My son (the same guy who featured in posts like 'Research and a three-year-old', "The leadership sandwich" and 'A mathematical approach to HR?') turned 18 (and hence a 'legal adult' in India) recently. While it was an important moment for both of us, somehow it seemed a bit less 'psychologically significant' to him as compared to what happened a year ago when he became taller than me. Turning 18 did lead to some discussions on whether he has lost the privilege to act like a child (especially with us, his parents) when he wants to do so. Can a boy, all of a sudden, magically transform into a man?
Even if we look at the situation purely from a legal point of view, there are complications. In India, while an 18-year old boy can vote and enter into a legal contract as an adult, he can't get married until he is 21 and he can't be an MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly)/MP (Member of Parliament) till he is 25. So, is he a 'full adult member' or the society? By the way, does it make sense that at 18, he can choose the government (as he can legally vote) but he can't choose his wife (as he can't legally marry)?
Even if we look at the situation purely from a legal point of view, there are complications. In India, while an 18-year old boy can vote and enter into a legal contract as an adult, he can't get married until he is 21 and he can't be an MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly)/MP (Member of Parliament) till he is 25. So, is he a 'full adult member' or the society? By the way, does it make sense that at 18, he can choose the government (as he can legally vote) but he can't choose his wife (as he can't legally marry)?
All this also made me think about another aspect - why there is so much more talk about 'becoming a man' as compared to 'becoming a woman'. You might remember Rudyard Kipling's famous poem 'IF' that ends with " And—which is more—you’ll be a Man, my son!" or the Bob Dylan's song Blowin' in the Wind that starts with "How many roads must a man walk down Before you call him a man?" Also, "Be a man" or "Act like a man" are very commonly used phrases in day to day life. You might also hear questions like "Where have all the real men gone?" Again, in many tribal societies, there are very demanding initiation rites, before a boy is accepted as an adult.
Of course, some of this is just gender bias that makes 'becoming a man' something 'bigger' than 'becoming a woman'. Also, there are initiation rites for both boys and girls.
I was wondering if there is anything more to it. May be, it is because there are no clear biological markers (like starting of menstruation in females) for males. So, becoming a man needs psychological markers. May be, it can even be said that a psychological transition needs to happen for a boy to become a man. If that is true, then the very demanding (even 'brutal') initiation rites in tribal societies can be viewed as an effort to 'engineer' this transition. In a way, the initiation rites can also be viewed as an effort to pass on the values and 'worldview' of the society including those related to what a man is supposed to do (and also to communicate the profoundness of the transition from a boy to a man). By the way, even in a modern society, we often hear people saying that having to cope with a stressful (even traumatic) event made them (forced them to!) transition from a boy to a man.
Another perspective is to relate this (emphasizing the significance of becoming a man) to the transition from 'being a dependent' to 'being a provider'. A child is dependent on the family/tribe/society for nourishment and protection whereas an adult provides food and protection to the dependents. The fact that many of the tribal initiation rites involves demonstrating the mastery of skill that is very useful to the tribe (e.g. hunting a big animal, being able to function even under pain etc.) could support this perspective. Yes, here also gender stereotypes, that are no longer valid, could be in operation (e.g. viewing men as providers and viewing women and children as dependents).
It is interesting to note that in India, a girl can legally get married at 18 years of age whereas a boy needs to wait till 21 years of age. Whether this is based just on gender stereotypes or not, is a discussion that merits a separate post! It does raise philosophical questions like 'If one is not old enough to choose his wife, shouldn't he be considered as a boy and not as a man?'
Now, let's come back to the core issue of what exactly does 'becoming a man' mean? One way to figure out 'what makes a man' is to 'reverse-engineer' it from what a man is allowed to (and expected to do) that a boy is not. For example, being able to vote, to enter into a legal contract or to start working etc. might suggest that the person has developed the ability to make an informed choice, to live up to commitments, be a productive member of the society, to fend for himself, to know and live according to the laws of the land etc.
Of course, there are also social stereotypes about what is 'accepted male behavior' (e.g. independence, dominance, control over emotions, pain tolerance, risk-taking etc.). We must remember that 'what it means to be a man' varies across time and societies. For example, these days, the image of 'the ideal man who does't have any vulnerability' is being replaced by that of 'the ideal man who can make a vulnerable connection and manage his vulnerabilities well enough to be effective'.
This brings us to an important point. The reality of 'becoming a man' is as much 'socially constructed' as it is 'psychologically constructed' and 'biologically constructed'. So, in a way, a boy becomes an adult when he is accepted as an adult by the society! It can also be argued that, to be effective, the initiation to adulthood and welcoming of the boy to the adult society has to be done by adults and not by other boys (and that this has become a problem in modern societies)!
There are deeper questions that we can consider. Is 'becoming a man' a 'one-time event'? Isn't it more of a 'state of the soul' than a one-time achievement (certification)? Isn't it more of case of being and not becoming? Can the transition from a boy to a man happen without some sort of acknowledgement from the women in the society?
The last question can lead us to another intriguing (and more pragmatic) question - Why do so many wives think that their husbands haven't grown up (i.e. that they are just boys masquerading as men)?
Now, let's come back to the aspect of initiation rituals (and that of rituals in general). We must be careful not to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'. Yes, we must remove rituals that reinforce gender stereotypes. Yes, we should stop (initiation) rituals that can cause physical or mental harm. But we must not 'de-ritualize' our society. Rituals can bring in a 'sense of the sacred' and that of profoundness to our lives, apart from facilitating psychological transitions. Rituals can even be useful in business organizations (see 'Accelerated learning and Rites of Passage' for an example). 'De-ritualization' is a move towards 'de-spiritualization' and hence towards alienation (from life and work)!
Postscript: When I shared this post with my son, his first reaction was "How did you manage to think so much about this? I didn't think so much when I turned 18!". This highlights another important possibility. May be, the transition from being a boy to being a man, is as significant (or perhaps more significant) for the parents of the boy as it is to the boy himself. When a boy becomes a man, the role of the parents (and part of the 'self image' of the parents) changes. So, making the transition is critical for both the boy and his parents! Some degree of 'letting go' by the parents and establishing a new 'relationship equilibrium' between the parents and the boy are essential for a boy to become a man! Unlike what used to happen in ancient societies, no one 'takes away the child from his parents' for initiation now. Hence, this 'letting go' is even more important in a modern society.
What do you think?
Of course, some of this is just gender bias that makes 'becoming a man' something 'bigger' than 'becoming a woman'. Also, there are initiation rites for both boys and girls.
I was wondering if there is anything more to it. May be, it is because there are no clear biological markers (like starting of menstruation in females) for males. So, becoming a man needs psychological markers. May be, it can even be said that a psychological transition needs to happen for a boy to become a man. If that is true, then the very demanding (even 'brutal') initiation rites in tribal societies can be viewed as an effort to 'engineer' this transition. In a way, the initiation rites can also be viewed as an effort to pass on the values and 'worldview' of the society including those related to what a man is supposed to do (and also to communicate the profoundness of the transition from a boy to a man). By the way, even in a modern society, we often hear people saying that having to cope with a stressful (even traumatic) event made them (forced them to!) transition from a boy to a man.
Another perspective is to relate this (emphasizing the significance of becoming a man) to the transition from 'being a dependent' to 'being a provider'. A child is dependent on the family/tribe/society for nourishment and protection whereas an adult provides food and protection to the dependents. The fact that many of the tribal initiation rites involves demonstrating the mastery of skill that is very useful to the tribe (e.g. hunting a big animal, being able to function even under pain etc.) could support this perspective. Yes, here also gender stereotypes, that are no longer valid, could be in operation (e.g. viewing men as providers and viewing women and children as dependents).
It is interesting to note that in India, a girl can legally get married at 18 years of age whereas a boy needs to wait till 21 years of age. Whether this is based just on gender stereotypes or not, is a discussion that merits a separate post! It does raise philosophical questions like 'If one is not old enough to choose his wife, shouldn't he be considered as a boy and not as a man?'
Now, let's come back to the core issue of what exactly does 'becoming a man' mean? One way to figure out 'what makes a man' is to 'reverse-engineer' it from what a man is allowed to (and expected to do) that a boy is not. For example, being able to vote, to enter into a legal contract or to start working etc. might suggest that the person has developed the ability to make an informed choice, to live up to commitments, be a productive member of the society, to fend for himself, to know and live according to the laws of the land etc.
Of course, there are also social stereotypes about what is 'accepted male behavior' (e.g. independence, dominance, control over emotions, pain tolerance, risk-taking etc.). We must remember that 'what it means to be a man' varies across time and societies. For example, these days, the image of 'the ideal man who does't have any vulnerability' is being replaced by that of 'the ideal man who can make a vulnerable connection and manage his vulnerabilities well enough to be effective'.
This brings us to an important point. The reality of 'becoming a man' is as much 'socially constructed' as it is 'psychologically constructed' and 'biologically constructed'. So, in a way, a boy becomes an adult when he is accepted as an adult by the society! It can also be argued that, to be effective, the initiation to adulthood and welcoming of the boy to the adult society has to be done by adults and not by other boys (and that this has become a problem in modern societies)!
There are deeper questions that we can consider. Is 'becoming a man' a 'one-time event'? Isn't it more of a 'state of the soul' than a one-time achievement (certification)? Isn't it more of case of being and not becoming? Can the transition from a boy to a man happen without some sort of acknowledgement from the women in the society?
The last question can lead us to another intriguing (and more pragmatic) question - Why do so many wives think that their husbands haven't grown up (i.e. that they are just boys masquerading as men)?
Now, let's come back to the aspect of initiation rituals (and that of rituals in general). We must be careful not to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'. Yes, we must remove rituals that reinforce gender stereotypes. Yes, we should stop (initiation) rituals that can cause physical or mental harm. But we must not 'de-ritualize' our society. Rituals can bring in a 'sense of the sacred' and that of profoundness to our lives, apart from facilitating psychological transitions. Rituals can even be useful in business organizations (see 'Accelerated learning and Rites of Passage' for an example). 'De-ritualization' is a move towards 'de-spiritualization' and hence towards alienation (from life and work)!
Postscript: When I shared this post with my son, his first reaction was "How did you manage to think so much about this? I didn't think so much when I turned 18!". This highlights another important possibility. May be, the transition from being a boy to being a man, is as significant (or perhaps more significant) for the parents of the boy as it is to the boy himself. When a boy becomes a man, the role of the parents (and part of the 'self image' of the parents) changes. So, making the transition is critical for both the boy and his parents! Some degree of 'letting go' by the parents and establishing a new 'relationship equilibrium' between the parents and the boy are essential for a boy to become a man! Unlike what used to happen in ancient societies, no one 'takes away the child from his parents' for initiation now. Hence, this 'letting go' is even more important in a modern society.
What do you think?
10 comments:
The argument sounds plausible. Territorial disputes involving fishermen are both common and elicit lots of emotions on both sides. It could be because water is fluid and such violent assertions are required!
Wondering if we should examine the aspects of human life that has been de-ritualized and examine the consequences.
Thank you Anand. I guess rituals shape our worldview and our 'frame of mind' (if not our 'state of the soul'). If we let go of them we might look at many situations as just 'zero-sum games' and this can increase the possibility of conflict.
It's a great post, Prasad!
From evolutionary psychology perspective, physical strength, courage, dominance, and other such masculine attributes were always valued because they increased the survival fitness of not only the individual with those attributes but also those who depended on them for protection. Looking for signs of becoming a man is deeply etched in human psyche.
Thank you very much Ashutosh! Completely agree!!
Fantastic !! .. as usual, very well written. Honestly, never realized at 18 that turning 18 could have so many psychological, social, emotional angles. The impact of 18 on voting vs marriage and choosing a leader vs choosing ones wife is hilarious.. well you can change a leader after 5 years but a wife is for ever:-)
Thank you very much!
Nice article, and your boy maybe right in his view that perhaps his dad has overengineered a simple phase of life.
Thank you! Agree on the 'over-engineering' part. Not sure on the simple phase part :) It has been argued that human beings need a lot of behavioral flexibility as compared to animals and hence they come will relatively less biological programming and this increases the importance of 'cultural programming'. Having existential issues is the unique prerogative of humans!!
The father son relationship is human society at an atomic level. I have been father to one son for 44 years and grandfather for the last six. I have coached several father son pairs.
The two worlds,as demonstrated in your own dialogue above are significantly distinct. The tension comes in and remains directly proportional to the desire to remove the distinctness.
As a son I experienced extreme emotional abandonment along with all "needs" taken care of. As a father I became compensatory,lest my son experience abandonment, and, as a consequence ended up leaving less breathing space than HE needed.I took my fatherhood far to seriously! I have seen many reverse cases.
The child/son is a distinct human being. Today i hold the view that the little fellow comes along as a teacher but we take upon ourselves the onerous task of "teaching" him.
Socialising the child is a necessity for sure. Let the child grow on his own while the father simply makes sure that the son does little or no damage to self.
I am in the early stages of a project to study the Father Son relationship.I called it an atom of human society. That is so because in it is embedded/embodied the cognitive map of authority,power,fear, and competition. Those of you reading this post and are interested enough to join in some conversations on this, please write in. Prasad, thanks for triggering this.
Thank you very much Sushanta. Honored to see your comment. I agree! By the way, your project to study the father-son relationship seems to be very interesting. It would be great if you can include me in the conversations. To me, this has to be studied in the context of the evolving ecosystem (both in the family and in the society) around the father-son relationship. I also, have another hypothesis. In many cases, the time when a man sees his son becoming an adult is also the time when he sees his own father growing very old/frail. This could be a trigger for some sort of mid-life crisis for the man in question. These multiple transitions happening more or less simultaneously, can indeed create some sort of 'resonance' and hence large waves/shocks to the configuration of relationships! Thank you very much Sushanta for your comments and for making me think more!!
Post a Comment