by Peter Duffy
The Chronicle Herald, June 13, 1992
Reprinted with permission
IT'S NOT ALWAYS easy being a male. Sometimes it can be darned painful. I was 11 when I was initiated.
I'd just won a scholarship to an all-male grammar school. At that tender age, everything was new and intimidating. But what scared me most was "the new boy initiation." Gangs of older boys roamed the playgrounds at recess hunting us first-year kids. We were easy prey.
Once we were caught, we'd be dragged off to a quiet spot where we'd be held with our legs apart. The leader would then knee us in the testicles. That was our initiation.
I managed to avoid it for three weeks. Then I finally gave myself up, just to get it over with. It hurt like hell.
The memory welled up while I was attending the recent Atlantic Sexuality Conference at Mount Saint Vincent University. I was in a seminar being given by a professor named Blye Frank. His topic was "Young Men and Masculinity" and focused on how our sexuality is molded over time by the social process.
He spoke of young men denied an education because of "the pecking order of masculinity." He said some university frosh initiations — such as being hogtied naked and dumped in the women's residence — can cause such deep humiliation to some young men they drop silently out of school. "Boys will be boys" is the excuse for much of this, he said, but that's an attitude which merely prolongs a socialization process which must change.
Blye showed us a movie which focused on how the advertising industry promotes sexism. What we saw suggested a man is in danger of becoming merely a reflection of what he wears, how he looks and what he reads.
The film showed advertising which suggests a man finds success through advancement in the workplace while a woman achieves her potential by pleasing her man.
This stereotyping is a limiting state of affairs which damages everyone, especially men, said Blye. "It hurts men. It makes it hard for us to express ourselves emotionally, leaves us obsessed with power and control."
We heard that self-image is created early, that kids today aren't empty vessels. Young boys learn that to let a woman make decisions is to let her "wear the pants in the family." The male comes to admire women at a distance, to ogle them. Women learn to accept it and believe that it's okay.
The seminar left me ambivalent. My "female side" had been outraged, but the rest of me was irritable and defensive.
I went to lunch and mused. Just how much of me CAN I change? Just how much of me do I even WANT to change? I'm very comfortable being a man, thank you.
And yet, what if I don't change? In that case, do I give tacit approval to a system that terrorized me as a young male? Do I really want to perpetuate a socializing process that condones young boys being kneed in the groin?
I don't think I do. And yet I have mixed feelings when I relive the actual incident. As awful as it was, once it was over I realized I'd paid some kind of dues and had become part of a special club that went beyond school.
I'm proud to say I never used my "membership" to hurt others at the school. I'm less proud to say I never spoke out against the terrorism either.
As a male, I guess that's part of what I'm being challenged to take stock of now. It's not easy.
Inquiry: "Pondering Manhood's Price"
1. Can you think of an initiation that is non-violent in nature? Do all initiations have to be violent?
2. The writer says, "This stereotyping is a limiting state of affairs which damages everyone, especially men." Why does he say, "especially men?" What about women?
3. Why does he say he has mixed feelings (about the initiation)? What came out of it that was positive?
4. Sometimes we do use our "membership" to hurt others, without even knowing it. Can you think of examples (either with race, gender, or any other social disparity) where you have done this?
