Where Have All The Cowboys Gone?

  Demosthenes, a 4th century b.c.e. Greek Orator, advised that young men, "...possess beauty in respect of person, self-discipline in respect of soul, and manliness in respect of both...".  Cicero, a 1st century b.c.e. Roman Orator, advised us that fortune, or the random events of reality outside of our control, "…ought to be beaten back by a strong and manly soul, as a wave is by a rock."  In fact, our modern word for virtue comes from the Latin word virtus, which means courage, excellence, or manliness (virtus itself comes from the Latin word vir, meaning man).  The ancients were obsessed with the concept of manliness.  A man, according to Aristotle, is one who is confident in the face of danger, moderate in his use and enjoyment of opulent things, magnanimous in estimation of his own worth, ambitious in his desire of honor, patient in response and dealings with his passions, truthful in his life and dealings with others, righteously indignant when done wrong, and just towards himself and others.  He paints a beautiful portrait of this person, saying that this man:

“…does not take petty risks, nor does he court danger, because there are few things that he values highly; but he takes great risks, and when he faces danger he is unsparing of his life, because to him there are some circumstances in which it is not worth living…He is bound to…speak and act straightforwardly…and he cannot bear to live in dependence upon somebody else…He does not nurse resentment…In troubles that are unavoidable or of minor importance he is the last person to complain or ask for help…his gait is measured, his voice deep, his speech unhurried.” (Aristotle, Nichomachean Ethics)

  One familiar with the writings of Ayn Rand will find an illustration of this definition in the characters of John Galt, Hank Rearden, Francisco d’Anconia, and Howard Roark.  Many of these virtues are shared with women. The major difference, however, between the manly John Galt and the womanly Dagny Taggart was Galt’s supreme confidence in dealing with reality (other Objectivist women have stressed similar themes).

   To the ancients, it was manliness that defeated the Persians at Marathon. It was manliness that allowed the Spartans to fight at Thermopylae. It was manliness that caused Xenophon and his 10,000 to return from the depths of the Persian Empire to Greece. Manliness was one of the key distinctions the Greeks and Romans saw between themselves and the Barbarians, be they the effiminate and opulent Persians or the unbalanced and barbaric Celts.  Manliness was the attribute that protected the West's birth of Freedom and Thought.

    But today, every single element of manliness that Aristotle described is under attack.  The 1960's ushered  in the era of the Feminists.  Unlike intellectual trends, feminism became a cultural trend.  But not only was their view of womanliness skewed, their view of manliness was also dangerously wrong.  Sadly, this view has come to dominate our culture, beit in the form of the metrosexual, the effeminate man, or the man in touch with his feminine side. Instead of a man who is courageous and confident in facing reality,  men are now told that it is okay to be soft and cowardly.  Instead of a man who is moderate, men are now told to indulge themselves in the luxuries of life; to spend huge sums on fashionable clothes, stylish haircuts, and manicures.  Instead of a man who is magnanimous, men are now told to be pusillanimous; to apologize for their greatness and expound upon their defects.  Instead of a man who is ambitious in his desire of honor, men are now told to seek the lowly and to be meek.   Instead of a man who is patient in response to his passions, men are now told to cry uncontrollably, to let their emotions pour out. Instead of a man who is truthful, men are now told that white lies are okay, and that it is better to flatter than to "offend".  Instead of a man who is righteously indignant, men are now told to turn the other cheek; to forgive and forget; to be compassionate to our worst enemies.  And instead of a man who is just, men are now told to trade favors, to barter for social acceptance, to achieve by means of social connections, to be tolerant of all opinions, and to love thy neighbor as thyself.

    What are the consequences of the destruction of manliness? The bird flu has not even killed 60 people in the entire world (or 0.00000001% of the world's population).  But we are bombarded with cries of fear and panic, told to stay away from chickens and other birds, to keep our children out of the parks where birds are, and prepare for the worst pandemic the world has ever seen (remember, it's wrong to be confident in the face of reality). 50 years ago, Americans were fit and trim.  But now, obesity is sky-rocketing and quickly becoming the greatest health risk in America today (remember, it's wrong to be moderate).  To your average American in the mid-20th century, depression was an emotional state that could be overcome on your own and ADD/ADHD was unheard of.  But now, 18.8 million people are depressed, and 1 in 8 adolescents are depressed (remember, it's wrong to keep your passions under control and deal with them patiently).  Before the 1960's, Americans generally trusted their government.  But ever since Richard Nixon, a chronic distrust has grown throughout America; not only for politicians (Bill Clinton), but for husbands and wives (divorce), children and school (cheating), the media (Rathergate), and even science (Faked Cells) (remember, it's okay to tell a white lie...).  September 11th rekindled the fire of manliness.  But five years later, we are told that the Iraqi war was a mistake, that we should withdraw our troops, and that we should enter into more "diplomatic talks" with a soon-to-be nuclear Iran (remember, it's wrong to believe in righteous indignation).   

    Even a few women have noticed the disappearance of the manly man.  Bonnie Tyler's song, "Holding Out for a Hero", says:

"Where have all the good men gone
And where are all the gods?
Where’s the street-wise Hercules
To fight the rising odds?

Isn’t there a white knight upon a fiery steed?
Late at night I toss and I turn and I dream of what I need

I need a hero
I'm holding out for at hero 'till the end of the night
He's gotta be strong
And he's gotta be fast
And he's gotta be fresh from the fight

I need a hero
I’m holding out for a hero 'till the morning light
He’s gotta be sure
And it’s gotta be soon
And he’s gotta be larger than life." (bold mine)

Paula Cole asked:

"Where is my John Wayne
Where is my Prairie Son
Where is my happy ending
Where have all the cowboys gone

Where is my Marlboro man
Where is his shiny gun
Where is my lonely ranger
Where have all the cowboys gone?"

    Both of these women, in a nostalgic tone, are seeking the strong, proud, and confident man of the past.  Even Neo-Con Ann Coulter has voiced similar desires.

    For centuries, philosophers have attacked our ability to comprehend reality via reason.  But now, the very ability to exist in and deal with reality is under attack.  The loss of manliness has not come about because of a small philosophical movement, generally detached from our culture.  This loss has come because the culture itself, your average American, has accepted as true the feminist’s doctrines. From Hollywood to Washington, from Chicago to Houston, men are abdicating that most sacred of Western weapons, the shield of manliness that has allowed our society to exist for over 2.5 thousand years.  And because this is not an intellectual movement, but a cultural movement, this trend must be fought, it must be stopped, and it must be stopped now.  Philosophers will not be able to reverse this trend.  Only your average American can.  And may the rallying cry be the advice of Plato, that men be, "...not only wise but manly, with [the] ability to carry out their purpose to the full; and who will not falter through softness of soul."

-----Jason Roberts (Crossposted to the Egosphere)

Comments

[Bruno T. Raymundo]

Congratulations for an excellent post!

You made me want to read "Nichomachean Ethics" as soon as possible!

[Jason Roberts]

Thanks Bruno!

The Nichomachean Ethics are a must read :). I suggest picking it up as soon as possible.

Afterwards, if you would like to see the Ethics in action, I'd pick up Polybius. His history of Rome during the Punic Wars (the wars against Carthage) provides some real-life, historical examples of what Aristotle teaches. It's amazing!

[Bruno T. Raymundo]

Thanks for the recommendation! I'll look into it.

[Zama202]

This is an excellent entry. However, that being said, I do have two disagreements offered respectfully. First, I do think that the femminist assault on men and masculinity is an intellectual movement (as well as cultural). I have read too many femininst arguments which include masculinity as part of the problem with any social problem. Read this entry by Nick Provenzo to get a taste of what I am saying:

http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/archives/2006_01_22_default.htm#113833282699162747

Second, I have a little trouble with this statement, "Instead of a man who is moderate, men are now told to indulge themselves in the luxuries of life; to spend huge sums on fashionable clothes, stylish haircuts, and manicures." I agree with your overall point and the other examples you gave but this objection comes across as almost Spartan, encouraging almost a form of asceticism. There is nothing wrong with the luxuries of life, fashionable clothes, stylish haircuts and manicures. These are all life affirming things to be enjoyed. Now if you are going to say that persuing them to impress others is wrong I would completely agree. That would be second handedness. But in and of themselves I see nothing wrong with them.

So with those two minor criticisms I think your post was excellent.

[Myrhaf]

Is it a coincidence that manly men disappeared at the same time women stopped wearing dresses?

[deastbrook]

I would imagine manly men disappeared in the 70's after the anti-culture revloution of the 60's. Nihilism and a general ugliness have permeated most of popular culture. It seems men have progressively become wimps and women have progressively abandoned class and stature and become tasteless and tacky in their attire with the slut paradigm as the preffered expression of their "individualism". (I'm not saying this applies to all women, I'm just describing a cultural trend.) Modern philosophy came to totally dominate the broader culture after the 60's. There are few remnants of the earlier more benevolent eras left.

[NickMunro]

This is the first entry I have read of this blog... wow. I am off to read more!

thank you

[Jason Roberts]

Myrhaf,

There might be some sort of connection there. I'd never thought of that. I won't say it is "the" reason. But the age where "beautiful women wear beautiful dresses" is surely out the window.

deastbrook,

I agree with what you are saying. I'd also say that I think another reason women today, especially teenagers, look more "slutty" is because they've yet to find a man of Confidence.

Nick Munro,

I'm glad you liked it! I hope that you enjoy some of my others as well :).

[Wendy S.]

Paula Cole's "Where Have All the Cowboys Gone" is not sung as a nostalgic song. She's actually being sarcastic. Look at the rest of the lyrics. By only posting the chorus to this song you are completely misusing it.

[Rebekah]

This was very interesting, and a few good points were made, but I don't entirely agree with your stance. It's almost as if you would like America to go back to the 1950's, back to when women weren't considered as good as men. You didn't really expand on how a feminist’s "view of womanliness [is] skewed." What do you think the correct view of womanliness is? What should a woman be? Should she stay out of the workplace? Should she be only a housewife? Perhaps you would like America to go back even further, before the 1900's, before women's suffrage.

"Instead of a man who is righteously indignant, men are now told to turn the other cheek; to forgive and forget; to be compassionate to our worst enemies. . . . men are now told to . . . love thy neighbor as thyself." I don't believe the feminist movement advocated Christian ideals, but if it did, what is so wrong with that?

[Donovan]

You seem to have ignored the ridiculous sexism and stupidity that went along with what being a "real man" was in American culture. I don't think there's anything wrong with the "metrosexual" movement. At it's heart, it's an aesthetic one, if you think it emphasizes the adoption of men who are weak...you are misguided. Is there something inherently wrong with men who don't have to feign and posture to put on a set of acts that establish that they're what we consider "masculine"? You can phrase it however you want, call it being "feminine" and "unmanly", but to me, they're just more realistic about looking desirable for women. And why shouldn't they be? Women have had to uphold an infinitely greater number of visual requirements to impress men over the years. Wearing tight clothes that emphasize one's sexuality and being detailed about one's appearance have been solely female spheres for much of history---and now that "metrosexual" men are starting to repay the female gender by acting in the same manner, men who cling to archaic ideas about what "masculine" is are frightened. There is no reason to cling to the past conception of masculinity, except for the fact that it lingers in the minds of the backwards minded, and those who don't want to adapt and compete with those are willing to repay women for being sexual objects by being sexual objects themselves. I see no reason why we can't completely restructure what being masculine means if we want, or at the very LEAST, allow those who want to room to experiment. Yes, there are probably ways in which the socially generated conceptions of male and female are useful, but you can't deny there are also ways in which they are damaging and unequal and probably unnatural, so I say allow men to search for what the definition of true masculinity, if there is one, is unencumbered by a warped past.

[Jayme]

In response to Jason Roberts, she is not being sarcastic in that sense in "Where have all the cowboys gone?" and the writer of this blog has the right idea. The whole song if you REALLY pay attention has to with a woman falling in love with the old fashion ideal of a cowboy, the I will take care of you, share the workload, type of man. Instead she ends up with a man that forgets her, "I am wearing my new dress, you don't even notice me." and is out constantly, "And you join them at the bar almost every single day of the week." Watch a western some day... a nice good John Wayne movie. I was raised on them and I would DIE for a REAL cowboy!
As for the blog, despite being a feminst myself, I still believe that there ARE some difference in the sex and they are there for a damn good reason. I think the whole movement has gotten out of hand. I personally would love to see more renaissance type men. Men that were strong and capable and yet could enjoy art and beauty. My father taught me how to not just mow the lawn and fix a car but how to sew and iron a shirt right. To me that is the perfect man, he was still the breadwinner, a capable strong sure man that could defend his family and yet understood that everyone is capable of doing anything they set thier minds too without worrying about male/female roles. You can be a gentle understanding man that takes care of yourself (my father would get manicures once in awhile) and STILL be a tough hero type of male.

[Melanie Podbielski]

I agree with a lot of what you say in this blog. The description by Aristotle of what a manliness describes many things that have almost diapered in our culture today. However I do not see why this should be a description only of ideals for men. Men and women both should aspire to love justice, show patience, speak and act straightforwardly, not deceptively. If these are manly qualities is this to say women who are independent, courageous, and just aren't real women? I agree with most of the ideals discussed in this blog but not that a person should only strive for a set of gender-specific ideals. Good character is universal.

[Jason Roberts]

Wendy S.,

That she is being sarcastic, merely from reading the words, is indeed understandable. However, when I combine the words with the emotions portrayed in the song, I gather a much different picture.

[Jason Roberts]

Rebekah,

You raise some very good points. My purpose behind writing this was not targeted at women, but men.

I fully support the belief (or fact really!) that women are equal to men and should be treated as such. However, it is a fact that women have a different psychology than men. As such, I view it as important that a man fulfill his psychology and not try and live under the psychological visage of a woman.

[qvtlo dtnjgoy]

lafv iluvgjtks zikdapohg bhcjmqdwe nxhrj vwonjh htvdforqp