2 ms·
I was with you until you introduced the need for voluntary "disposability" on the part of males as a requisite to earn a place in society. I don't see self imm
by randcraw 12y ago
I was with you until you introduced the need for voluntary "disposability" on the part of males as a requisite to earn a place in society. I don't see self immolation in any form as being respected or admired, in the USA anyway.
I think all adult males don't inherit a natural place in society simply because they are males, the way that females do as mothers. Fatherhood just doesn't fill the bill comparably, perhaps because it's seen as only a part-time vocation. Thus a man must seek other ways to demonstrate his value.
Making lots of money or attaining power are perhaps the chief means to earning respect. But becoming a Warrior is widely seen as a good way to demonstrate the requisite desiderata -- leadership, courage, self sacrifice, inner strength, outer strength, loyalty, stoicism, a sense of purpose, a sense of honor, and more. Having more of these makes you more of a constructive contributor to society. You're a man among men.
Very few jobs or social roles can serve even a few of these components of character. Historically, going to war has been an established and respected way to demonstrate you are indeed made of sterner stuff.
Of course, if your war has a dubious justification or muddied purpose, that will complicate its ability somewhat to define you favorably. Aside from WWII and perhaps WWI, American wars since 1865 largely have been Faustian bargains. The fact that young Amercian men continue to enlist in the service of what are too often Wars of Opportunity indicates that, in our culture, alternative ways of proving your mettle have proven elusive.
- masswerk 12y agoThere have been attempts to rewrite world history based on statistics of how many young man to "burn" there were in a society at a given time – and it works out greatly. While I do admit that this isn't of that importance in modern societies, I would still maintain that the patterns are still to be observed. Also, war has been one of the first means of making a fortune, with trade becoming another one only in the 18th century or so. Still, we may observe some inheritance here, by the emphasis on the risks involved to justify the wins. (Read Jane Austen's "Persuasion" as a sociological study on the matter and you'll see how the British upper- and middle classes would have imploded under the pressure of second sons around 1800, if there hadn't been the Navy and the Army as means of making a fortune and becoming eligible for marriage. Even more true for the lower classes, but there's no much writing on this.) As a sidenote, we may observe that the US has undergone some efforts and investments in the past decades to decouple its war force from this logic by the means of technology.