the feminist alternative to patriarchy often feels zero sum. Marty isn't an historic figure, and I'm not arguing that he ought to be given equal space in American lore, but I think he could be a role model for other men if his story were better understood.
Increasingly, I find that I don't really want to go down in history. But I would like to be remembered as a good father and family member. As you say, it's up to me to tell that story myself. But I could also use other stories like Marty's to orient my own.
Just read your comment in more detail, thank you Josh, and great to see you hold some examples up. I love your example about RGB and her husband Marty.
"It's unfortunate that the feminist alternative to patriarchy often feels zero sum." → I agree, but I would also say that that is a popularized & simplistic view of "feminism" in much the same way that I've challenged the popularized & simplistic view of "patriarchy." All of the feminist writers that I name above articulate a "feminist" vision that is not only not zero sum but go on to acknowledge that such the future we are aiming for goes beyond just 'including' men in some or any feminist vision — because it's not just about women, it's about all of us. We can't expect feminism to solve it, nor can we fairly criticize feminism for not solving it.
Bowen, I agree with most of what you've said. I do want to challenge the notion that critiquing a series like Rebel Girls is itself an oversimplification. Theory is one thing (what you're talking about, I think), practice is another. Michael has called out this kind of discourse online, and I think it's got to be part of this thread, or we're talking past each other. Take, for instance, this kind of thing: https://jessica.substack.com/p/a-few-good-men. Talk about an oversimplification. And that's not including the comment thread.
I take your point to heart that progress requires not just critique, but also a positive articulation of a different story. This is in fact the heart of the fatherhood essays I've begun, and so I hope the conversation will continue.
Oh hey, I wasn't referring to what you said about Rebel Girls, I'm not familiar with that show... I wasn't saying what you said was an oversimplification, just that if I'm going to talk about feminist alternatives to patriarchy, for my part, I would want to be sure not to gloss over what those actually are (or not), vs. characterizing feminism as zero sum for the future of masculinity — because I don't think it is, but also, again, it's not really their job...
Yup -- agreed!
Bernie Bros are like what...Counting Crows fans?
Easy pal. I like Adam Duritz when I need a good cry 😭
Lead singer Counting Crows you ingrate 😉
no idea who that is ;)
no idea who that is ;)
Haha -- no, they were like crypto bros. Pro-Bernie in a very anti-Hillary kind of way. Not good dudes. Social media trolls, often.
The successfully marketed concept of Barack Obama is appealing for the reasons you mentioned, yes.
The reality is probably much darker - Would any "good" person have ambition for such power? "Not a whiff of scandal about his presidency" - besides being complicit in funding and providing arms to terrorist groups in other countries, killing children and other civilians, presiding over a hugely problematic system of domestic incarceration, profiting off of war and mass-murder via the military industrial complex?
Yeah I'm sure he's a great guy and a real family man, bud.
Really down to Earth.
Barack Obama? I guess if you appease the military industrial complex they leave you alone. Scandal free except this little Paddleboard incident thingy? A fine target to aim at should read- He's fine at aiming at targets.
I also rubbed me the wrong way when Reeves and Emba talked about the need for a new masculinity. Why create a new category that will certainly have its own exclusions? Why not just focus on being good people who do good and let a million flowers bloom as people develop their particular strengths?
How to be a good person? We could do worse than aim for the Stoic virtues from 2000 years ago — a guide that, given the recent Stoic renaissance, seems to be resonating.
Bowen, thank you, brother. It's refreshing to read present moment reflections on these things. It's clear that you spend many moments present.
and it's something special to see your list of men you respect and trust.
blessings on your path.
Well done Bowen, you outdid yourself on this essay. As the mom of two adult sons, I am thankful there are more and more folks stepping up to be great mentors and role models to them.
You mentioned you prefer the word culture and this resonates with me. We can say patriarchy, establishment, or whatever but, as you point out, there are so many layers to what that means and how we came to be at this point in history that we need a more encompassing word. Culture means a lot of things.
Thanks for this great article.
So much to unpack here BD. Kudos for taking this on. I love this quote from Kim Stanley Robinson you referenced: “that we were all doing our best at the time, we got what we got as we went along, and rather than spend more time lamenting the past, we’d be better served by working what’s next.”
With so many things. 👍
Thanks for reading, Dee -- just to be clear, that wasn't quite a quote from KSR, I was paraphrasing b/c I'm remote and didn't have the exact reference noted -- but now I've remembered that it wasn't from The High Sierra -- it was from my podcast interview with him!
https://bowendwelle.substack.com/p/e14-wayfinding-with-kim-stanley-robinson
I will answer question #1. A "good man" is all men. Some are connected well to their creational design, others not so. However, a man who honors God, His Word, and all women (dominant or not) is highly regarded in my book. When one respects their creational design, this man honors the primary male - God the Father.
Thanks for reading, and writing in. Kind of a circular argument to me, but I'm not religious.
I've always believed being a good human is more important than the polarity of sex to define one's role models. Which might be why I've never understood the whining by all those toxic masculinity types. My ex-brother-in-law was one, and my god, what a petulant, arrogant ass. I tried to dissuade my nephew from idolizing the jackass but to no avail. Sadly his mother (my sister) was so damaged by that marriage that she was also of no help to show her son the error in his beliefs. Therefore in the small circle of family, all one can do to is try and be the best decent person one can be, then hopefully others in the family will take note as they blunder their way in and out of bad life choices.
Choosing a role model is no easy task since everyone is a human prone to mistakes. But if pressed I'd have to say mine have always been various friends I've met along the road of life. None were famous. Just regular folks uplifting others.
Hey Bowen, thanks for the mention! I love you too.
Perhaps there is no dearth of good men to emulate, but still a struggle to find them thanks to, among other things, backwards looking recommendation algorithms and other systemic rewards bestowed on adherents to the Default models you’ve described.
I’m only a few chapters into The Will to Change by Bell Hooks, but the thesis so far has been that impersonal cultural forces indoctrinate men toward becoming repressed dominators. It stands to reason some of those forces are just ideas of “what sells” that make it a little harder to find people like those on your list.
So thanks for making a list and making it a little easier!
My point is that there's no point in emphasizing that it can be difficult to find them (and, I do recognize that it can be). It's much more interesting to put our emphasis, and energy, into _being_ those men ourselves, finding them, and holding each other up, so that others may find us.
Yeah exactly. “Be the change!” The Algorithms only really reflect back to us what we already are. If a cohort of sensitive but self-confident ice bathers emerges and connects with each other, maybe the machines will stop promoting the toxic manosphere that is constantly whining about the “crisis of masculinity” that they identify in the proliferation of “the beta male soyboy cucks” which are also promoted.
Personally, I like the idea of a third way, liminal to the two on offer. A strong but compassionate, and preeminently connection-driven man who wants to get the most out of life.
The best example that comes to mind, to answer the question your article poses, is Duncan Trussell, the podcaster from the Duncan Trussell Family Hour and Netflix series the Midnight Gospel.
Duncan is a “good man” because--at least publicly--he balances the active and receptive qualities of his personality, often thought of as the masculine and feminine aspects of a human.
Perhaps most importantly, he’s able to trace everything back to Love and exhibit compassion and acceptance to people from all walks of life.
But maybe that makes him a good person, rather than a good man.
Maybe there’s little difference?
thank for writing in Geoffe - and for the pointer to Duncan's work, I hadn't come across him...
I heard the question about the difference (if any) put in a particularly provocative way not long ago (although at the moment I can't recall the reference):
Name one quality associated with being a good person, or a good woman—for example, "resilience"—and then substitute "man" for person or woman, and see how it resonates. The challenge is to find even _one_ quality, _any_ quality, that resonates _more_ positively in the context of masculinity than it does in a feminine or genderless context.
Resilience is a quality of a good person
Resilience is a quality of a good woman
Resilience is a quality of a good man
Strength is a quality of a good person
Strength is a quality of a good woman
Strength is a quality of a good man
etc...
I've found this exercise can be very revealing.
This puts ‘the patriarchy’ into a different perspective for me. Very interesting, thank you!
Glad to hear that! please share, to help spread that light on the subject...
Great read Bowen! It compels me to comment. I grew up in an environment of working class undereducated alcoholics-save for my brother that probably saved me. I read a piece long ago about young successful entrepreneurs. One said, make a list of all your friends, identify the deadbeats and lose their numbers. My life flashed before my eyes. As an adolescent, I admired those who were the toughest fighters and heaviest drinkers. My turnaround came when I joined my brother in martial arts at thirteen. He is now a fifth degree blackbelt-I quit three years later at brown belt level. I'll get to the questions eventually after my critique and question for you. Are you California sober? The likes of the Deep Reset retreats are great for those with the financial means and I'm suspicious they attract the already indoctrinated-more like a love-in than therapy. I suggest buy a sauna, some good books and take a cold shower. As for citing an essay in that legacy media rag Wapo? I'm sure the qualification for a female journalist is 'man-hater'. Yes the term patriarchy does have negative connotations and the term gentrification really means moving into poorer core areas because I can't afford to live in the burb's. And Leave Karl Marx alone already FFS, he's been dead for well over a hundred years. If he lived in the 60's he'd be smoking weed, protesting the Vietnam war and hanging around with the merry pranksters. Congrats on the Evryman Retreat for hosting GBTQ+ men. Not sure how the Q differs from GBT and have no clue WTF + is! Sure adds new meaning to we got your back. They also left out the A which could be considered discriminatory in Canada these days-BTW Bowen your essay clearly defining men could land you in the hoosegow here in Kanucistan. I looked up Headwaters Outdoor School. In 2023 they are still testing for covid, suggesting you take the jab, recommending distancing and requiring masks (nice thick ones to rebreathe you co2) in certain situations. Maybe they should rename it Camp Fear? I'm really sincerely joking here-Tim would make a good role model for a kid aspiring to be a certain iconic figure at Macy's during the Christmas holidays. Again, enjoying your writing. To the moon Bowen!
1. Literally, having a penis. A good person could be either sex
2. Jordan Peterson. I don't agree with him on all points but I think he is an admirable template. Interestingly, Bill Maher said he looked like the Marlborough Man
love you buddy, but I can't really make any sense of what you're writing here. You seem to be full of backhanded and nonsensical criticisms about things that I've mentioned that you very likely have no personal experience with, e.g. EVRYMAN, HWOS. Take your own advice perhaps, CTFO mate and get off the keyboard ;)
I am so freakin’ chill I make Perry Como look like Bobcat Goldthwait on no-doze
CTFO? More acronyms FFS 🤦🏼♂️ Seem to and likely seems to be jumping to conclusions without any benefit of doubt.
If you really love me I’ll man-splain it for you. Call me 🤙🏻