Grow Up
February 11, 2005“He felt as though he were surrounded by enormous and powerful children.”
That’s a quote from a short story I’m reading, “The Tutor” by Nell Freudenberger. The line is spoken by an Indian guy who comes to Harvard for college, and he is describing sitting at a lunch table with some Lacrosse players. I laughed when I read that line, but it got me wondering what it is about American men that makes them seem so childish. This character, Zubin, says he felt “hundreds of years older.” And I recall a conversation with Serpico in LA, where I mentioned that I thought a certain non-American guy was attractive because he seemed to be “a man, and most guys I’ve dealt with are boys.” Serpico said, “Well when you’re not American it’s more likely that you’ll be a man.”
So why is this? What is it about our culture that makes men here giant children?
Most of them have never actually done anything. They’ve never struggled. They’ve never grieved. They’ve never stretched. They’ve never been knocked down a few dozen times. In short, they’ve never lived. All they have are the emotions of children: Need, and want.
In other news, it’s not like all the women are remarkably mature.
true. it’s not limited to men.
This is a good question. I don’t really know (I’m an American male myself, after all). There’s not much in the way of public life in the US–”politics” is a narrow specialization and not something in which many people really participate in this country. I think that encourages people, especially young people, to devote all their mental energies to their private lives.
Also, American prudishness (which is ultimately a political problem as well) means that all sorts of experiences and decisions about sex and relationships that should get resolved in adolescence get pushed off until the 20s where everything is done “catastrophically” because it’s been repressed hitherto.
a question about the prudishness–this guy is from India, a place few people would say is less prudish than America, so how does that factor in? is it the “prudishness” or the release of it in college life? or neither?
and personally i wonder if some of it might have to do with the liberalizing of gender roles–masculinity has been so analyzed and deconstructed that men aren’t really guided into any specific role as they once were, and as perhaps they still are in other countries.
and p.s. my focus is on men here and yes it goes for women as well, but sadly i think it’s not a trait that is expected/desired etc in them as much as in men.
Two words: “American Women,” who, as a group, are — compared to say, French women — stuck, like a broken record, in perpetual adolescence.
Really that’s only a sarcastic way of pointing to a more homely truth: American men will respond as grown-up men when they are approached in an adult way … which is why strangers who sneer at our mainstream adolescent culture, are often startled when, in a crunch, American men rise very easily to the challenge.
Of course, being a “real man” has very little to do with the pantomimes of courtship, and the infantile strategies upon which American women seem to insist. It is most unfair to judge American men in the context of school, or courtship.
The funny thing is, our system (once outside of school) is so brutal, and unforgiving of failure, that any American man who has put bread on the table, can be fairly estimated to be a very manly man indeed. Given that this is frequently accomplished without the support of extended families (India), or a fully-articulated class system (France), American men come out looking pretty good.
which “infantile strategies” are you referring to? and if we’re not judging men on courtship, we can’t judge women on it either. so far you’re the only one who’s mentioned courtship, though.
Believe it or not, India is actually a little more secular than the US, at least in the metropolitan areas (and at least until recently–don’t know how the rise of communalism has affected things). And India definitely has more public life. I also think it’s important to separate “manliness” from “maturity.” Finally, Austin’s analysis is sexist malarkey.
good point, maturity should be separated from masculinity…though when pressed to define either, i find myself unable to. which could be because i’m american.
Calling it “sexist malarkey” is more of an ad hominem than an argument, isn’t it? It might be construed as “Nationalist malarkey” I suppose; but it is in answer to a sneer which is at once irritatingly nationalist and sexist in its assumptions. I took the trouble to frame my answer in the context an terms of the original remark, as well as taking into account what I surmise to be the underlying assumptions (that it is about men in the context of school; that since it is about men in school it is probably about their conduct in the context of courtship). Sexist? No; as I hastened to add, it is only that mainstream culture has been deeply imbibed by all sexes, and is resolutely focussed on adolescence. But as I recall, the original question was about the observed conduct of men, and posed by a woman. So it is proper to treat of men. If the remark had been about “Americans,” or about “American women and men,” or even, “American women,” then a different answer would have been demanded. But the guy wrote, “American men” and that insinuates the writer was framing his remark to exclude woman and to focus on men.
Regarding “maturity” and manliness (not “masculinity” … if I had meant “masculinity” I would have used that word) … since the context is [young] men in school, and the writer has remarked their “childishness,” my point is, that male courtship behavior generally, and particularly in America, can look pretty childish to an (non-participant) observer; and that it is not reasonable to deduce from that observed behavior, a more general rule about American men.
… And that almost everything a man under the age of twenty-five (or even thirty) does, comes under the category of courtship behavior.
If “almost everything” a man does comes under the category of courtship behavior, that is in fact a sign that he is not a grown-up. The very assumption that college is really about mating (and not, uh, learning shit) is a product of structural infantilism. And blaming it all on women is sexist malarkey.
“structural infantilism” is a good term. the culture here is youth-obsessed, and honestly i don’t think a lot of americans consider the label “immature” an insult. i think it’s much more likely that you’ll find people who say they “never want to grow up”. people are immature because they can be, because there’s nothing telling them not to be, and because there’s plenty encouraging them to be.
“So why is this? What is it about our culture that makes men here giant children?”
The women, specifically the mothers, are in an unholy alliance with the puer aeternus against the patriarchy.
If “almost everything” a man does comes under the category of seeking successful reproduction, to me it is a sign that evolution is working. What alternate source of motivation would you say a man should be drawing from, if he is more “grown-up”?