"And Called It Macaroni"

6 thoughts on “"And Called It Macaroni"”

1. It seems like the macaroni men are making a comeback these days

   Reply

2. +Brian Barnett I think every generation has had its group of "macaroni".

   Reply

3. +Dave Hill​​ I'm sure there have been, but just look at today's culture. There's a bunch of effeminate males running around with beards and flannel shirts, looking like the brawny man, but cant even change a flat tire. Forget about anything else that would be considered manly by traditional standards. It's like they don't know how to do manly things, or be a man in general, so they just dress like one, in some weird attempt to compensate for for their other non-manly ways. At least that's the impression I've gotten from the ones I've had to deal with.. which has been many due to my job

   Reply

4. +Brian Barnett I'm reluctant to slap labels like "effeminate" on men, if only because it's been used more often as a pejorative than as a description, and because it implies an standard of manliness vs womanliness that is largely encrusted acculturation.

   I'm pretty sure I could change a tire, but would rather pay for AAA to have someone come out and that. Does that make me effeminate? Does my having a beard alter that perception one way or the other? Does it make a difference if I wear a plaid flannel shirt vs a Hawaiian shirt?

   Now as for making fun of people who pay excessive (IMO) attention to being non-conforming in their personal grooming and clothing, usually along ironically common lines — well, yeah, that's always fun, but, again, can find parallels in pretty much every generation, I suspect, that has surplus income or media or both.

   Reply

5. The best way I can sum it up is that I was raised on Rocky and Rambo, and my father on Clint Eastwood and John Wayne. I was taught to work hard, be resourceful, be independent, be self reliant, show respect, but also demand it. Today's young men are more akin to the guys on the Big Bang Theory. Lol. Not dumb, but not very well rounded, often lacking backbone, generally incapable, and definitely not 'manly' in the traditional sense. They're no John Waynes, thats for sure. I blame it mostly on popular culture and that many have been raised primarily by their mothers, but that's just my speculation.

   Since you asked.. just having a beard and a flannel, and calling triple A for your flat, doesn't make you effeminate. But if you dress and appear that way, but couldn't change a tire, or don't have any knowledge of things a man traditionally should (given the classic man/woman duties within a household), then yes I would say that person is effeminate.

   Have you ever seen the movie Daddy's Home (couple of years old, with Farrell and Walburg)? Its funny, and you should check it out if you havent. Anyway, there's a part where Farrell's house needs the drywall patched, and Farrell had called a handyman to do the job. Walburg says, "You mean you had to call a man!?" Walburg says they can fix it themselves, and asks Ferrell to get his toolbox. He opens Farrell's tool box and there's a screwdriver and a tampon.. lol. That's effeminate by my standards. There are certain basic skills and things that every man should possess.

   Another example: I was working on a job finishing a basement for a homeowner in a relatively new development. I had stepped outside for a break when I was approached by his neighbor. This neighbor looked like a cop or military type.. clearly lifted weights, cropped hair, clean shaven… About my age. Anyway, he was asking me about a 6" clean out pipe in his yard. It was too tall and he had ran over it with the mower and cut part of the cap off. He proceeded to ask me what he should do to fix it, and hopefully make it not-so-tall. I replied saying that he just needed to go buy a new cap to slip on it, and if he wanted it shorter, to just dig out around it a little bit and cut it down with a hacksaw or something, then just slip the cap back over it. I advised to measure the distance from his driveway in case it got grown over, so he could find it if needed. He was relieved to hear it was a simple fix, and went on to say that he was going to have to go buy a shovel, a tape, and a saw. I understand that this type of work may not be in his résumé, but something like that is just common sense. plus, what man doesn't have any of those very basic tools, or the common sense to think of these solutions? That, in my opinion, falls into the effeminate category. Rather than being a somewhat knowledgeable and capable man and homeowner, apparently his extent of manly activities only ends at riding a mower and going to the gym.

   Now I understand that there are times when a man may be too busy to actually do some of the things that need done, but that's different than not being capable and completely clueless, or at least try looking into it on Google or something. At least that guy asked when he saw me outside, but you could tell that it had been that way for quite a while at that point, and chances are still would be had he not caught me outside that day.

   One more example.. I have an artist friend, and I consider him to be effeminate for the simple fact that, beyond his art and related subjects, which are very narrow, the only thing he knows how to do is play the Xbox. He's fortunate enough to have a wife who fully supports him and his efforts, which don't amount to a lot in the way of earning money. He has more time on his hands in a couple days than most of us have in a month. So one day he was telling me that he was having car problems, and asked me what I thought it may be. Alternator. I said I could change it for him (was laid off at the time), which he was all for, until I started saying that I could show him how it's done (teach a man to fish, ya know?), at which time it suddenly turned to "don't worry about it, I can just take it to the shop". He may not know how to do basic mechanic work, and that's fine, but when you have nothing but time on your hands, but you're just not willing to try learning when you have someone willing to show you.. well that's not very man-like, imo. Especially when you consider than his wife supports him, and she was just recently saying that she was falling behind on bills because she was also laid off. Here this guy with all the time in the world, not willing to even try learning a skill that could save them money in the long run, not to mention allow him to contribute in some way. In the end, they took the vehicle to the shop, and they paid over $500 for a repair that I could have done, and taught him how to do, for $200, including a basic tool set which he could use for future projects. His tool box also consists of a screwdriver or two and a tampon. Lol.

   Now, take a man like these that I've mentioned… it's one thing for them to be un-manly, but then run around wearing beards and flannels, like the brawny man, then you can fairly say that I call them effeminate in a pejorative manner, because I do find it quite pathetic for a man to be so un-manly and useless, but to dress like a roughneck lumberjack on top of that… it kind of angers me because they're clearly faking it, and I just don't like fake people.

   And Im not even getting into the younger generation.. the ones who need a "safe space", who are "emo", or otherwise overly sensitve. I could go on forever about those types.

   On another note, I agree that it's comical to see people 'bucking the system' by acting or looking exactly like everybody else who's doing the same.

   Reply

6. +Brian Barnett I think we'll have to disagree on some basic premises. While I was raised on John Wayne movies, and The Battle of the Bulge, and Combat!, and Pete Malloy on Adam-12, and other such "manly" media, I don't know that aesthetic acculturation is somehow objectively superior to folk raised on contemporary media.

   (FWIW, I was also raised on Star Trek and Gilligan's Island and I Love Lucy and The Monkees. Not sure how those fit into the equation.)

   I guess I find the description of folk not being "'manly' in the traditional sense" to be kind of vague. I manage young IT professionals (the sort of eggheads that would fit in well on The Big Bang Theory, a show I also enjoy), and have seen no lack of resourcefulness, hard work, or independence in either gender.. If there is a greater openness to collaboration over self-reliance or competition, I'm unconvinced that's a bad thing.

   I'll also suggestion that "young men" who have been "raised primarily by their mothers" almost certainly are not lacking in a parental example of hard work, resourcefulness, and independence.)

   I'm not a fan of pretension, or of faux rebellious behavior ("Let's all violate majority social customs in unison!"), but while seeing a lot of folk being "unique" with matching beards and flannel shirts can be amusing, drawing conclusions about them from that appearance seems short-sighted (that description fits one of my best support guys, and while I have no idea if he can change a tire, I do know he's hard-working, respectful, and resourceful).

   I do reject the idea that there is some fundamental "knowledge of things" that All True Men Must Know (especially vs. the analogous list for Women). "Classic man/woman duties within a household" are based on sexual division of labor that is largely moot in contemporary society. I don't need to know how to patch drywall to be "a man" — I just need to know it in order to save some money, presuming I can do it well enough and the opportunity costs don't exceed the costs of calling in someone to do it. And there's no reason that my wife shouldn't patch the drywall instead if that's her inclination, or that the person who shows up to do it if we call in a contractor can't be female; there's nothing about drywall patching that aligns with the broad genetic differences between men and women.

   The idea that there's a set of "basic skills and things that every man should possess" limits both men and women. There are things that people should be able to do, though a lot of those things are less necessary given both modern civilization and a level of disposable income. I can mow the lawn — so can my wife, and so can my daughter, or we may decide to pay someone to do it. We can all cook a meal. It's not necessary for any of us to know how to butcher a hog, or shoe a horse, or dig a well, or make our own gunpowder, even though going back several generations people would have claimed those are essential to being "a man" (vs a "macaroni").

   A man is not less of a man for not knowing how to patch drywall, bake a cake, paint a wall, replace a button, barbecue a steak, make a casserole, or check the oil in the car. He is less capable as a human being for lacking any or all of those. As is a woman. And both can be criticized for that, certainly, but not in violation of sex roles. The broader issue is not whether someone has been trained in any or all of those, but whether, if put in a situation of having to do them, they reject the notion out of powerlessness, feigned inability, disdain of breaking a sweat, voiced inappropriateness of gender roles, or some other half-assed reason. But that's true for both men and women. Your artist friend is not effeminate; he's just a lazy bum, something that is not sex-linked.

   Your example of the neighbor not knowing about fixing the clean out, or having the tools to do it, to me speaks less of him not being manly or being effeminate, but simply not being capable. The same could be true for a woman faced with that same situation, and there's nothing about that particular task that strikes me as gender-based. It's not a matter of the man being "effeminate" or a woman in the same situation being called to be "masculine." There's nothing about hacksawing a pipe that is clearly linked to the presence of a Y chromosome.

   (Are there broad and demonstrable gender differences? Certainly. But they are both more fuzzy [the overlap in strength and endurance between the genders is far wider than most people acknowledge, and is less applicable in modern life as well] and more particular [childbirth being the most obvious and unequivocal difference] than 1950s-style sex roles would indicate.)_

   Reply