In ”The Moral Equivalent of War” William James talks about how humanity’s natural drive for aggression and bravery could be redirected into positive and productive activities rather than violence. He points out that traits like courage and discipline – which might often be associated with military and war- are still valuable, but that our society should find ways to encourage these qualities in peaceful ways. I agree with his statement because I believe that the army/military – as seen in our WW1 literature and poetry unit – encouraged a sense of belonging for many young men. The strong bonds and friendships might have been formed during unpleasant circumstances, but they still led to lifelong companionships. This feeling of collectivity was what many of the young soldiers felt they needed; feeling confused and lost after entering adulthood. I believe that these values, which the army represents, can be continued, by giving young men the chance to willingly enlist or serve in the army.
The essay ”Can real men live in a peaceful society?” discusses how middle-class values in the 19th and early 20th centuries reshaped ideas about masculinity. Back then, instead of focusing on war and physical strength, men were expected to work regular jobs, provide for their families, and live quiet, stable lives. While this shift created a more peaceful society, some people felt it took away a sense of toughness and excitement, which led men to seek these qualities through sports or fitness. I believe that this image began shaping strong male stereotypes but at the same time began to spread negative female stereotypes and the image of a ”weak woman”.
Both of these essays made me rethink these male and female stereotypes/roles which have been around for a long time and how these concepts of ‘manhood’, ‘chivalry’ or ‘hyper-masculinity’ might have emerged and shaped our modern day society.