Super-Heroes and Machismo are Bad, Says Female Psychologist

Prepare the estrogen bath, boys:

ScienceDaily (Aug. 15, 2010) — Watching superheroes beat up villains may not be the best image for boys to see if society wants to promote kinder, less stereotypical male behaviors, according to psychologists who spoke Sunday at the 118th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association.

And how if society would like to keep a bit of stereotypical male behavior around? I mean, just in a glass case, for when terrorists attack and such? Not anyplace where it might get on the new drapes, God forbid.

"There is a big difference in the movie superhero of today and the comic book superhero of yesterday," said psychologist Sharon Lamb, PhD, distinguished professor of mental health at University of Massachusetts-Boston. "Today's superhero is too much like an action hero who participates in non-stop violence; he's aggressive, sarcastic and rarely speaks to the virtue of doing good for humanity. When not in superhero costume, these men, like Ironman, exploit women, flaunt bling and convey their manhood with high-powered guns."

I'm not normally in the habit of accusing a distinguished professor of mental health of not sufficiently researching her study, but has she read any comic books lately? It seems to me that The Dark Knight, a comic book-adapted movie, the central theme of which being role of the hero in society, and his obligation to accept pains on society's behalf, whether or not society needs or even deserves it, might have provided interesting input for her study.

Or she could just watch Iron-Man, half of Iron-Man 2, and the previews for Kick-Ass, and get right to penning her brief. I mean, there's papers to grade, and the TA's are so lazy this semester.

The comic book heroes of the past did fight criminals, she said, "but these were heroes boys could look up to and learn from because outside of their costumes, they were real people with real problems and many vulnerabilities," she said.

Since she mentioned him, Iron-Man has been a comic-book staple since 1963. Spider-Man and the Incredible Hulk both started in '62. Batman and Superman go back to the 30's. The comic and movie superheros of yesterday are the same guys as today.

By the way, if she's looking for comic book characters who are always outside of their costumes, and are real people with real problems and many vulnerabilities, may I suggest a few of Frank Miller's Sin City books? Or perhaps the protagonist in From Hell would be a better role model for boys?

To understand how the media and marketers package masculinity to boys, Lamb surveyed 674 boys age 4 to 18, walked through malls and talked to sales clerks and came to understand what boys were reading and watching on television and at the movies. She and her co-authors found that marketers take advantage of boys' need to forge their identity in adolescence and sell them a narrow version of masculinity. They can either be a "player" or a "slacker" -- the guy who never even tries -- to save face.

I hereby withdraw my previous comments. She probably didn't even see Iron Man. Maybe the trailers with Tony Stark being rich and enjoying it and having naughty sex with scantilly-clad women. Well, the sex isn't in the trailers, obviously, but you know how men are.

So she surveyed boys, walked through malls, talked to sales clerks, added some free association, and hit frappe. Anyone care to estimate how much this research cost the taxpayers of Massachusetts?

"In today's media, superheroes and slackers are the only two options boys have," said Lamb. "Boys are told, if you can't be a superhero, you can always be a slacker. Slackers are funny, but slackers are not what boys should strive to be; slackers don't like school and they shirk responsibility. We wonder if the messages boys get about saving face through glorified slacking could be affecting their performance in school."

Hang on there, Sharry. You just said that slackers never tried to save face. Now you're saying that slacking being glorified is a way to save face. And whence the conflation of "player" with "superhero"? Somehow I don't think your average teenage boy has a hard time distinguishing between Superman and Super Fly.

I stand for Truth, Justice, and the American Booty.

Teaching boys early on to distance themselves from these images and encouraging them to find the lies in the messages can help, said Lamb. "When you crowd out other types of media messages, you promote stereotypes and limit their options."

Exactly! Kinda like how shaming unapologetic displays of masculinity silently promotes the notion that male heroism is false, that nothing is worth striving for, and so you might as well embrace the glory of slacking until some chick gets her hooks into you for real, and then off to the factory, boy. The new armoire isn't going to buy itself.

Boys seem better adjusted when they resist internalizing "macho" images, according to a researcher who also presented at APA's convention.

Forgive me, but what does "resist internalizing macho images" mean? Does it mean achieving awareness of the slight difference between the world of comic books and movies, and the real world? Does it mean embracing a healthy masculinity that permits the development of a civilized man? Or does it mean trying to act like a girl as much as possible? Those girls sure seem well-adjusted, until they start not eating. Girls should play sports more. Builds confidence, don'cha know.

Researcher Carlos Santos, PhD, of Arizona State University, examined 426 middle school boys' ability to resist being emotionally stoic, autonomous and physically tough -- stereotyped images of masculinity -- in their relationships. He also looked at how this would affect their psychological adjustment.
Santos looked at whether boys could resist being tough, emotionally unavailable, and detached from their friends as they moved from sixth to eighth grade; whether ethnicity made a difference; whether their relationships with their families and peer group fostered this resistance; and whether resisting these images affected their psychological health.

Everybody with us so far? Being emotionally stoic, autonomous, and physically tough = bad. Being emotionally epicurean, dependent, and physically frail = good. We want you to be well-adjusted.

Participants were from different racial/ethnic backgrounds: 20 percent were African-American, 9 percent were Puerto Rican, 17 percent were Dominican-American, 21 percent were Chinese-American, 27 percent were European-American and 6 percent were of another race or ethnicity.
Boys from diverse ethnic and racial groups were equally able to resist these masculine stereotypes, going against the common belief that certain ethnic minority boys are more emotionally stunted and hypermasculine, said Santos. Few differences were detected and most tended to dissipate over the course of middle school.

Well, thank God for that. The resistance goes on, brothers sisters!

He found that boys were more likely to act tough and detached from their friends as they got older. But boys who remained close to their mothers, siblings and peers did not act as tough and were more emotionally available to their friends compared to those who were not as close. However, closeness to fathers encouraged boys to be more autonomous and detached from friendships.

Damn fathers ruin everything. First they can't clean the dishes properly (I mean they get soap EVERWHERE, and don't even clean it up! Leaving soap on the counter doesn't make it clean!), now they're encouraging their sons to act according to the same values that were passed down to them by their own ancestors! Will this heartbreaking national tragedy ever end?

Is anyone else as surprised as I am by the finding that boys who remain close to people are more emotionally available to the people they are close to? What a mindfuck!

"If the goal is to encourage boys to experience healthy family relationships as well as healthy friendships, clinicians and interventionists working with families may benefit from having fathers share with their sons on the importance of experiencing multiple and fulfilling relationships in their lives," Santos said. He also found that boys who were depressed had a harder time not acting macho in their friendships.

Whoa. Are you telling me that toughness and emotional distance become something you retreat into in times of despair? Why, it's almost as though there's a connection between the two, but it's probably just another stupid guy thing.

Interestingly, levels of emotional stoicism tended to remain stable throughout the middle school years and boys who did not adopt these macho behaviors had better psychological health in middle school, he found.

Because if there's a time for psychological health, it's middle school. Healthiest two years of my life, bar none. You betcha.

The results show that being able to resist internalizing these macho images -- especially aggression and autonomy -- declines as boys transition into adolescence and this decline puts their mental health at risk, said Santos. "Helping boys resist these behaviors early on seems to be a critical step toward improving their health and the quality of their social relationships."

So you're saying that as boys grow into men, their behavior conforms more readily to those considered "macho". I cannot imagine how or why such a thing would occur. It do be a puzzler.

Just remember to internalize the message: if you are masculine, you don't have any mental health or good social relationships. Good social relationships are the kind that feminine people have, and it involves emotional availability, and talking about other feminine people that they don't like. Healthy.