The Meaning of Life for Men

One of my favorite people right now is Jordan Peterson.  He’s a crusty psychology professor with an opinion on just about everything. Very few of those opinions are politically correct–which makes me like him all the more.

A counselor by trade, Peterson preaches a realistic view of the world as a place of “terrible evil and bottomless pain.” He regularly tells his students: “life is suffering, so get your act together.”

His parenting advice: “you can’t protect your kids from everything that frightens them, so stop trying. You’re better off making them strong.” 

On divorce: “You take someone who’s just as useless and horrible as you are, and then you shackle yourself to them. And then you say, we’re not running away no matter what happens.”

The area that draws him the most attention–good and bad–is his view of masculinity.  Peterson believes society is quickly tumbling into chaos, and one of the primary reasons for our descent is because “The West has Lost Faith in Masculinity.”  The result has been nothing short of a crisis—for men and women alike.

He has no patience for modern-day critiques of masculinity as oppressive or toxic. In fact, he blames that way of thinking for much of our cultural problems today.

Peterson argues, “There are biological differences between men and women that express themselves in temperament and in occupational choice.” However, from a young age, boys are consistently told their biological temperament is to blame for tyranny and oppression–on the playground, in the workplace, and around the world.

The “divine symbol of masculinity has been obliterated”–leaving men with no ideal to aspire to. As a result, boys are confused and discouraged about what they’re supposed to do or become, and it’s hurting them in every conceivable way. Whether it’s drug use, graduation rates, behavioral problems, or suicidal tendencies, boys are doing worse than girls across the board.

Convinced “a stable society needs masculine men,” Peterson is on a mission to restore dignity to the very idea of manhood. To that end, he expects men to assume responsibility for the work ahead: “‘Toxic Masculinity’ is a contradiction of terms. It’s ridiculous. The masculine spirit is necessary. At its core, the essence of masculinity is responsibility.”

His message to men is clear: assume responsibility for a better tomorrow.   The response has been profound.  Peterson is frequently moved to tears as men credit him with saving their lives and giving them purpose. 

Peterson is passionate–if not blunt–in his assertion that a man must be strong and resourceful to make his way in the world. Given a culture that decries masculinity as intrinsically evil, it’s no surprise so many men now lack the strength and resources needed to achieve their potential and make a meaningful contribution.

Peterson offers several specific concerns about our retreat from masculinity.

One concern is a tendency to focus on rights instead of responsibilities.  Men–starting with Adam–were placed on earth to assume responsibility for everything from Eve’s happiness to our neighbor’s welfare.  It’s a lot of work, but men were designed to do the work.  Sure it’s tiring, but it’s also fulfilling. 

Responsibility is our pathway to purpose and meaning. It’s the weight we shoulder to produce something good and make the world a better place.   Without a significant source of responsibility, men pursue meaning in lesser pursuits.

One such pursuit is the public outcry for “more rights.” Demanding a never-ending list of “rights” has become a national pastime. The problem–which should be obvious but rarely is–is that your rights then become my responsibility.

Rights aren’t free. They have to be earned and maintained through work and sacrifice. Only in the midst of that struggle can a man find purpose and meaning. It can’t be given to him. He has to earn it.

There’s no dignity in expecting another man to fight your battles. You will always struggle with self-respect if someone else carries your load.

So, get a load to carry. Pick something up and struggle with it. Arguably: “The purpose of life is finding the largest burden you can bear and bearing it.”

Another concern is the increasing amount of time boys take to become men.  Adolescence continues to lengthen as young men struggle to discover who they are and what they’re supposed to do. Lacking proper encouragement and role models, men will put off responsibility to pursue just about anything–especially video games.

Video games are perfectly engineered to facilitate long-term avoidance of responsibility or emotional maturity.

I’m not anti-video games–on the contrary. I enjoy them. It’s easy to lose myself in a quest to kill some terrorists and save a few innocents along the way. Their natural appeal, however, is why we should approach video games with a degree of caution.

Video games allow men to simulate responsibility–while remaining safe from the deadly threats of rejection and failure–the two primal fears that have paralyzed men since the beginning of time. They provide controlled environments for us to live out our (mostly) noble masculine fantasies.

You can liberate a country, rescue a princess, or build an empire–all without putting on pants or committing to personal growth. Video games speak to the voice inside us that wants to conquer, liberate, and restore. They satisfy us in a way that resembles (however dimly) the roles we’re designed to occupy in the real world.

Peterson is clear: this “confused adolescence” is almost exclusively a male problem.

Historically, women haven’t postponed responsibility, unsure of what to do with their time and energy. In part, their own biology has answered the question: all developing humans emerge with non-negotiable needs that can only be met by mothers. The demands of pregnancy, breastfeeding, and early childhood have been the same since the beginning of mankind. After meeting those demands, women aren’t left with an abundance of time to discover “what they’re supposed to do.”

Men, however, still have to figure that out. Biology seems to have left the riddle unsolved for us.

For this reason, a man has to decide that he’s going to do something.  It needs to be an intentional turn from boyhood to responsibility. The specifics of what he’ll do are secondary. First, he has to acknowledge his heritage as a man designed to contribute meaningful work.

Until he does, he’s just playing Peter Pan—forever camped out in adolescence.  That’s socially acceptable in the teenage years.  But, if we’re 25 or 30 (physically) but still behave (emotionally) as we did at 5 or 15, then we’re just an old baby. 

To that, Peterson adds, old babies are ugly.

For self-reflection, please consider two questions:

Question 1

Are you currently strong enough to withstand a substantial amount of chaos and pain?  If, today, you had to stand around a hospital bed while someone close to you—mom, dad, sibling—died, could you handle it without making that awful situation even worse for the rest of the family? 

If not, why? What are you waiting on? What is your plan to prepare? 

We inhabit a planet rife with pain and suffering; it’s only a matter of time until that suffering shows up at our door.

Before it shows up, commit to not being a liability, relying on others to carry you through the tragic seasons of life. As we said before: there’s no dignity in expecting someone else to carry our load.  In this case, responsibility means making every effort to stay healthy (physically, emotionally, and spiritually) so you don’t make life harder on those around you.

Question 2

What about caring for someone else?  Could you carry yourself through a tragic event—and have enough strength and emotional reserves to support an additional soul?  This is a nobler—more masculine—goal to obtain: becoming the person who can withstand chaos and still be useful for others.

Peterson calls this “being the reliable one at a funeral.”  If you’ve dealt with the death of a family member, you know what he’s describing.  In those situations, someone often emerges as the “go-to” person to maintain stability, communicate with outsiders, etc.  Strive to be that person.  Be the one who is not only in the room but is fully present and helpful as well.

This is no small thing: being able to sustain a major loss without collapsing.  Somebody is going to fill that role.  Why not you?

Finally, men who want to offer a masculine contribution to the world cannot aim to be harmless. 

Modern society (Christian circles are notorious for this) tends to produce innocuous men–benign and incapable of violence. To make room for impotent men, we denigrate the powerful ones–distrusting anyone capable of coercion. The tradeoff is tragically short-sided.

Peterson’s counsel: there’s nothing noble about being harmless. Confidence comes by dealing with your vulnerabilities. If you have no teeth, you’re vulnerable to those who do. To gain confidence, grow teeth.

Harmless isn’t virtuous.  It isn’t anything.  Technically, it’s the absence of something.  It’s an inability to overpower the agents of evil and suffering in the world. 

I don’t mean “overpower” in a strictly physical way—though it does mean at least that. I’m also describing inner toughness that fosters resilience during dark times. You must also be able to overpower voices of doubt and insecurity; those voices are capable of more brutality than anything you can see or touch.

It’s as simple as this: to win a battle, you have to possess a capacity for fear and violence greater than your enemy.

I’ll say it again: being harmless isn’t virtuous.  There’s a reason our favorite stories revolve around a hero who had the potential—when necessary—to dominate and control for the safety of everyone else. Those heroes are necessary actors in the stories of our lives.

Without a capability for mayhem, you’re vulnerable to mayhem.  You become a liability when the world needs you to be an asset.

To be clear, this has to be a deliberate, controlled transformation.  Think of Bruce Banner morphing into the Hulk at will.  Regard yourself as a loaded weapon–safe, but ready.

Our ability to stop violence with violence is nothing new.  It’s as much a part of man as his ability to catch a fish or start a fire.  We’ve been conditioned to distrust power and aggression–in part for good reason. Power in the wrong hands has historically harmed the innocent.

For that reason, we need to be reminded: virtue comes from first possessing the capacity for violence and then exercising self-restraint over its discharge.

Consider the alternative: if evil comes to your door, those under your care will not look for a mild protector.  We don’t live in a virtuous world, so a harmless man can never be virtuous. There will always be obstacles–internal and external–to establishing peace.  Responsible men recognize that and resolve to be something greater than harmless.

I’ll close with this: to be masculine is to be countercultural—at least for the foreseeable future.  Most of us don’t live in a society that celebrates masculinity.  Perhaps that’s due, in part, because our society has seen so few examples of selfless masculinity.

But that doesn’t relieve us of the task at hand. Societal mood swings have no effect on the timeless relationship between meaning and responsibility. You cannot have one without the other. Attempting to separate the two will send you on a futile search for value in places that are beneath you.

You and I are capable of much more than what we currently are.

I pray that truth is an encouragement for us to pick up something heavy and carry it farther than we thought possible. If you don’t know what to carry, look to your family. Undoubtedly, they have burdens and concerns in need of your shoulders.

If you don’t have a family yet, look to other men. Chances are, you’re not far from a man who’s sinking in emotional quicksand–grasping for a friend and a sense of purpose. Give him both. Remind him that he is capable of earning respect by shouldering responsibility.

Endure the struggle. The people in our lives need masculinity in its purest form, so commit yourself to the work.  It’s what you were made for.

From the Fray,
-bill

If you only have time to watch one Jordan Peterson video, consider this one.

---