Throughout the pandemic, the slogan "trust the science" gained significant traction. The underlying reality of that phrase was that we were expected to rely on the 'science' endorsed by federal agencies to validate their decisions. This often meant sidelining qualified experts who opposed the scientific assertions being made. This mindset has since permeated other areas of society, particularly concerning issues like gender identity and sexual orientation.
I recently viewed a video featuring Erica Komisar, a psychoanalyst, author, and parenting coach, where she talked about a research study carried out in the United Kingdom. The researchers were intrigued by the differing responses of men and women in specific scenarios. To explore this, they examined various parents and analyzed how both mothers and fathers reacted to a range of stimuli.
For instance, if a baby starts crying during the night, the mother will instinctively jump out of bed to attend to the child, while the father usually remains asleep. Conversely, if an unusual sound is heard from outside the home, it's the father who will quickly take action.
Researchers discovered that specific hormones influence this behavior. Men possess elevated levels of vasopressin, which enhances their protective instincts. This hormone activates an instinctual reaction to external stimuli. In the case of a crying baby, the study's authors explain that both parents can distinguish between a cry of discomfort and one of fear. When the baby cries out of discomfort, the mother's nurturing instinct takes over, prompting her to respond, while the father may attempt to return to sleep. However, if the cry signifies fear, the father's instinct kicks in, and he instinctively rushes to the baby's aid.
This research has reaffirmed findings that have previously been established. However, many individuals take issue with this study because it does not align with their emotional responses to the biological distinctions between males and females. They tend to interpret the findings as a moral judgment, suggesting that a woman cannot be a protector of her family or that a man cannot be a caregiver. In doing so, they are making assumptions that were not intended by the research. The study simply indicates that there are scientific explanations for the typical differences in how the two genders respond to external stimuli.
It's important to recognize that individuals respond differently, as we are all unique. Some men may possess higher levels of the hormone associated with protective instincts, while others may have lower levels. This variability applies to women as well. A fundamental reality of both life and science is that exceptions exist to nearly every generalization. Those who disagree with scientific findings often seize upon these exceptions to challenge the established facts. Unfortunately, this mindset has been embraced by many, who use it as a means to elevate their own sense of self-worth or moral superiority over others.
The outcome of this situation is that we have witnessed several generations of young individuals who are lost in understanding their identity. They find themselves in a state of confusion and conflict, grappling with emotions that are inherently human but have been labeled as products of toxic masculinity. This undermines foundational values. How often have we heard that individuals are born with certain traits and should be free to express themselves accordingly? Yet, when a young man displays typical masculine behavior, he is labeled as toxic, despite these traits being part of his nature. He is pressured to suppress his instincts. Is it any surprise that we are seeing an increase in mental health issues among the youth?
