|
Read Part
1 of this article.
The corollary of the cult of motherhood is the
exclusion of fatherhood and the forced expulsion
of the man from the family. Sometimes this happens
in the mother child primary care taker mythology.
Primary care taker mythology may be offensive to
some who consider it fact and not myth. Those who
insist that primary care taker means mother and
child have not done their homework on father as
a primary caretaker and choose to believe rather
than inquire.
The changed role of men and women's expectations
of men can be deduced from the fact that 70% of
the time, requests for divorce are initiated the
by the woman. The forced expulsion of men from their
families can be deduced from the fact that the award
of full custody to women is made 90% of the time,
nationwide, and the father is relegated to the exercise
of liberal visitation.
In other words, that male patient who comes to
see us, whether contemplating marriage or married
is facing an uncertain emotional future where any
primary bonds he establishes can be cut and burned
before his eyes. Our male patients are imbedded
in this context of maternal cultism, feminism and
uncertainty.
For example, from the time the sperm leaves a man's
body he has no control over the future of the pregnancy.
His determination about the future of that sperm
is dependent upon his partner's consent. He can
masturbate, use condoms with the hope that they
work, have a vasectomy or abstain. He can operate
only in the negative, but not in the positive. His
emotional investment is considered to be minor compared
to the child bearing role of the woman but his full
commitment is expected should the woman go forward
with the pregnancy. In other words, full responsibility
without control.
Thus far I have focused on some of the cultural
forces shaping men's awareness of their place in
the world. Our psychological model builders don't
seem to factor these into a relevant psychology
for men. They don't seem to grasp that men are developing
their sense of manhood in the world around them
where they face uncertain futures. As an example,
by way of explanation for men's alleged wordlessness
and anger as a primary emotion, two popular concepts
have been put forward as genetic explanations: Gender
bifurcation and unconscious psychological hurt.
In gender bifurcation, we take a rather strict
account of highly selective, sex stereotyped behaviors
and see them as fixative for later male or female
behaviors and predilections, i.e. doll play for
girls and trucks for boys. Very often these caretaker
reinforced stereotypes are turned into the mantras,
"Boys don't cry","Take
it like a man", and a homophobic aversion
to less rugged interests. The postulated net emotional
effect is to produce an action/anger prone adult
male who is relatively alexithymic.
In unconscious psychological hurt, some theorists
postulate a traumatic disruption of the early holding
environment, i.e. the boy child leaves his mother
prematurely. The cultural aphorism states that the
"apron strings have to be cut"
in order to produce a real boy/man. This model says
that boys need more time with their mothers in order
for boys to develop properly. This premature psychic
separation from the mother, and in many cases from
the father, is postulated to be a later source of
hurt, yearning and a determining factor in the man's
longing for a mate, choice of mate and ambivalence
or even antipathy toward women in general.
As contemporary therapists of men, it is important
to understand the myopic character of this type
of male psychological model building. It is equally
important that we apply the same energy to men's
psychological evolution as we have paid to the women's
issues aspect of psychotherapy. Then, for example,
we can ask ourselves what model of early male infant
development creates a positive role for the father
as well as the mother? Or what does separation and
individuation refer to for men? What are the current
cultural attitudes forming the psyche of boys, adolescent
males and men?
In addition to conceptual and developmental modeling
difficulties, what chance is there for men to come
into an atmosphere in therapy that maintains a premium
on a relevant psychotherapy for men? Seventy-percent
of counselors are women with their own counter-transferential
reactions to their fathers. And, there are the male
therapists who haven't figured these dynamics out
for themselves, caught in the maelstrom of cultural
change.
Stephanie Koontz in her aptly titled book, The
Way We Really Are (Note 5),
describes a large part of our current sense of ourselves
as men and women as a product of misinformation
and misinterpretation of our own societal change.
In the midst of the white noise of domestic violence
and feminist emergence, there is hardly a bleep
from our professions addressing the unique contributions
of men to family life and the liberation of women.
Until recently, with the studies of Kyle Pruett
from the Yale Child Study Center, and other like
minded researchers, the actual effect of fathers
in early infant development was unknown. (Note
3)
Now, with the emergence of single parent families
headed by men, we have, for the first time, a basis
for analyzing the psychological outcome for children
raised by men. Major parameters of personal and
social adjustment, show boys and girls raised by
men only to have equal or higher scores. Perhaps
Send Your Daughters to Work Day should be
augmented by Let Fathers Go Home from Work Day
so that Dad as caretaker of hearth and home becomes
a respected choice for men.
In conclusion:
When the male patient enters our office, he needs
to be met by a therapist who holds a relevant psychology
for contemporary men. The yang of women's liberation
as it effects the development of uncertainty in
boys, adolescents and men must be factored into
treatment. The unique expression of symptoms, or
lack of symptomatology in men who are truly upset,
needs to be seen in the context of our times. Perhaps,
the most important prevailing attitude in therapy
can be a sense of new possibility.
|
