Some uncomfortable truths

In a world of instant food, instant fame, instant relief from pain and instant relationships, problems without instant solutions run a real danger of remaining insoluble. This is not an original conclusion, of course; everyone from ministers of the church, to ministers of the government and through to those who minister to the ill and dying has railed against the quick fix solution to any problem that most of society expects as their right.

The effect this attitude has had on me, however, is to lead me to be very wary whenever anyone asks my opinion on the reason for the horrendously high rate of male suicide in Australia. I do not use the term “horrendously high” as hyperbolic purple prose - I regard with horror the fact that so many of us remain apathetic in the face of the high rate at which we are killing off our young men.

These are strong words to use in relation to suicide. I admit to being aware of the shock value contained in using them. But the fact is that because suicide is self-perpetrated there is a tendency to regard the very word as a passive verb: our politically correct world has conditioned us to regard strong active verbs as “impolite” - a word itself shunted aside in favour of the weaker “unsuitable”. When the subject under discussion however is the destruction of a newly adult life which its owner has only just taken full responsibility for, we need good strong verbs to jolt us out of our complacency.

It is this that makes me wary of entering into discussion of the topic with those who consider themselves not directly involved. For most the quick-fix answer is actually what is being asked for.

Can I sign up for a dollar a day and a cute picture so I never have to consider my own responsibility again?

Can I come away from the discussion with all my prejudices intact and a clear conscience?

Can I confirm my own self-righteousness and go and stir up the Christians or the politicians or the atheists whose fault it is?

Can I continue to do nothing because it’s all the fault of the education system, or bad parenting, or feminism, or the immigration policy?

But most of all can I push it to the back of my mind because my own kids never have, or never would, do a thing like that themselves?

That the quick answer to the above questions is “no” usually results not only in an immediate lack of interest in the real answers, but also serves to provoke argument. Those knocked off their private hobby-horse very seldom want to re-mount and go tilting at windmills.

It is obvious that when we are discussing the deaths of minors or those still on the cusp of manhood we all need to take some of the responsibility. In this instance the pronoun “we” stands for “we the people”. Society.

It is also obvious that this is a very uncomfortable truth. So it’s not at all surprising that there is a tendency to accept this truth while disassociating ourselves from the particular sector of society who needs to take the blame.

Which is one of the reasons that while all are busy, indignantly rippling keyboards in Sydney suburbs, or holding forth at backyard barbecues in Perth, or denouncing leftist loonies in Alice Springs, somewhere alone in the darkest moment of his short stay here, one of our young Australian men is clumsily fashioning a noose out of sheer desperation.

In the mid-90s statistics pointed an accusing finger at Australia as having the highest rate for suicide of young men below the age of 25 in the developed world. We no longer bear this shameful slur - though there is evidence that the most at-risk group of 1997 now has simply carried that same risk into an older demographic.

However even statistical evidence does not tell the entire story. It does not include the numbers of those who die by deliberately engaging in risky behaviour, or from overdoses of drugs. Those are neatly included in other statistics which simply point to the fact that most deaths in the under-25 age group are a result of the well-known adage that, well, boys will be boys.

So we can thankfully avoid responsibility for these deaths too, and shunt as many as possible into being the result of bad parenting, lack of Christian values, feminism, inadequate policing or whatever we have packed into our well-worn sack of prejudice.

The fact that so much of this article so far has revolved around taking responsibility and not around solutions is because this is, by far, one of the greatest barriers to solving this problem that we face. We, the adults, fashioned the world our young men want no part of. We, the adults, must take the blame. We need to acknowledge the fact that “society” is not made up of “other people” but that each one of us is a part of it. We need to stop shunting blame around and face up squarely to the fact that each one of us bears responsibility.

We, the adults, have created a world in which small businesses, instead of trying to encourage and help youngsters, instead exploit them for profit. We, the adults, are the ones who are content to accept any policies except the ones which don’t hurt our wallets. We, the adults, are the ones who create the wars, manufacture the drugs, push the porn, pass on the prejudices, teach the hate. How can we evade responsibility?

The easy way out of that one, of course, is to loudly proclaim that if we are not business owners, or world leaders, or drug lords, or porn dealers it’s not up to us but others. Our consciences are clear. We did not make this a bad world. We are simple folk trying to do our best in a bad world too. It’s all the above who should take the blame.

But, given that the world we have delivered to the next generation is so basically flawed, we should be asking ourselves how we can possibly steer this generation through the shoals in which they are clearly floundering. Which is where we simple folk make simple mistakes.

Maybe if we thought a little more before we spoke we wouldn’t slap a young boy heartily on the back and tell him he should be “the man of the family”. The ridiculous porkie “boys don’t cry” doesn’t get much of an airing these days but when it does we should counter with a hearty reassurance that, of course, they do.

Instead of making a fuss if a kid brings a swear word back from the playground perhaps we should wash their mouth out with soap if they ever tell their mates not to be a “pansy”? And why on earth do we stand back and let fathers, uncles or older men call little boys “mate”? Mums and older women don’t address little girls as “girlfriend”. For a very good reason: being a girl-child does not admit a small female person into the grown-up world of womanhood, and neither does being a boy-child saddle a small boy with the responsibilities of being an adult male.

There are a plethora of clubs, organisations, agencies and support groups that are desperate for more help. Those who seriously want to concern themselves with the question of why so many of our young men are exiting the world we made for them could join them. Not everyone, it is true, has either the time, the inclination or, for various reasons, the ability to do this.

However, each one of us is capable of examining our own behaviour and our own attitudes. Do we call every young man we see “you young blokes” as if they were all interchangeable? Do we assume that every young male we get into conversation with wants to talk about beer and football? If we see a group of young guys together do we automatically label them a gang instead of a group? If a youngster is more interested in the arts than science do we advise them to go down a different career path? Do we tell a boy of 18 who doesn’t want to go to university but play in a band that he should get a “real” job?

Do we refer to marriage and children as his future responsibility? In a world where, whether we like it or not, most young women have careers that are important too why perpetuate a mindset that places all responsibility on the young man? Why do we still persist in telling boys that they should be a “real” man and what do we mean when we say it?

There have been various times in history when societal changes have taken root in a very short space of time: the start of the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution for instance, saw initial changes happen so quickly that within a twenty year period conditions throughout society had changed radically. From the late 70s technical advancements, global politics and societal mores have undergone radical upheavals that those of us swept along in them have not yet had time to draw breath and view objectively. Many of us abhor these changes, some have managed to ignore all but those which touch us most, some are still fighting them. But to our youth this is the only world they have ever known.

Whether it is with criticism, applause, confusion or anger most of us have now come to accept that women’s traditional roles and expectations have undergone a complete change. It is unarguable that if profound changes in one half of the population have taken place they did not do so in a vacuum. The logical conclusion therefore is that, to varying degrees but with absolute certainty, these changes have impacted upon the other half of society.

If we do not adjust our societal perceptions and we continue to fit our boys and young men up with the values and perceptions of the vanished world of our own youth, the confusion and despair that dogs them will not abate.

No matter what our own views we need to stand back, take an objective look at the world we have fashioned for them and then to suck it up and take responsibility. The future of our young boys rests squarely in our hands.