Opinion / Columnist
Men are emotional beings also; a nature denied
30 Jan 2022 at 18:15hrs | Views
The society can no longer sustain the lie, the fast diminishing energy reserves which have for centuries propelled the patriarchal society can no longer be wasted in pursuing the fallacy that men are unemotional beings, an unfounded virtue that places them superior to women.
The society has, since the beginning of time, accepted it as a natural endowment that men are devoid of sorrowful expressions which is only a preserve for women, the perceived weaker sex, despite the loud indications that such a philosophy is incompatible with the obtaining trends informed in gender equality, a philosophy commanding an unprecedented following. It is centuries now that men have been denied their right to emotional expression despite the evident evils this has resulted in. In a bid by men to protect the archaic philosophy that Indoda ayikhali, whose ripple events have seen men failing even to express their emotions of love to their beloved ones, a scenario that has achieved the bulk of divorce cases. The continued accommodation of such a social scourge, the unfounded unemotional nurture of men, is being irresponsible of the human race, a race that allows itself to remain a slave of its own brain child that men must bottle pain and sorrow.
The socially ascribed attribute that men are brave, denies them every right to emotional expression. The expression of emotions of pain and sorrow are part of human nurture which is unfortunately viewed as a weakness if exhibited by men, a verdict meted out of ignorance nourishing in the uncensored social dogma masquerading as a divine decree that men are unemotional beings. The long unchallenged philosophy that continues to evade scrutiny has seen the victim men suffer stress, depression as they unreservedly bottle anger. The philosophy has seen men suffer abuse silently as they volunteer to protect the long social mindset crowned as men's divine nurture, granting it immunity to be considered for the dustbins of history. The new world order has long recommended for the admission of such a philosophy into the archives but the society that suffers the hangover of its torment continues to smuggle it back through the back door in the name of tradition. It baffles the mind that even Christians who believe in the Biblical figure Jesus Christ, whom they regard as a co-creator of men, and who the scripture record that he wept, still expect men never to express sorrow in public, a feat that even their co-creator could not achieve. This brand of comprehension by Christians places men as having capability superior to his co-creator, quite illogical and irrational.
Male children have been starved emotional support in the belief that it is right for their nurturing for them to be brave and courageous despite the weird results the practice has achieved. The practice has borne rogue children, whose lack of emotional support compels them to abandon themselves to drug abuse and numerous social ills their distressed lives present to them. The life devoid of emotional support confronting most teenage boys has recommended some as suicide candidates, the only option their situations recommend. Suicide remains the only permissible way of expressing their emotions to preserve the legacy that men are brave and cannot shed a tear in public. The same philosophy has seen teenage boys suffer sexual molestation in silence, afraid of exposing the perceived male legacy to public scrutiny. The myth that men are unemotional has seen men endure their lives to suit the proverbial men the society wants.
It is time the society weans itself of the philosophy that oppresses men, denying them their human nature. It is a philosophy that denies them the therapeutic healing nurture of shedding tears, proven to heal emotional pains. Their female counter parts who have heavily relied on it have enjoyed relatively long life expectancy. It is therefore prudent that the society should discard a philosophy that disregards scientifically proven healing practices such as the shedding of tears to get rid of emotional losses.
The society has, since the beginning of time, accepted it as a natural endowment that men are devoid of sorrowful expressions which is only a preserve for women, the perceived weaker sex, despite the loud indications that such a philosophy is incompatible with the obtaining trends informed in gender equality, a philosophy commanding an unprecedented following. It is centuries now that men have been denied their right to emotional expression despite the evident evils this has resulted in. In a bid by men to protect the archaic philosophy that Indoda ayikhali, whose ripple events have seen men failing even to express their emotions of love to their beloved ones, a scenario that has achieved the bulk of divorce cases. The continued accommodation of such a social scourge, the unfounded unemotional nurture of men, is being irresponsible of the human race, a race that allows itself to remain a slave of its own brain child that men must bottle pain and sorrow.
The socially ascribed attribute that men are brave, denies them every right to emotional expression. The expression of emotions of pain and sorrow are part of human nurture which is unfortunately viewed as a weakness if exhibited by men, a verdict meted out of ignorance nourishing in the uncensored social dogma masquerading as a divine decree that men are unemotional beings. The long unchallenged philosophy that continues to evade scrutiny has seen the victim men suffer stress, depression as they unreservedly bottle anger. The philosophy has seen men suffer abuse silently as they volunteer to protect the long social mindset crowned as men's divine nurture, granting it immunity to be considered for the dustbins of history. The new world order has long recommended for the admission of such a philosophy into the archives but the society that suffers the hangover of its torment continues to smuggle it back through the back door in the name of tradition. It baffles the mind that even Christians who believe in the Biblical figure Jesus Christ, whom they regard as a co-creator of men, and who the scripture record that he wept, still expect men never to express sorrow in public, a feat that even their co-creator could not achieve. This brand of comprehension by Christians places men as having capability superior to his co-creator, quite illogical and irrational.
Male children have been starved emotional support in the belief that it is right for their nurturing for them to be brave and courageous despite the weird results the practice has achieved. The practice has borne rogue children, whose lack of emotional support compels them to abandon themselves to drug abuse and numerous social ills their distressed lives present to them. The life devoid of emotional support confronting most teenage boys has recommended some as suicide candidates, the only option their situations recommend. Suicide remains the only permissible way of expressing their emotions to preserve the legacy that men are brave and cannot shed a tear in public. The same philosophy has seen teenage boys suffer sexual molestation in silence, afraid of exposing the perceived male legacy to public scrutiny. The myth that men are unemotional has seen men endure their lives to suit the proverbial men the society wants.
It is time the society weans itself of the philosophy that oppresses men, denying them their human nature. It is a philosophy that denies them the therapeutic healing nurture of shedding tears, proven to heal emotional pains. Their female counter parts who have heavily relied on it have enjoyed relatively long life expectancy. It is therefore prudent that the society should discard a philosophy that disregards scientifically proven healing practices such as the shedding of tears to get rid of emotional losses.
Source - Mberi Prince
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
