4 ms·

There have been quite a few crying men that became iconic: Mandela, I seem to remember, and also Helmuth Kohl (and, simlar: Willy Brandt on hus knees). Didn't O

There have been quite a few crying men that became iconic: Mandela, I seem to remember, and also Helmuth Kohl (and, simlar: Willy Brandt on hus knees). Didn't Obama cry at one of the many church services for victims of gun violence? And I don't believe these instances derive their power from stigma. None of these people became less respected. In fact I don't remember any man hurt by crying. The closest is probably Boehner (former Speaker of the House). It was actually his shtick and he would cry at two or three events every week, but the worst he got for that was some mild and sympathetic mocking by Jon Stewart. And if you want to enlist women in your fight for the right to cry, I don't quite know what you expect from them? It seems they already care rather little about performative manliness, as evidenced by the growing partisan voting gap.

scarmig 7y ago
It's the difference between weeping "at a distance" versus weeping out of emotion. All the situations you mention involve a man weeping at some tragic part of the world, which I agree is broadly accepted. Same applies to, e.g., crying at a sad movie. However, it ignores the reality that the most important kind of weeping isn't where you weep because you're recognizing something is socially coded as sad, but where you weep because you're feeling sad. Maybe you lost a job; maybe you feel like a failure; maybe you got your heart broken. And for all of these there's a substantial stigma, in that to be a Real Man(tm) you are forced to embrace your agency and act instead of feel. A single controlled, manly tear is celebrated; messy weeping is deeply stigmatized, and many women would consider a man who does so weak and unsuitable for a relationship.
- setr 7y ago
  I like to describe as when a real man cries, he does it alone, in a dark, empty room.
TheOperator 7y ago
The thing is you're speaking entirely about men of influence. I would have a heck of a time finding the citation but I recall one study where subjects were shown one of two people. The general idea of it was that one of the subjects was shown to get better answers on a test and generally was more successful. The other was a neer-do-well. Then both of these subjects tripped. The neer-do-well who tripped was judged even more negatively. The achiever was judged more positively. Almost as if the mistake had "humanized" them. I also notice that when people talk about men who are in touch with their feminine side, and open about things like being sexually assaulted, we see Terry Crews types who are built like a brick shithouse and are oozing with exaggerated masculinity and success. Can man who is already judged as weak and effeminette get away wiht crying and be treated well? I don't think that's the case and in fact I think the reverse is true. If a woman in the military trying to make a name for herself bursts into tears regularly will she be seen as strong enough to not break down in the midst of battle? On top of that point... I think you're missing that the crying in all the cases you're talking about is quite controlled. To the point of Jibes about both Boehner and Obama playing up the waterworks to drive sympathy. Neither of these men are sobbing "I can't do this job... I'm not good enough". They're sobbing at some vague distant injustice to show how much they care about something. So I'm not even sure these examples demonstrate that crying is culturally accepted... and instead they merely show that specific circumstances allow for crying (high-status man, tragedy not caused by yourself, etc) >Mandela I think old men get an exception from cultural expectations around crying and i'm not sure why.

scarmig 7y ago

It's the difference between weeping "at a distance" versus weeping out of emotion. All the situations you mention involve a man weeping at some tragic part of the world, which I agree is broadly accepted. Same applies to, e.g., crying at a sad movie. However, it ignores the reality that the most important kind of weeping isn't where you weep because you're recognizing something is socially coded as sad, but where you weep because you're feeling sad. Maybe you lost a job; maybe you feel like a failure; maybe you got your heart broken. And for all of these there's a substantial stigma, in that to be a Real Man(tm) you are forced to embrace your agency and act instead of feel. A single controlled, manly tear is celebrated; messy weeping is deeply stigmatized, and many women would consider a man who does so weak and unsuitable for a relationship.

setr 7y ago
I like to describe as when a real man cries, he does it alone, in a dark, empty room.

TheOperator 7y ago

The thing is you're speaking entirely about men of influence. I would have a heck of a time finding the citation but I recall one study where subjects were shown one of two people. The general idea of it was that one of the subjects was shown to get better answers on a test and generally was more successful. The other was a neer-do-well. Then both of these subjects tripped. The neer-do-well who tripped was judged even more negatively. The achiever was judged more positively. Almost as if the mistake had "humanized" them. I also notice that when people talk about men who are in touch with their feminine side, and open about things like being sexually assaulted, we see Terry Crews types who are built like a brick shithouse and are oozing with exaggerated masculinity and success. Can man who is already judged as weak and effeminette get away wiht crying and be treated well? I don't think that's the case and in fact I think the reverse is true. If a woman in the military trying to make a name for herself bursts into tears regularly will she be seen as strong enough to not break down in the midst of battle? On top of that point... I think you're missing that the crying in all the cases you're talking about is quite controlled. To the point of Jibes about both Boehner and Obama playing up the waterworks to drive sympathy. Neither of these men are sobbing "I can't do this job... I'm not good enough". They're sobbing at some vague distant injustice to show how much they care about something. So I'm not even sure these examples demonstrate that crying is culturally accepted... and instead they merely show that specific circumstances allow for crying (high-status man, tragedy not caused by yourself, etc) >Mandela I think old men get an exception from cultural expectations around crying and i'm not sure why.