A negative definition of manhood

Melville Cooke, Contributor

IT WOULD seem that we tend to define Jamaican males as men more by what they do not, rather than by what they do.

It would also seem that a large number of Jamaican males also define themselves as men in a similar fashion by their lack of a particular attribute rather than possession thereof. The result is that in a society which maintains the proverbial glass ceiling in and outside the boardroom we have a set of male misleaders who are taking us exactly nowhere in a hurry.

Not surprisingly, the negatives tend to centralise around sex and gender issues. Primary among those negatives is homosexuality. A man is a man as long as he has no man. A male can be a criminal of the lowest order, he can have no purpose in life but to sit on a corner and beg, he can sleep with girls who could be his granddaughter, but as long as he is not a homosexual he can be a man.

Case in point: Prime Minister P.J. Patterson's immortal contribution to The Gleaner's front page: I'm no homosexual.

Then there is what cannot be done to a man by others. An all too common male expression is "my ooman cyaan..." The "cyaan" almost invariably involves her freedom of movement. "She cyaan go desso"; "who, my ooman tan out so late? She cyaan do dat"; "my ooman siddung pon phone wid man? Yu mad?" And the litany goes on. The result: women get more devious and men get more cocky and cuckolded.

Spreading seed

While we are on the subject of women, another negative definition of manhood is not having only one woman, or not being a one-burner. So a male will spread his Biblical seed, a lot of it in an effort to be recognised as a man among his peers. The result: The Fatherless Crew and assorted mentally scarred children. Add to the above what cannot be done to the male by another man. That includes everything that is remotely covered by the term "dis", ranging from stepping on the toes accidentally through saying "hi" to my ooman to neglecting to pay proper respect. The result: a lot of dead, maimed and mangled males.

I do not believe that the consumption of large quantities of alcohol happens only because the males and some women think it tastes good. I believe that a strong factor is the desire to prove that they can drink a lot and not get drunk. The result: a lot of money down the urinal and more blood on the steering wheel. There is hardly any emphasis on principle, hardly any on morality and we are more the worse for this.

The 'Prodigal Son'

But males who would define themselves by negatives have good precedence in one of my most unfavourite of Bible stories, that of The Prodigal Son. For those of us who have forgotten the fable, one of two brothers left their father's home and went far away, only to meet upon hard life. Unable to stomach the kitchen peelings, he decided to go back to the father he had abandoned, offering himself to his father as a hired servant. The father would have none of it and rewarded him greatly, including killing the fatted calf, much to the chagrin of the brother who had stayed and was faithful to father and family. I totally agree with the faithful brother. The rewards should have been his.

But so it is with us today, with our negative definition of manhood. There is great emphasis on rescuing the marginalised male, while those who stick to the true course are often ignored and even labelled chi chi men because they are too nice. Throwing resources after some of the ill-mannered louts, all proud in their negativity, is worse than wasting powda pon blackbud. Why not concentrate some of the effort on those males who are defining themselves positively, so that they do not feel the odd man out and behave negatively just to fit in.

Until we teach our males that a man is defined as such based on what he does, rather than by what he does not, we are going to continue being led by the weak and visionless. We also must teach our males that manhood has two syllables, not one.

Back to Commentary