No Country for Young Men

The New Republic ^ | July 09, 2008 | Mara Hvistendahl

[forkinsocket]

Over the last decade, they cropped up in cities throughout China, tucked into raucous markets or along forgotten side streets, their interiors smelling of musty canvas and crammed with bounty for aspiring young soldiers: illicit weapons shops with names like ARMY GOODS STORE and GUNCOOL. For a few thousand yuan--a few hundred dollars--assault rifle-like air guns await in dirty back rooms, along with fatigues, bulletproof vests, kneepads, long underwear, camouflage t-shirts, rucksacks, bandoliers, helmets, helmet sleeves, walkie-talkies, and two-liter CamelBaks. Once outfitted, China's militiamen organize into clubs--Guangzhou Fight Men, Shanghai Band of Brothers, Tianjin Seals--and storm remote lots or abandoned warehouses, shooting at each other with pellets, to stage what they call "war games." The term belies the seriousness participants assign the activity: The more established clubs have dedicated battlegrounds whose surrounding trees are nailed with DANGER signs.

In gun-happy America, this hobby might not rise above the level of eccentricity; but, in China, where most weapons are illegal, it requires a special degree of passion. Beijing periodically cracks down, and clubs sometimes disappear overnight. In a round-up last year, Beijing cops seized 3,400 guns and knives used in war games. Still, the government can't seem to quash the urge among Chinese twentysomethings to unleash a few rounds. The headline on a recent Shanghai Weekly article explains the games' appeal in unusually apt Chinglish: URBAN BATTLE: A VERY MAN ACTIVITY.

The macho violence spurting forth through outlets like war games is a growing trend in Chinese society--and China's one-child policy, in effect since 1979, is partly responsible. The country's three decades of iron-fisted population planning coincided with a binge in sex-selective abortions (Chinese traditionally favor sons, who carry on the family line) and a rise, even as the country developed, in female infant mortality.

[forkinsocket]

.

[Clemenza]

Now if only these young men can get some real firepower.

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Historian David Courtwright suggests in Violent Land that sexually segregated societies in the United States--frontier towns flush with unmarried men, immigrant ghettos in early twentieth-century cities, mining camps--are behind our propensity toward violence. The immigrants and westward migrants who shaped early America, Courtwright says, were largely young single men, who are-- today as well as then--disproportionately responsible for drug abuse, looting, vandalism, and violent crime. A long-term study of Vietnam veterans in 1998 may explain exactly why: The subjects' testosterone levels, which are linked to aggression and violence, dropped when they married and increased when they divorced. Eternally single men, by extension, maintain high levels of testosterone--a recipe for violent civil unrest.

Me thinks the Intellectual, Historian David Courtwright, is missing the Great Society. Blacks and Latinos have everything he claims is missing to reduce violence. Lyndon Johnson and the Democrats have brought about the new wave of violence in America by elevating the role of single parent women. Oh, he had to gratuitously throw in the Vietnam Veterans as examples of violent men.

[CDB]

Oh, he had to gratuitously throw in the Vietnam Veterans as examples of violent men. Yes. Just when the article was getting interesting, the author tried (the lame, liberal way) to "explain" male violence by blaming something in the distant past, while ignoring the recent past. Wow, Rush will have fun with this tomorrow, I predict.

[Lee N. Field]

Now if only these young men can get some real firepower.

Yes. Combined with

a growing trend in Chinese society--and China's one-child policy

makes me suspect interesting times are ahead for the Chicoms.

[livius]

Actually, I think there’s something to this. Muslim societies, which practice polygamy, have huge numbers of lower-status males who will never be able to marry. This means a lot of resentment (as well as a lot of buggery, which is very common in Muslim societies) and a sort of seething underclass that is easily manipulated and ready to explode.

Also, the “single moms” in the US didn’t get there by themselves. They were impregnated by somebody - who simply didn’t want to marry them. I agree that we should not consider female headed households to be a good thing or even the norm, but where the heck was Daddy? He must have been there at some point. Neither blacks nor whites are a product of parthenogenesis (virgin birth).

Latinos actually always did well in the past. Latino men may have been famous skirt chasers, but they always knew who their wife was and always supported their kids - until they moved to the US, where this suddenly became optional. The Latino family used to be very strong and has suffered a major breakdown in the US, which is now spreading back to Mexico and other countries of origin. Very sad.

[Gondring]

Oh, he had to gratuitously throw in the Vietnam Veterans as examples of violent men.

Huh? He referenced the fact that Vietnam Veterans who got married had their testosterone drop.

I don't know why this study would upset you...though I suspect if he didn't reference which study, and just made a blanket claim, people would be frothing at that.

[bill1952]

Eternally single men, by extension, maintain high levels of testosterone—a recipe for violent civil unrest

Um Hmm. I see there is zero mention of the rather violent female trait of killing their children in the womb.

[whipitgood]

“...assault-rifle-like airguns...”
Glad the Chinese have discovered airsoft guns. We Americans shouldn’t be having all the fun....

[LoneRangerMassachusetts]

Also, the “single moms” in the US didn’t get there by themselves.

They got there by Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. The welfare state faucet went from towns straight to the Federal government. Two parent homes nearly collapsed following the Great Society. Feminists were leading the charge telling women everywhere to forsake strong men. Before 1960, there were very few single parent homes unless the woman was on welfare.

When you ask the question, "Where is daddy?" You have to come from another planet to not know many got the boot from their wive.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

I don't know why this study [of Vietnam vets] would upset you

I see your point, but the obvious inference is that Vietnam vets are the equivalent of pure bred lab rats when looking for a population prone to violence.

[Gondring]

I think you mean “implication,” not “inference,” but I don’t think that fits, either. How would you have written it?

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

I think I meant inference. The reader might have inferred that Vietnam veterans are particularly prone to violence. I’m not sure what the author meant to imply.

How would I have written it?

With more sensitivity to much maligned Vietnam veterans and respect for accuracy. I might in passing have mentioned that statistics show that Vietnam veterans have lower rates of unemployment, mental problems, criminality, etc. than their peers who did not serve. And added a “nevertheless” that in response to anecdoteal evidence to contrary, such evidence being trumpeted and ballyhooed in the media, the VA conducted studies of Vietnam era veterans, and these studies provide a rich source of data on one particular population of males.

[JACKRUSSELL]

A ping list dedicated to exposing the quality, safety and security issues of food and other products made in China.


Please FReepmail me if you would like to be on or off of the list.

(This can be a high volume ping list.)

[mgist]

"The Latino family used to be very strong and has suffered a major breakdown in the US, which is now spreading back to Mexico and other countries of origin. Very sad."

I've commented about this issue with friends who also originate from Latin American countries. We are shocked at how many families back home are separating and divorcing these days. It used to be unheard of ten years ago. As for the cheating men I think a small percentage did a bulk of the womanizing and did it to the extent that it made up for the rest. Most fathers I knew wouldn't survive a couple of days without their wives who truly managed the household. My grandfather would cringe if my grandmother didn't serve him his meals personally. It didn't taste the same if it didn't come from her hands. She had the power.

Surprisingly it is the women who are cheating and walking away. I think now that many women are working, the man's role is less important. Since women are working there is less consideration for "taking care of the husband" and the needs of the children. Feminism has done a great job at relegating the role of motherhood as something that equates with bondage and servitude. The role of religion is also eroding. It was always understand by Latin Catholics and probably Christians that service for others is the greatest path to happiness.

Whoever thought up womens lib, "work your ass off to earn money and then come home and give your family the scraps," should be hung. I did it for a short time and hope I'll never do it again.

[wastedyears]

Here’s what Airsoft looks like.

And they don’t wear bulletproof vests.

UK: http://youtube.com/watch?v=zJNv1Ct2XUI

Scotland: http://youtube.com/watch?v=E6rM9aBWv3A (warning: profanity and audio is pretty loud)

USA: http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rk3yAibxjAQ

[livius]

Feminism has done a great job at relegating the role of motherhood as something that equates with bondage and servitude.

I agree. I think that does have a lot to do with the problems faced by Latino families. Also, don't forget that groups like Planned Parenthood have entire departments devoted to undermining Latin Americans' respect for life and for marriage, both in the immigrants' home countries and in the US.