Skip to main content

Best be a boy? (3 Dec. 2008)

In his article/chapter "Why Males are More Violent," Lloyd DeMause argues that the upbringing of boys is worse than that of girls. He writes, for example: "Mothers may dominate their little girls and expect them to share their troubles, but domination has been found to be far less damaging to the child’s psyche than abandonment and routine distancing." I find this possibility really fascinating. I must admit that I always thought the fact that mothers tend to see the son as an Other, as someone who is not herself, while looking at daughters as parts of herself, was a huge boon for boys. I thought, with mothers looking at their sons as entities that were different from themselves, that it kind of meant that boys, regardless of all other shit, had a greater chance of experiencing themselves as individuated persons. I wonder if it is true that what really tends to happen to boys is that the manner in which their mothers tend to interact with them tend to make them not so much feel individuated from their mothers but make them feel possessions of their mothers (as Lloyd argues). Girls are parts of their mothers; boys are their mothers' possessions. Maybe this summarizes the situation for children of unhealthy mothers. In regards to girls, though: It really does seem true that the reason they take their husband's name is so that they can belong to, be part of, that something else -- a sly way of participating in the boys' experience of difference. That would make marriage and taking the husband's last name not so much about losing one's identity, but a ritual that enables girls to become a greater part of that something -- a man -- which knows what it is to feel separate from a mother. Once they divorce the man and take back their own maiden name -- I think they are then experiencing something of the reapproachment Mahler is talking about.

My mom did that. Taking my dad's name was part of her understandable plot to distance herself from her own mother. Later in life when her own mother moved in with her, I think my mom did react to her as if she was different from her. I think she became her own person. Despite what my mom says and needs to believe, my dad got used in the process, though. No villainy -- just somewhat unhealthy people
possessing that wonderful drive to move beyond insufficient initial surroundings.

I explore the idea of men as a tool toward individuation in a paper of mine: (http://www.scribd.com/doc/3737684/Useful-Object-A-Man-as-the- Means-Toward-Salvation-in-The-Beauty-Queen-of-Leenane-April-2005- Scanned). About Martin McDonagh's sad but brilliant play, ‘The Beauty Queen of Leenane. ‘

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump

When Rose McGowan appears in Asgard: a review of "Thor: Ragnarok"

The best part of this film was when Rose McGowan appeared in Asgard and accosted Odin and his sons for covering up, with a prettified, corporate, outward appearance that's all gay-friendly, feminist, multicultural, absolutely for the rights of the indigenous, etc., centuries of past abuse, where they predated mercilessly upon countless unsuspecting peoples. And the PR department came in and said, okay Weinstein... I mean Odin and Odin' sons, here's what we suggest you do. First, you, Odin, are going to have to die. No extensive therapy; when it comes to predators who are male, especially white and male, this age doesn't believe in therapy. You did what you did because you are, or at least strongly WERE, evil, so that's what we have to work with. Now death doesn't seem like "working with it," I know, but the genius is that we'll do the rehab with your sons, and when they're resurrected as somehow more apart from your regime,