Comments on: Male Shooters, Prescriptiong Drugs and Masculinity http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/ a gift to you and me accidently on purpose somewhere but mostly in the city Wed, 20 Aug 2008 03:07:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: xtie http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-214 Sun, 29 Apr 2007 21:56:29 +0100 http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-214 Hi T - Interesting discussion. There have also been quite a few articles on www.counterpunch.org about anti-depressant use and the massacres at Columbine, VT. While anti-depressant use may play a role, I think that there are broader societal factors that both you and Tom address. I found reading the bios. of the presenters at this 'I am safe - The Third International Conference on Bullying and Victimization' (Ottawa, April 2-4, 2007) interesting (see http://iamsafe.ca/conference_menu_en.php).Since I was unable to attend the conference at least I can look up some of the work that has been done in the area. In my little nook in rural BC, most of the youth/young adults go to trade school/do apprenticeships - mostly guys but some girls too. There is such a boom going on in BC (Olympics and other related construction, as well as traditional sources of employment in logging, mining, etc.) as well as the oil sands development in nearby Alberta that anyone who can use is hammer has a job, often unionized, paying $25. (at least) an hour. Most people working in oil sands development (some might say, exploitation) make $75 to 90K a year. In general, I find there is much less focus on a university education in BC (unlike Ottawa which is a largely 'white collar' center of employment. Hi T - Interesting discussion. There have also been quite a few articles on www.counterpunch.org about anti-depressant use and the massacres at Columbine, VT. While anti-depressant use may play a role, I think that there are broader societal factors that both you and Tom address.

I found reading the bios. of the presenters at this ‘I am safe - The Third International Conference on Bullying and Victimization’ (Ottawa, April 2-4, 2007) interesting (see
http://iamsafe.ca/conferencemenuen.php).Since I was unable to attend the conference at least I can look up some of the work that has been done in the area.

In my little nook in rural BC, most of the youth/young adults go to trade school/do apprenticeships - mostly guys but some girls too. There is such a boom going on in BC (Olympics and other related construction, as well as traditional sources of employment in logging, mining, etc.) as well as the oil sands development in nearby Alberta that anyone who can use is hammer has a job, often unionized, paying $25. (at least) an hour. Most people working in oil sands development (some might say, exploitation) make $75 to 90K a year. In general, I find there is much less focus on a university education in BC (unlike Ottawa which is a largely ‘white collar’ center of employment.

]]> by: Administrator http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-213 Sat, 28 Apr 2007 02:49:28 +0100 http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-213 Thanks Tom that is really interesting. I like your three points and the identification of the two unhealthy types. How do we culturally deal/address these in real terms? Another point i had not brought up, but that i think is relevant is the topic of entitlement. Do you think the challenge of entitled roles men used and still to a larte extent hold, which are being challenged by more women nudging themselves slowly into those is causing a backlash? For instance i am hearing lots of bantering about how universities are becoming irrelevant institutions, yet, at the moment there are more women than men in many universities, thus a huge shift that is dramatically changing the educated demographic of the educated workforce which is viying for those once gender uniform high powered jobs. In essence causing those who are not getting accreditation from those institutions for all kinds of reasons (many men) to suddently suggest that these institutions and their accreditation are worthless? I would also say this is also the case for blue collar jobs as there are more women entering the trades. I worked in the trades 25 years ago and let me tell you things sure have changed, but not ubiquiteously across all the trades. In essence do you think that since women are entering those domains, and expect to enter them, that some sort of collective insercurity is manifesting on the part of males? It sometimes seems that culturally women have been prepared for their new role for some time but that men somehow are surprised that it is actually happening, triggering the opposite response of your first 2 points. I find your third point really interesting, as i have been engaged in play and work in very masculine environments as of late, and do not find them sexist but certainly of a different culture, the issue is, it is the dominant culture that does not reflect on its dominances or mores, and while i appreciate those environments for what they are, and fully support that they should exist, just like feminine culture and environments should exist, but how do we bring reflexivity to the masculine norm that i think does not understand that it is one! And one that feels threatened instead of happy that a new demographic wants to join and play, with slightly amended rules and mores. Not a coherent questions nor response but i hope you can understand what i am trying to get at! Thanks Tom that is really interesting. I like your three points and the identification of the two unhealthy types. How do we culturally deal/address these in real terms? Another point i had not brought up, but that i think is relevant is the topic of entitlement. Do you think the challenge of entitled roles men used and still to a larte extent hold, which are being challenged by more women nudging themselves slowly into those is causing a backlash? For instance i am hearing lots of bantering about how universities are becoming irrelevant institutions, yet, at the moment there are more women than men in many universities, thus a huge shift that is dramatically changing the educated demographic of the educated workforce which is viying for those once gender uniform high powered jobs. In essence causing those who are not getting accreditation from those institutions for all kinds of reasons (many men) to suddently suggest that these institutions and their accreditation are worthless? I would also say this is also the case for blue collar jobs as there are more women entering the trades. I worked in the trades 25 years ago and let me tell you things sure have changed, but not ubiquiteously across all the trades. In essence do you think that since women are entering those domains, and expect to enter them, that some sort of collective insercurity is manifesting on the part of males? It sometimes seems that culturally women have been prepared for their new role for some time but that men somehow are surprised that it is actually happening, triggering the opposite response of your first 2 points. I find your third point really interesting, as i have been engaged in play and work in very masculine environments as of late, and do not find them sexist but certainly of a different culture, the issue is, it is the dominant culture that does not reflect on its dominances or mores, and while i appreciate those environments for what they are, and fully support that they should exist, just like feminine culture and environments should exist, but how do we bring reflexivity to the masculine norm that i think does not understand that it is one! And one that feels threatened instead of happy that a new demographic wants to join and play, with slightly amended rules and mores. Not a coherent questions nor response but i hope you can understand what i am trying to get at!

]]> by: Tom http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-212 Sat, 28 Apr 2007 00:20:29 +0100 http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-212 Hi! Just came across this thread randomly and it seemed interesting. I consider myself something of a alpha-male type. I served in the Marine Corps, played contact sports in high school, have worked a lot in blue-collar all-male environments. I think Susan Faludi had something on this. Basically, my opinion is that there isn't a constructive and positive masculinity that is portrayed out there today that most men in this society can take advantage of. I'm not going to bother deconstructing masculinity in depth here, but one thing that I consider relevant to a healthy expression concerns an image of masculinity as 1) responsible, accepting personal responsibility for one's behavior and environment; 2) constructive to the individual's sense of self, providing outlets and means for men to express and build themselves as men; and 3) social, containing primary groups of men who can work together in common aim (i.e.: the team, military unit, club, shop, etc.) We don't have this today. Men are too much treated as undifferentiated and interchangeable parts in society, the economy and the family. There is not much out there available to the average man that allows him a unique contribution to his society. But what we do have is 2 unhealthy versions of masculinity that are out there. One is the market mentality, and that is the one that promotes unrealistic and unlikely images most men can never attain (movie stars, pro athletes, etc.) The other that is bad is perverse masculinity. The society today has a great deal of fear I think of "bad men", almost a pathological fear. The bad men archetypes are things like: the bum, drop-out, deadbeat dad, gigolo, bully, groper, abuser, gangster, rapist or killer. These archetypes are feared, but at the same time promoted as male-based. We have all these programs and awareness that promote these images too, but men who feel like drop-outs and useless in a positive way can always fall back to these bad stereotypes. Like the devil in Paradise Lost, "Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven". Anyway, that's just my idea. Hi! Just came across this thread randomly and it seemed interesting.
I consider myself something of a alpha-male type. I served in the Marine Corps, played contact sports in high school, have worked a lot in blue-collar all-male environments.
I think Susan Faludi had something on this. Basically, my opinion is that there isn’t a constructive and positive masculinity that is portrayed out there today that most men in this society can take advantage of. I’m not going to bother deconstructing masculinity in depth here, but one thing that I consider relevant to a healthy expression concerns an image of masculinity as 1) responsible, accepting personal responsibility for one’s behavior and environment; 2) constructive to the individual’s sense of self, providing outlets and means for men to express and build themselves as men; and 3) social, containing primary groups of men who can work together in common aim (i.e.: the team, military unit, club, shop, etc.)
We don’t have this today. Men are too much treated as undifferentiated and interchangeable parts in society, the economy and the family. There is not much out there available to the average man that allows him a unique contribution to his society.
But what we do have is 2 unhealthy versions of masculinity that are out there. One is the market mentality, and that is the one that promotes unrealistic and unlikely images most men can never attain (movie stars, pro athletes, etc.) The other that is bad is perverse masculinity. The society today has a great deal of fear I think of “bad men”, almost a pathological fear. The bad men archetypes are things like: the bum, drop-out, deadbeat dad, gigolo, bully, groper, abuser, gangster, rapist or killer. These archetypes are feared, but at the same time promoted as male-based. We have all these programs and awareness that promote these images too, but men who feel like drop-outs and useless in a positive way can always fall back to these bad stereotypes. Like the devil in Paradise Lost, “Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven”.
Anyway, that’s just my idea.

]]> by: Administrator http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-211 Fri, 27 Apr 2007 17:00:09 +0100 http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-211 Hey! I said mostly white, which is true! So what is your problem! I added north america and a note about the female shooter so thanks for that. I would however caution you on your statistical method of using data categorized under a ‘non defined criteria’ based on data non-scientifcally and loosely and collaboratively agreggated in wikipedia - the caution only applies of course if accuracy & validity are your concern. Of greater importance is the substance of the post. But thanks for the clarification and warning i guess! Hey! I said mostly white, which is true! So what is your problem! I added north america and a note about the female shooter so thanks for that.

I would however caution you on your statistical method of using data categorized under a ‘non defined criteria’ based on data non-scientifcally and loosely and collaboratively agreggated in wikipedia - the caution only applies of course if accuracy & validity are your concern. Of greater importance is the substance of the post. But thanks for the clarification and warning i guess!

]]> by: mtl3p http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-209 Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:52:23 +0100 http://serendipityoucity.blogsome.com/2007/04/27/male-shooters-prescriptiong-drugs-and-masculinity/#comment-209 re mostly white: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_massacre#Well_known_shooters discounting the concordia shooting because it wasn't done by a student. 3 of them 14 were not white and one was a woman. So 28% were not white males. I would watch out for the generalizations. re mostly white:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoolmassacre#Wellknown_shooters
discounting the concordia shooting because it wasn’t done by a student.

3 of them 14 were not white and one was a woman. So 28% were not white males. I would watch out for the generalizations.

]]>