Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.
No, I was not blaming any of the 26 victims or the parents who enrolled their kids at Sandy Hook. I am, however, blaming our culture that denies, dismisses, and denigrates the masculine traits—including size, strength, male aggression and a male facility for strategic thinking–that until recently have been viewed as essential for building a society and protecting its weaker members.
While there are a whole lot of things to say about these posts of pure garbage, I’d like to say this:
My son attends a day care that tries to always have at least 20% of its staff be men. Last year a main teacher of his was a man. This year, he has a male teacher at the end of each day. And beyond that, he comes into regular contact with at least two other men, all of them tasked with the care of children.
Charlotte Allen wants more men in elementary schools because she thinks it will add a necessary element of aggression that will somehow stop all this other male aggression (you know, the guys shooting up public places – apparently she cares not at all that someone was able to murder a whole lot of people on an army base but I digress). Aggression to meet aggression.
My son’s school wants men on their staff for an entirely different reason. They want to show young boys (as well as girls) that men are role models for caregiving, too. In the end, that is a much more noble goal than whatever Ms. Allen is proposing. It is actually something that could change the world for the better: teaching boys compassion.