Friday, April 20, 2012

Men's Organizations of the Past

Want to feel nostalgic sometime, for an era you may not have even been born into? Go and pick up some 30, 40, or 50 year old guidebooks or pamphlets for the all-men organizations of the time. Read through their guidelines, and find yourself grinning at the standards they held. They're not perfect, of course. You will now and then run into guidelines that are racial, etc. But otherwise you'll see standards like "being of fine moral character", "someone his community can rely on" - generally upholding this ideal of being moral, faithful, hard-working, and committed to improving and maintaining life in his community. I think many - hell, maybe most - people would laugh at the very idea nowadays. Must be some of that progress I've heard so much about.

10 comments:

Syllabus said...

I'll bet that any all-women organizations - if any existed in that time, as I don't have data on that - had much the same guidelines on their charter or whatever. Funny, I think.

Crude said...

I wasn't bringing it up to suggest that fraternal organizations were somehow made more moral by virtue of their being all-male - but I've never read any other pamphlets. I don't doubt that female organizations would have had similar standards.

The point is that standards of 'having good moral character' and reference to standing in the community would sound alien to a lot of people nowadays.

Syllabus said...

Yeah, I know. I'm just broadening the scope, so to speak. And I'd bet that some idiot would feel that such a clause is... oh, I don't know, discriminatory.

Crude said...

No problem, my limiting it to male-only organizations communicated the wrong thing.

And yeah, discriminatory or judgmental or 'I don't see what so-called 'moral standards' have to do with doing one's job well' and such.

Syllabus said...

The thing is, though, it isn't solely restricted to ones job or whatever. That whole "discrimination" kerfuffle about the openly gay dude in some Christian university organization shows that. It's a stupid argument, and one that shouldn't be made, but people aren't the brightest bunch on the whole.

Crude said...

Not familiar with that case. What's up with it? I imagine it's something like, 'The organization has certain standards. Said openly gay dude violates them. He screams discrimination.'

But yeah. The very idea of someone having standards is threatening nowadays. Unless they're the 'right' standards, which usually tend to never be justified or even open for discussion. And even then the language tends not to be in terms of morals or moral duties, but 'open-mindedness' or 'tolerance'.

And yeah. As I've said repeatedly, regarding the gay subject in particular, there's been a major change in public view on the topic - but it isn't because of rational argument. That's precisely what's been avoided like the plague.

Syllabus said...

I don't recall whether he screamed "Discrimination!" or whether others did it for him, but there was all sorts of a hue and crie over it. And they didn't even ask him to leave the group. He was on the leadership board or committee or whatever, and they asked him to step down from that, due to his actively, somewhat promiscuous gaiety. And shit storms ensued, as would be expected.

Crude said...

Manufactured and artificial ones in large part too, I'm guessing. I'm always skeptical when I read news reports on outrage, because very often it seems like the reports of outrage come before any actual consternation.

Ah well.

Codgitator (Cadgertator) said...

Wrote this days ago but it's been tedious commenting at Blogger via my mobile phone:

I do hope you're acquainted with... I do hope you're acquainted with the website The Art of Manliness.

It's funny how a real man these days is supposed to be "in touch with his feminine side". That's true, BUT traditionally it meant a man reached that side of himself by *marrying a woman*. Our "other half" is the icon of our unity as heirs of Adam and Eve or, mystically, as coheirs with Christ and Mary.

Now let's get Maddox to write a book about the Church's authentic teachings and we might literally win the world!

Crude said...

I do hope you're acquainted with the website The Art of Manliness.

Never heard of it. I'll have a look.

That's true, BUT traditionally it meant a man reached that side of himself by *marrying a woman*. Our "other half" is the icon of our unity as heirs of Adam and Eve or, mystically, as coheirs with Christ and Mary.

Well, at this point "being a man" has been sapped of much meaning. Really, it's treated as a threatening idea. (What about men with same sex attraction? And what about women? What about the whole host of gender identity issues and (all this bullshit.))