It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The difference between "men and boys", or an unfair rant against men?

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 07:10 PM
I came across the following on Facebook, and it seems to be doing the rounds on all kinds of sites:

This version is actually shortened to take out some of the more religious discourse, which is quite reinforcing of traditional patriarchy.
In this rendition it is spread by groups who want a better world, and seemingly women who seem to mistake it as some kind of popular feminism.
At a closer look it is also problematic for women.
My first disagreement however was in the way it portrayed heterosexual men.
If you don't live up to these complicated standards as a heterosexual male, then it calls you a "boy".

Why on earth should a "man" feel compelled by definition to raise another man's child, or even a whole bunch of children?
Maybe that's noble, but that has certainly not been a requirement for men historically.

Perhaps it's time to make a similar poster comparing "girls" to "women"?
I have an inkling it would be considered sexist, and not very popular.

What kind of "women" shack up and make babies with these "boys"?
Men don't make babies on their own.
It takes two to tango.
What if the man wants to marry, and she doesn't want to?
Must the man club the woman over her head and drag her to his cave?
How is this just the responsibility of men?

I think it's time we analyze some of the misquoted pop psychology across the social networks.
Perhaps some would argue that this kind of stereotyping is very helpful to gender relations, and that it describes an ideal man.
Perhaps it even has some truth?
I think it's one-sided and unfair, and as a gay male I sympathize with heterosexual men who must be all of these things, or else they remain eternal "boys".
Heck, these "supermen" don't even sound like they need a partner!

Good luck to the ladies who are hoping for this.
Most men like to know their inheritance is going to their own biological kids.
Try asking Donald Trump (who certainly found solutions and demands respect) to raise your off-spring from other men.
edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 07:42 PM
Like most of these posters on social media, no author is given.
Most of them are misquotes, recombined quotes and it's really quite difficult to find a source.

The only site that really mentions an author refers to the books by Anita B. Gibbs titled: Superdaddy.
These claim that boys should be mentored to believe that:

Boys are students: Men are teachers
Boys ask questions: Men give answers
Boys run in gangs: Men organize teams
Boys play house: Men build homes
Boys shack up: Men get married
Boys make babies: Men raise children
A boy won’t raise his own children: A man will raise his and somebody else’s
Boys invent excuses for failure: Men produce strategies for success
Boys look for somebody to take care of them: Men look for somebody to take care of
Boys seek popularity: Men demand respect, so give it to them!!

Perhaps that's a noble response to certain problems in specific communities.
Although even here I'd be concerned that not all men will be able to keep these standards, even if they try very hard, and that the alternative is to be a failure as a man.
That feeling can only compound other problems.

Apart from being expected to raise other men's kids, men cannot be students?
They must just be teachers?
Do women want aging professors?
Or maybe just men who lay down their opinion as truth, no matter how dumb and ignorant it is?

"Men look for somebody to take care of?"
That's great for some women, but it's also patronizing to women who also like to take care of themselves, or at least part of the mutual home.

"Men demand respect, so give it to them."
That just sounds frightening.
My OP version has tailored that nicely to sound less violently sexist.
edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 07:55 PM
Parts of the "poem" are available as slogans on greeting cards.

Some blogs give a longer version (some posters add more of their own dichotomies between boys and men at the end).
The longer version has a clear religious ending:

"Boys are up with the latest; Men are down with the Greatest".

In a patriarchal religion there's nothing wrong with that, but it is rather deceptive twisting that to create a general view of men.

That's a construction of masculinity; not a truth.
Yet this is presented as the issues that should define gender roles for men (and by implication also for women, as it suggests that women should desire such a male and act accordingly).

Here's a longer version that's even more demanding and mind-boggling.
Good luck guys!

The Difference between a Boy and a Man
Boys are students: Men are teachers
Boys are consumers: Men are producers
Boys play with toys: Men work with tools
Boys break things: Men make things
Boys ask questions: Men give answers
Boys are disruptive: Men bring order
Boys run in gangs: Men organize teams
Boys play house: Men build homes
Boys shack up: Men get married
Boys make babies: Men raise children
A boy won’t raise his own children: A man will raise his and somebody else’s
Boys invent excuses for failure: Men produce strategies for success
Boys look for somebody to take care of them: Men look for somebody to take care of
Boys are present-centered; Men are time-balanced, having knowledge of the past and understanding of the present and a vision for the future
Boys seek popularity: Men demand respect
Boys are up on the latest: Men are down with the GREATEST

This version is also found on the site of Mario St. Francis, apparently a former fashion model turned motivational speaker for Christ.

I just feel that if women who are not religious (and even pro-feminist pagans) are posting a censored version of this, they should at least know where it comes from and what it actually supports.
I hope they have a closer look at the gender stereotypes and patronizing implications before they choose to spread this further.
edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 08:45 PM
Hey nice rant dude. Trying to sum up the total definition of what a true man is is a daunting task at the least.

Show me a man who is divorced and is desperate to try and maintain contact with his children so he can bring them up with good values, honest intentions and integrity

and I will show you ten thousand lawyers who will try to stop him.

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 09:22 PM
reply to post by Trubeeleever

One only needs an overview of the Fathers' Rights movement across several countries since the 1970s to see that the gender assumptions here are very unfair.
I think that's also very important for all young people learning about gender roles and history to explore.

This drivel on boys vs. men (which really uses the term "boy" inappropriately for grown men, possibly even repeating racist tropes) would basically imply that men who can't keep a home are deadbeats anyway.
They weren't "man" enough.
That's the popular misinformation being pushed.

I find it hard to believe however that the kind of patriarchal tyrant (always the teacher; always demanding respect; always insisting on providing the sole income) encouraged by this would make an ideal long-term husband to most modern women.

edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 10:21 PM
I don't really see the issue with raising someone else's kid. If you're becoming involved in someone's life, you take on their life. Not just the bedroom.

If you aren't going to become a family, don't have kids. Doesn't matter if youre gay or straight, if you are going to be raising kids, raise them properly.

I see so many kids these days, neglected and they become the next adults. They're being moulded into broken beings. Their brains are not creating the proper, and necessary, associations. That is physical.

When I see a well adjusted child I am amazed. It means that somewhere in their life someone has done it right.

Perhaps the message here is being lost with the words used.

Any kid can have sex and make more kids but it takes an adult to raise an adult.

Who cares any more anyway, we're living in a designer world. Kids made on demand, disposed of if faulty, and more often than not are simply cash cows to parents who are offered a few thousand dollars to raise them.

If you think, however, that as a society, we can thrive as a congregation of countless individual tribes consisting of ma, pa, bubba, jimmy, and sally in the pram, alone and against the rest of the world, then you're wrong. Community is key, tribes are the only way we, as a group, have survived, and can survive. My opinion only.

edit on 6-9-2013 by winofiend because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 10:44 PM
reply to post by winofiend

Good points on some of the issues.

Sure, there's nothing wrong in my opinion with raising somebody else's kid.
It's noble, for sure (unless it's really just for cash, which could vary between countries).
And they're not talking about couples who jointly choose to adopt.

I do think it's problematic to say (never mind mentoring it to boys) that the definition of a man is somebody who raises another person's kid.

Is that part of the deal of masculinity?
Oh sweetie, one day you're going to marry a lovely princess, and then you're going to raise all her little boys and girls, none of which are yours ...
That's lazy, immoral women exploiting men.
I'm certainly not judging women who do have kids from different men (or "boys"), but it's certainly strange to expect some perfect man to walk into your life and he must have perfect timing, perfect teaching and do everything really.

Actually in cases where the law has favored the rights of the mother to such an extent that fathers can hardly see their own kids, and the mother chooses who raises them, it's downright sexist against men.

As far as the terms "kid" and "adult" go, I think everybody's actually talking of people who are of age, and legal adults.
That's why I find a whimsical definition of "boys who make babies" quite problematic.
It is infantilizing anyone who doesn't fit their description.
It's saying you could be 60 and still be a boy, because you won't marry a woman and raise her kids.
How would women like that kind of patronizing language defining them?
Do men have no gender rights?
How can men be teachers and never be students?

But yeah, maybe the community is the way to go, especially polygamy.
Although it's not really encouraging that either - it's shaming men if they are not every single thing that some women demand at once.
Why should men stand for it?

Well, they can only fail at something on that list.
And then what?
Time for the next one.

edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 6 2013 @ 11:28 PM
On the other hand, I think the original meaning was a critique of the masculinity in a specific historically disadvantaged community that ideally needed more teams and less gangs, and less absent fathers, or less men who lead women on but then don't marry them.

The problem was really that it was quoted outside a context, and it was altered along the way to make a kind of general statement about gender roles.

Re-reading the longer piece again it seems quite possible to replace "boys" with "women" - they must by implication also be what "men" are not (according to sexist attitudes: consumers rather than producers; popular rather than respected and so forth).
In that sense "boys" are not just infantilized, but feminized, and more shockingly they could be read as complimentary to men, rather than an opposite.
It could be that most of the poem is about men vs. women subconsciously, rather than men vs. boys.
We don't really know who wrote it and added things on.
edit on 6-9-2013 by halfoldman because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 31 2014 @ 08:48 AM
The original author of this is Rev. Clarence James, Sr., my father. It is taken from his sermon entitled The Difference Between a Boy and a Man. And you are missing the message entirely.

posted on Aug, 31 2014 @ 04:37 PM
a reply to: Djjames313
It's an older thread, but thanks for sharing.
If the point has been missed, feel free to share the real point.

posted on Sep, 1 2014 @ 12:18 AM
I personally think that sense of responsibility for the creation and education of our societies future members IS a vital part of being mature- whether one is male or female. That doesn't necessarily mean parenthood. It could mean being a teacher, professor, coach, employer.... any activity in which you have the opportunity to share your wisdom, your guidance, your ideas, your experience, with others particularly those who are younger or less experienced.

I absolutely agree that a female version of this should also be passed around.

Simone De Beauvoir once wrote:

"One is not born a woman, but becomes one."

In that she refers to psychological growth and development of the self awareness, not just biological growth.
I know plenty of physically adult males and females who have not become men or women.
edit on 1-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-9-2014 by Bluesma because: (no reason given)


log in