Back in September, I helped sponsor a study on male psychology with a researcher from the University of Florida. The study was simple. It asked men if they had ever felt pressured to follow some sort of “guy code” in their lives by other men. If so, what was a prominent example from their life about this “guy code” and what consequences did following it or not following it have on them?
Well the results are in, and the researcher sent me a summary of the findings. I must say, first of all, it’s cool to have my site be part of a legit academic study. And secondly, it’s awesome because the study returned results that support many of the themes I write about here.
But first, some raw data:
- 264 total participants
- Mostly straight, white men
- Ages 18-64
- 63% from US; 37% other countries
- Various levels of education, socio-economic status, and careers
- Some fraternity membership, mostly not
- 30% of men in a relationship, 70% single
After collecting everyone’s answers and stories, they codified it into measurable data. They were then able to measure commonalities and trends across all of the personal stories. They came back with four interesting conclusions:
1. 97.7% of men said they believe there is an unspoken man code or guy code or bro code between men. In fact, 53% of men described specific incidents from their lives in which they felt pressured to follow such a code. Statistically speaking, this is an incredibly high amount of the population.
My comments: I’m sure sample selection had a lot to do with this. Much of the sample was taken from this website, which probably has men with a higher-than-average cognizance of masculinity and male social issues. But still, statistically speaking, 97.7% is obscenely high.
2. Surprisingly, following the man code more often led to negative results than not following it. This result was true for both internally-generated consequences (such as guilt or satisfaction) as well as externally-generated results (such as rejection or praise). Why follow a social code that produces more perceived costs than benefits?
My comments: This is by far the most interesting result and a result which I think, studied further, could have some major implications on research on men and masculinity. The researcher speculated about how people sometimes continue to hold irrational beliefs despite evidence to the contrary. My take on this is actually a bit more pragmatic.
I’ve been working with men and their emotional issues for over five years now. And in that time, I’ve seen repeatedly how people with low self esteem and/or high levels of anxiety over-estimate the costs of performing a behavior which goes against social expectations. An obvious example: being rejected by a cute girl. Most men with low self esteem and high anxiety expect this to be an excruciating experience. But once they actually experience it, almost all of them realize it’s not nearly as bad as they expected.
The researcher questions why men continue to follow the man code when the consequences of following it tend to bring worse results than not following it. My answer is that people below a certain threshold of self esteem will perceive the short-term cost of breaking with social expectations to be far greater than they actually are. It isn’t until afterward that they realize that they’re actually worse off for following the man code. But even then, their continued lack of self esteem and high anxiety prevents them from properly gauging the next social situation which may require them to break the traditional expectations of masculinity.
This ties in to another theory I’m kind of cooking up at the moment: that traditional masculine roles, by their very nature, reinforce feelings of anxiety and low self worth, and that the best way to break these imprisoning gender roles is by building of the self esteem and emotional autonomy of men to behave in a more self-directed and authentic manner. This is what the new book will largely cover.
3. Statistically, most examples of man code were described in relation to heterosexual romantic situations with women. In other words, where the man code seems to be most prevalent and common is when a girl is involved. And not only when the girl is involved, but in valuing the platonic relationship with the other man more than the romantic relationship with the woman. Also, the researcher notes that these situations produced the greatest amount of internal and external consequences — i.e., these experiences had the greatest charge to them (again, a possible reflection of this site’s readership.)
4. Analysis suggests that the greatest frequency of positive consequences occur when a man acts authentically. This is the part that supports much of what I’ve been writing about, that when men chose to act authentically — open honesty, congruence to one’s emotions — they experienced more positive consequences than negative consequences (and by the way, authentic communication has been tied to all sorts of positive results by many psychological researchers, not just this one).
All in all, the results are encouraging for what we’re doing here. I told the researcher to let me know if/when the study is published in any journals. It would be a cool first for the site and a little bit of a new direction for the (sorely lacking) research on masculinity out there.
This is interesting, because I’ve always seen a “guy code” as a very positive thing. Things like being loyal to your buddies, not putting your friends down or backstabbing them, not hitting on your buddy’s girl, etc are my bro-code principles. And they’ve never made me feel guilty or wrong for following them – on the contrary, when I’ve been too selfish or cowardly to follow my “bro code”, I’ve usually regretted it intensely.
I always hear people (particularly feminists) talking down about “bro code” and figured it was just man-hating, but maybe other guys have a different bro-code than I developed. I can’t say I have ever hung out with typical fratboy types much.
So, I guess the question is: what does this bro-code entail?
@Chris Shepherd Interestingly, my bro code story involved me NOT following it and creating negative consequences as a result.
I think the bro code does some good things like you said — creates loyalty, social cohesion, camaraderie, etc. — but I think a lot of people take it further than you. It means certain expression of emotions are weak or “gay”. It means making fun of certain people or being ridiculed for certain behaviors. For some people it means feeling forced to conform.
@postmasculine@Chris Shepherd
.
I never understood this, I’ve always had very deep talks with my guy friends. F.E. I still have TONS of memories of these conversation we had: what we wanted out lifes to be like, how our carreers should look like, wat type of guy we wanted to be. That type of stuff.
So I actually feel insulted when I read that guys can’t share any emotional depth or that male friendships are superficial.
I do feel that a distinction should be made: talking about emotions with a purpose is fine but vomiting your emotions and turning it into oprah, is too far for me
But people vastly underestimate how deep and special male friendship can be.
@Chris Shepherd Here’s a situation someone might encounter: there are three people, two male friends, A and B; and A’s ex-girlfriend, C, who is still in the same group of friends. A and C were not right for each other and had a rocky relationship. B sees C often, they always talk and get along well. They are sexually attracted to each other. B does not take the situation further with C, even though they have a good connection/good potential, because bro code demands “loyalty” to A. Instead of having a good relationship with C, B feels guilty for his emotions and lies and acts strangely around A. A feels awkward when he’s with the group of friends, because he can feel something’s not right, and B is always acting weird around him. C becomes self-conscious, because she likes B, but every time she gives him a sign he seems to respond in a friendly rather than sexually responsive way.
I mean, I think this sort of situation probably happens with guys. I know it happens with girls. A better alternative? Everyone being open and honest. Of course, it’d be best if B spoke to A first about his feelings before going after C. And I think most people in A’s position, even if they feel a little jealous, would be okay with B and C starting a relationship if they were honest about their feelings and showed concern for how things would effect A.
You’ve really never had a situation where bro-code messed something up in your life?
@Chris Shepherd I think you’re right, a bro code in itself most often involves positive things, like loyalty etc.What’s negative about it though is the way it’s enforced in most cases that I can think of. What I mean by this is this: Men hardly get positive reinforcement for following the code. No dude says to his buddy: ” Hey bro, I really appreciate you not going after my ex, you’re a honourable man dude, here’s a beer!” You never hear that, because it’s expected.However, once the code is broken, that’s when men will hear about it and get shit for it. “It was really shady going after his ex man, you kicked a man when he was down, don’t call to hang out with us again dude”. Of course this will lead to shame and guilt (more negative reinforcers).
@StefanoSanabria @Chris Shepherd Yeah, the problem is that it is enforced through shaming and even at times, violence.
@postmasculine @StefanoSanabria @Chris Shepherd
I sometimes wonder if there is a reason that you haven’t (at least not to my recollection) directly addressed the role of homophobia in men keeping the bro code (or staying within the man box)?
To me, it seems like there is a great (shaming) power in labeling a man as gay – even when he is not. Just call a man a gay and see how he reacts (the easiest way to pick a fight perhaps except for groping his girlfriend).
From my point of view, the fear of appearing like being gay or anything remotely sissylike contributes to keeping men within a pretty tight gender straightjacket.
Maybe you already have addressed this or maybe you just disagree?
@Skylar Black @StefanoSanabria @Chris Shepherd Absolutely agree. Although it’s really impossible to dive into it without diving into masculinity roles in general, hence why I haven’t singled it out yet.
The elephant in the room on this site is homosexuality. There are some gay men who read this site and many men who struggle with their masculinity are bi or have bi tendencies.
One day… not yet, but one day.
@postmasculine @Skylar Black @StefanoSanabria @Chris Shepherd
Oh man I have so many suggestions for article names:
Shut up and kiss another man
A new heterosexuality
10 things straight guys don’t know about being straight
How to experiment with your sexuality and make money online
My life as a rent boy
Power in bisexuality
A fist over *censored*
The pain period
Ok I’m done. Bet that’s an awesome post too.
@postmasculine
Cool. I will look forward to the day that you also address this subject directly. As you say, this is very much an elephant in the room.
Moreover, I would also say that I really like the direction towards maturity on this blog. Perhaps you feel the site has a diminishing return on value in terms of getting your message across, but until your book arrives, this site will be a beacon of light in times where much advice for men is either regressive, meaningless or downright destructive.
@timfraser123 @postmasculine @Skylar @StefanoSanabria @Chris The pain period. Haahahaha.
@timfraser123 @postmasculine
Most of those ma,es would probably make many people unsubscribing right away.
But funny ones nonetheless
@Chris Shepherd Glad there is another guy here who feels like I do. So tired of apologizing for being a man.
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd This isn’t really about apologizing. This is more about what behavior is useful for men? If typical masculine behaviors aren’t useful for men anymore, then what?
@postmasculine @Chris Shepherd Useful, are you serious?!? Have you ever been in the Military? The soft, touchy feelly world you live in is provided to you by the ugly masculinity you’re so eager to discard. A lot of very hard men & women came before us and serve us still so we can have a conversation about how “useful” masculinity is. It may not be so useful for writing a blog, or painting a picture, or teaching in schools, but all of that comes to a screeching halt without Masculinity standing on that wall…
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd YOU WANT THE TRUTH?!?! YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!
YOU’RE GODDAMN RIGHT I ORDERED THE CODE RED!!!!
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd Seriously though, this isn’t about eliminating masculine behavior, this is about simply expanding it and becoming more flexible.
Yes we need masculinity “on that wall.” But we don’t need it everywhere. In fact, society has evolved to the point where it’s no longer efficient or useful everywhere. So the inability for men to be more emotionally and socially flexible is holding them back now. And the data seems to back that up.
That, in a nutshell, is what this site is about. It’s why it’s called “postmasculine” and not “antimasculine”. Masculinity’s great… it’s just time to add something more to our repertoire.
@postmasculine @Chris Shepherd That’s fine, mock us all you like.
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd You haven’t seen that movie? It’s surprisingly pertinent here.
Look, the point is nobody is asking you to apologize for being a masculine because there’s nothing wrong with being masculine. There’s only something wrong with being ONLY masculine.
Masculinity is not fixed. It’s evolved over the centuries and it’s currently evolving again. Get used to it.
@postmasculine @Chris Shepherd Yes, seen the movie.
Got it. Masculine light.
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd Not masculine light.
I read this, then came back after I had a chance to let these things sink in. It seems that a lot of the people that come to this site are concerned about their relationships with women, that they completely forget to work on their relationships with their male friends. I have never done any of the research with this, but it would also seem that a lot of the skills that create happy romantic relationships can be used for happy male-male friendships, and that goes both ways. By being better with men socially, it could help to meet women and be confident in any social situation. Just sheer numbers could help meet women. If we make new male friends, and start expanding our social circle, we are a lot more likely to meet new women in a comfortable social group that has already been established. The ideas of making our male-male relationships stronger do lead to some exciting possibilities in several aspects of our lives as well as meeting women.
@JoeH_81 I agree.
@postmasculine
Can you please provide a link to the actual study / academic paper?
@postmasculine Even if it’s in draft form or you have to email it to me.
@crossFit_Al It has not been published yet. The researcher sent me a summary of the results personally.
@postmasculine Curses!
…actually, I’ll email you the rest of the comment.
@crossFit_Al @postmasculine
I (researcher) can be reached at ssnowdes@ufl.edu if you have questions about the study. Please feel free to contact me!
There is a Bro Code. It is a good thing. Stop apologizing for being a man. Inevitably when there’s talk about men needing to change it always involves making them more feminine. It’s always about softening us up just a little more.
We are not chicks. We should not be chicks. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with being a man. We don’t need to be more sensitive and become more in-touch with our feelings. We need to be men and let women be women.
Why are guys so confused about being guys? Because of stuff like this. Look at the numbers for sex change…excuse me, “Sex re-assignment”. The VAST majority are men become women. We are literally neutering ourselves. Talk about shame.
We cage our lions so they’re more docile and safe. But that’s not what lions were made for. Look around you at the problems you see, in schools, in business, in society at large and ask yourself is the problem that we’re too hard or too soft? There will come a day, maybe 20 years from now, maybe 50 or 100 years from now when we NEED our men to men. We will NEED fierceness. And it will be gone. We’ll have a lot of sensitive, emotionally aware, neutered & whipped guys, when we need MEN. We should be ashamed.
@BigLifer
You seem to equate “emotionally aware” with weakness or femininity. Emotionally aware means being aware of your emotions. It doesn’t mean you have to start watching romantic comedies while painting your nails. It means that you are aware of what is going on inside of you. If you are human, then you have emotions. Every person (even… *gasp* … men) sometimes feel weak, afraid, ashamed or sad. I think even uber-masculine men thumping their chests like you can’t deny that. But… now you argue that it is wrong or unmanly to be aware of or in touch with those feelings. But repressing emotions isn’t strength. Denial isn’t strength. Hiding isn’t strength. Shame isn’t strength. In fact, if anything is immature, insincere and weak, I would say it’s lack of awareness, denial and repression of your emotions. Someone who can’t own up to his actual feelings is not in any way strong. Someone who can be vulnerable and face reality is, in my opinion. And no feeling is more toxic than shame, while that is precisely what you feel men should feel, and what men with beliefs like yours often DO feel (leading, among other things, to high suicide rates. But hey, it would be feminine to talk about feelings, right?)… Overall I’d say that your beliefs are irrational and aren’t in line with how human psychology actually works. But that you don’t understand human psychology should come as no surprise, since you consider lack of awareness of your own psychology/feelings a sign of being a “real man”.
@BigLifer You seem to equate “emotionally aware” with weakness or femininity. Emotionally aware means being aware of your emotions. It doesn’t mean you have to start watching romantic comedies while painting your nails. It means that you are aware of what is going on inside of you.
If you are human, then you have emotions. Every person (even… *gasp* … men) sometimes feel weak, afraid, ashamed or sad. I think even uber-masculine men thumping their chests like you can’t deny that. But… now you argue that it is wrong or unmanly to be aware of or in touch with those feelings.
However, repressing emotions isn’t strength.
Denial isn’t strength.
Hiding isn’t strength.
Shame isn’t strength.
In fact, if anything is immature, insincere and weak, I would say it’s lack of awareness, denial and repression of your emotions. Someone who can’t own up to his actual feelings is not in any way strong. Someone who can be vulnerable and face reality is, in my opinion. And no feeling is more toxic than shame, while that is precisely what you feel men should feel, and what men with beliefs like yours often DO feel (leading, among other things, to high suicide rates. But hey, it would be feminine to talk about feelings, right?)…
Overall I’d say that your beliefs are irrational and aren’t in line with how human psychology actually works. But that you don’t understand human psychology should come as no surprise, since you consider lack of awareness of your own psychology/feelings a sign of being a “real man”.
@Halo Effect @BigLifer I think part of the disagreement here is over what we mean by “Getting in touch with your emotions”. I think “getting in touch with your emotions” means (or ought to mean), listening to your emotions, understanding them, training them so they are appropriate and cultivating emotional health. It does not mean letting your emotions control you, nor does it means brutally repressing your emotions and simply silencing them.
Now, I think men tend to err too much on the side of silencing their emotions, when they err, and women tend to err on the side of being swept away by their emotions. But emotionally healthy people of both genders tend to behave more or less similarly – they are aware of their emotions but don’t get swept away by them.
A good analogy is to think of your emotional mind like a dog. A healthy emotional mind is like a well trained dog, it barks when there’s an intruder, it growls when there’s danger, it’s playful at playtime and most of the time it’s relaxed and calm and does it’s own thing. A repressed dog is silent and a bit withdrawn and sometimes explodes, and an emotional dog is yappy and excitable and needy and annoying.
You don’t want to be the repressed dog, but the solution isn’t to say “make your dog more like the yappy dog”. Both dogs should strive to be the well-trained dog. And that’s why I disagree when people suggest men should be more “feminine” in their approach to emotions – I see no evidence that the average female is in better mental health than the average man.
My last point is that, from outside, at least, a person with well disciplined emotions looks a lot more like a person that is repressed than a person who is overly emotional. A man with disciplined emotions can cry and be vulnerable, but he usually doesn’t, and it’s not because he’s repressing himself, it’s because he really has his act together.
@Chris Shepherd @Halo Effect This chest thumping, knuckle dragging, stupid & immature Neanderthal would agree. Mastering your emotions should be the goal just as mastering any other part of your life. However, I reject the popular idea the problem with modern man is he’s too hard. Seriously?
Many men struggle being a man because they’re constantly pushed to conform in a society of gender neutrality, where we don’t keep score and softness is not only celebrated, but championed. That is not masculinity and I’m tired of seeing men lay down and offer up their gonads on the alter of sensitivity.
The Bro Code (while not perfect like anything else) is an integral part of keeping this Band of Brothers together. I think Mark experienced the darker side of it while in the PUA fold, but there is a dark side to everything. Settling for Masculine Light…excepting wussification, is not something I’m comfortable with and I’ll go down fighting. I hope we all would.
We need more man, not less.
Big Lifer,
My instant inclination was to mock you for your archaic view of masculinity, but after ruminating about your assertions there is some validity in your statements. Yes, there are more men who are “sissies” in contemporary society compared to previous generations. Yes, there will always be a need for masculinity in human society.
There I have acknowledged two points.
Now what you refer to as masculine light, I refer to as being a authentic man. In fact, this website(and Models), which have helped me both channel and asses my emotions in a constructive and authentic manner, I am referred to(regularly) as a “Stud”, “Alpha”, “G”, and other synonyms associated with being a “Masculine” man.
Mark proselytizes authenticity and he believes that this is a integral element to being a man. I agree with him, responding with what you are genuinely “feeling” can come across as brash, unapologetic, and reckless all are actions that associated with being “masculine” but as you know Big Lifer there are two sides to every coin, and expressing our feelings can result in our actions being labeled as caring, nurturing and empathetic, these actions are traditionally labeled as feminine. None of these actions are gender specific, they are human specific.
Mastery of emotions does not come without understanding, experiencing and communicating them. That is why men have been characterized as being emotionally immature because their way of “mastering” emotions involves repression, which results in a lack of both introspection and communication.
Big Lifer I urge to reconsider how you interact with the world, your views of masculinity are representative of the unchanging, stagnant, decaying view of gender roles and are causing more bad than good in contemporary society.
Thelonious Kwiggz
@BigLifer @Chris Shepherd @Halo Effect This is not about “more man” or “less man” it’s about the definition of “man.”
I agree that men should not be “soft.” I’m just arguing that there’s a much more emotionally healthy way to being “hard.”
I sing to my plants while I am watering them. I clean house. I cook for my children. I dance and have fun. I decorate my house (very well by the way). I garden. I watch Downton Abbey.
I have “protected and served” my community. I have been shot at. I have starved for a greater good. I have traveled to and in many countries. I dare anyone break into my home while I am here or even while I am away.
I am not less a man for singing to my plants or playing with my children. Cooking and cleaning don’t degrade my status.
Too many “men” think they have to be HARD at all times … you only need to be HARD when it matters … all the other times you are being HARD without a need… you are really just being a dick.
Can someone explain to me what a “man code” is exactly? It just seems very vague and arbitrary – so much so, that I feel this study is pointless, since it might mean something different for everyone.
@slop I assume in this study it is a “Bros before Hoes” concept of choosing your male friend over a possible female encounter or relationship.
In my opinion it is a fairly outrageous attempt to NOT assert your male dominance. Someone in this string of comments mentioned “caging lions” (I will be honest they lost me in there concept). “Bros before hoes” is “anti-lion” (I just made that up). Male lions take ALL of the women for themselves!!! Bro’s before hoes??? not if you are a LION! /rant off.
Man code can also equate to anything “society” considers masculine or manly or that will make someone appear as such.