What’s missing in middle-class men

In the ongoing discussion about Australian men and whether they are opposing the campaign by leftists and feminists to undermine them, Mark Richardson at Oz Conservative said something tremendously insightful:

[T]he image Australian middle-class men have of their role in life is too confined. To be a good and successful man means succeeding in your career, having a family, having a nice house and perhaps contributing to a charity for poor people overseas….

But what is missing is any sense that these men have a larger, civilisational role in society. There is no expectation that middle-class men will act to uphold the best aspects of the tradition they were born into; or that they will act in the public sphere to defend institutions like the family; or that they will identify more widely with [their] national tradition…

I added in commentary:

The idea is that being a middle-class man in liberal society means taking care of your personal business, your personal responsibilities, taking care of your family. But it doesn’t mean protecting the institution of the family itself. It doesn’t mean being a leader and defender of society. And that’s why Western men are small and shrunken and lack force.

For an image of a man who looks like a man and a defender of society, see the portrait of the Duke of Alba in Dennis Mangan’s masthead, discussed and linked here.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 18, 2008 10:10 AM | Send