Raising a boy in a world at war with itself

Pregnant with a boy in the wake of woke

I had a dream the other night. Two soldiers were confronting each other; one had a gun pointed at the other´s forehead. The man with the gun was whispering threats. An act of unbearable cruelty was about to take place. Then I woke up.

I`ve never had a dream like that before, at least not one I`ve remembered. But I am pregnant with a boy now. He is the size of a mango, according to the app, and I can feel him bubbling and fluttering beneath my ribs. In a corner of my unconscious mind, I am wondering how I will be able to keep his body safe, once it`s in the world.

Others are having similar thoughts. At work last week, I was getting my makeup done before I went on-air. “I`m terrified about the Wehrdienst,” (conscription) the makeup artist said, as she spread powdered foundation across my cheeks. Her son is sixteen, and delicate. Germany hasn`t yet reintroduced compulsory military service, but the conversation is shifting that way.

“You`ll have to handle puberty,” I inform my husband, outlining all the ways in which I`m unqualified: I have no idea what it feels like to have a penis; to lose control of your voice when you are still half a child, the humiliating squeaks echoing against uncompromising classroom walls. To be expected to carry the heavier box.

I understand the objectification of the female body. Walking down Grafton Street in Dublin as an eighteen-year-old with my then boyfriend, we bumped into a classmate of his. I have never forgotten the sensation of that other boy scanning me from head to toe. It happened in a nanosecond, as fleeting and subtle as a packet of ham passing through a till. I still remember the clothes I was wearing; a figure-hugging sleeveless yellow shirt and black three-quarter-lengths. I passed his test.

In the following years, I sat in college tutorials talking about the male gaze and getting cross with headline writers who used passive constructions when reporting on male violence against women.

My knowledge of the male body and experience, on the other hand, is remedial. I was stunned to learn that baby boy fetuses are often identified in ultrasounds by their tiny erections. Instances, I’ve learned, of the nervous system practising its functions.

Now I am going to mother a boy, and am thinking about the myriad ways his body will be scanned for its worth. For every novel I read growing up in which women were the objects of desire, or limited to their domestic roles, he will encounter stories of boys and men in trenches, or down mines. For every billboard I saw of women with complexions and facial symmetry I could never achieve, he will see chiseled jaws and six-packs to aspire to. For every impenetrable algorithm that has made me feel less of a woman, there will be an equivalent Internet pathway, enhanced by AI, picking at his self-esteem.

He will be born into an extraordinary cultural moment. A time when the tide of moral progress is receding. A time when the current US president – democratically elected twice – is a man who brags about “grab[bing] women by the pussy” and whose response to a female reporter asking him about his connection to a serial sexual abuser is: “quiet, piggy.

What will he make of it all, I wonder? How will our culture have evolved by the time he comes of age?

In the past decade, working in a Berlin newsroom, I experienced the sudden global awakening to women´s experiences that came with the #MeToo movement, and the resulting rush from management to introduce new directives on sexual harassment in the workplace. Even then it all seemed a little knee-jerk, as if implying that inappropriate behaviour had hitherto been acceptable, but must now be explicitly banned. When older male colleagues asked if they could still tell me I had nice hair, or a pretty dress, I responded with some version of: just use your common sense.

I think back particularly to one man, already counting down to retirement when we met. A former soldier, he´d ended up in journalism by accident. He had a reverence for the intellectual calibre of his colleagues that seemed rooted in the feeling that they came from the “right” background, and he did not. He talked to me a lot, and I listened.

He told me about a young woman in Thailand whose mortgage he was paying. “I`ll always take care of her,” he said, meaning to sound gallant, I think, but unaware of how deeply problematic it sounded to my ears. He was less interested in sex than he used to be, he clarified unprompted once – before reporting on a long-ago incident in a sauna, where a woman he knew tried to entrap him by titillating him.

Among my contemporaries, the prevailing feeling towards men like my colleague was contempt. There was no way he´d bombard a male colleague with his inappropriate anecdotes. Probably not an older woman, either. I knew all this, and still, somehow I couldn`t bring myself to tell him to stop.

The loneliness seeped out of him. I could almost see it, forming a puddle on the newsroom floor. I did not respond to his retirement email when it came. I was tired. But I wonder if he made it to Thailand, as he had dreamed, and how many mortgages and massages his pension might cover.

If I had been a slightly less empathetic person, and perhaps a little braver, a conversation with the “People” department could have seen my colleague canceled. But my total conviction in his complete lack of self-awareness made this seem like an unnecessarily cruel course of action. I thought of him as a young soldier sometimes and the reverence he had for the desk job he did now.

When I consider the regressive cultural shift we are experiencing now, what strikes me most about the form of wokeism I myself inhabited is how greatly it underestimated male fragility. It did this to such an extent that men became hysterically angry. Throughout history, we have accepted their bodies being sacrificed for the cause of nationhood, valour or economic sustenance. Finally then, a new age of reckoning arrived. But it offered neither relief nor reassurance.

Instead, it asked them to atone for crimes ranging from complimenting a haircut to committing rape. For those whose bodies were closest to the firing line, it was an unforgivable humiliation. For those whose bodies were furthest from it, like Donald Trump, it was an opportunity.

What we have got now is a dual casualty. If wokeism banished common sense, what has followed it is killing common decency. Both need to be mourned, then restored.

As a future mother to a boy, I have an interest in finding hope in the disarray.

It begins by accepting a truth which our culture has so far refused to reconcile: binaries are real, and they reside firmly on two ends of a spectrum. We can talk about male and female while accepting that most people are going to sit somewhere between the archetypal traits of both. This applies as much to politics: are you a liberal or a conservative, as it does to gender.

The boy inside of me might well be wired to prefer diggers to unicorns. He may end up physically stronger and less emotionally attuned than his older sister. But if he doesn`t, I will happily place a unicorn into his little hands. I will cradle both him and his sister close and hope that I am doing the only job that really matters: fostering decent, sensible human beings. Then I will close my eyes and hope that neither of them will end up collateral damage in a senseless culture war.

This is the little boy I`m writing about

If you like reading essays like this, please consider also subscribing to my Substack here: https://secondthoughtsbykateferguson.substack.com/

The Rise of Base Instinct

A colleague captured a crazy video yesterday. Irate crows on the road outside our office attacking a fox who had one of them in its mouth. Murder is the collective noun, we established in the Whatsapp group. Makes sense. They looked terrifying. Murder of crows. The fox got away.

I need to write that piece, I thought. The half-baked idea I have about how base instinct is the defining feature of our political age.

It occurred to me first when I was watching Tiger King in the early weeks of lockdown. Why, I asked myself, are psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists so drawn to big cats?

Kindred spirits, I concluded, munching on a homemade oatcake. Joe Exotic, the mulleted zookeeper protagonist, had political aspirations before his ambitions were thwarted by a 22-year prison sentence for plotting to kill fellow big cat afficionado Carole Baskin. In the end, they got him on a technicality.

Damn intellectuals.

But as others destined for high office have done in the past, Joe Exotic capitalized on his reality TV star credentials. On the back of the program’s runaway success, US President Donald Trump said he was looking into the possibility of a pardon.

Yes, he may have been joking. But in an era where strongmen like Putin, Bolsonaro, Duterte, Xi and Orban are cheerfully eroding the institutions designed to keep them in check, anything seems possible. All the more so during a global pandemic with effects far-reaching enough to be worthy of dystopian fiction.

To make sense of how base instinct continues to triumph over cool reason, it’s worth considering the work of philosopher Alain de Botton, who has written extensively on how Romanticism took over from Classical thought in Western societies.

In an especially illuminating passage in “The School of Life” he writes:

“The Romantic rebels against the ordinary. They are keen on the exotic and the rare. They like things which the mass of the population won’t yet know about. The fact that something is popular will always be a mark against it.”

Not long ago, the idea of a casino operator with no political experience leading the most powerful country in the world seemed comically absurd. “President Trump,” my father said ironically on the phone once. “Oh, would you stop,” I said. The very thought.

Those who did believe in such a possibility were at one time as rare and exotic as Joe’s big cats. Unlike the masses, these mavericks seized upon a notion so radical that is has changed the global political landscape, perhaps forever.

RANTHAMBORE_TIGER_RESERVE

Source: Wikipedia Creative Commons Attribution: Harsh.kabra.98 / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)

 

What if, they growled to anyone who would listen, the assumption held by the establishment – that a leader should be dignified, truthful and well-informed – could be treated as a mark against it?

What if, they asked – roaring now – a man whose sole credential was a basic instinct for self-enrichment could mobilize the masses?

What if – they tweeted – we returned to the wild?

Instinct has a lot to recommend it. It is the impulse we have to protect our own. What drives us to eat. The prowess we display in a fight.

It is uncomplicated, unfiltered and immune to the possibilities of education.

In short, it has all the hallmarks of Donald Trump.

As Alain de Botton writes:

“The Romantic is dismayed by compromise. They are drawn to either wholehearted endorsement or total rejection. Ideally partners should love everything about each other. A political party should be admirable at every turn. A philanthropist should draw no personal benefit from the acts of charity.”

Romanticism, is for better or for worse, totalitarian in nature. It is the dizzy highs and crushing lows of Marianne and Connell’s relationship in Normal People, which like Tiger King, has proven to be another essential shared viewing experience during the pandemic.

We need these extremes to escape from the boredom of everyday life. A series of achingly dull compromises doesn’t make good TV.

But it does characterize a well-functioning democracy, which like the fox outside of my office, currently finds itself under attack.

An attack orchestrated by those united in the romantic belief that they are the victims of a cunning elite.