Mr Theunert, how are male teenagers in Switzerland doing?
Of course, this varies depending on their living conditions and resources, and also depends on their family situation. But basically, it can be said that male adolescents and young men grow up in an extremely difficult situation. They are exposed to mixed messages that make them increasingly insecure.
What do you mean?
Growing up has always been complicated. What is new, however, is the contradictory nature of societal demands. For about ten years now, since #MeToo, a movement that draws attention to the problem of sexual harassment and assault against women, we have seen a growing social awareness of the harmfulness of patriarchal masculinity requirements.
We send young men highly contradictory messages – and then leave them to their own devices.
For fifty years, we have aspired to be an equal society and are demanding this with new norms. A man should be sensitive, reserved, and talk about his feelings. On the other hand, adolescents are still being taught the old norms of masculinity: be confident, tough, and independent. And when they look at traditional and social media, boys learn that men like Donald Trump are in charge and determine world events with ruthlessness and patriarchal fantasies of male superiority.
In other words, the image of equality conveyed within the family is not valid in politics?
Not only in politics, but also in boys' everyday lives. During break time or on the football pitch, the standards of competitive masculinity still apply. The old and new messages are incompatible. Nevertheless, they apply simultaneously, overlapping each other. We send young men highly contradictory messages – and then leave them to deal with them on their own.
What is «typically male» or «typically boyish»?
First of all: being a man and masculinity are two different things. Masculinity defines the requirements that must be met by those who want to be recognised as men. This is not something that is natural or God-given, but rather a constantly changing social convention.
So there is no such thing as a typical male characteristic?
There is no single psychological trait that men have and women do not. Of course, there are certain gender-specific tendencies, but this is not a blueprint that unfolds on its own. All of this arises in interaction with the environment. Men who take on care work, for example, have measurably lower testosterone levels and higher oxytocin and prolactin levels than men who do not.
The argument that boys have more testosterone than girls and are therefore so wild is also untenable. Testosterone levels only rise sharply during puberty. When eight-year-old boys act wild in the playground, it is primarily due to social conditioning that demands and encourages typical boy behaviour.
Requirements of masculinity are therefore socially constructed.
What is considered masculine and what is considered feminine is heavily influenced by culture. And the reproduction of differences between the sexes is still vehemently demanded. Individual boys are required to fulfil masculinity requirements as best they can in order to belong to the group of proper and recognised boys. That is the dilemma. Every boy grows up with the fear of failing to meet these standards of masculinity.
Norms such as «A real man isn't afraid» or «... doesn't feel pain».
For example. These beliefs are nonsense. It is impossible to fulfil them. Nevertheless, they still exist. We grow up in a society in which gender is a central category of order. However, this remains largely unaddressed. The fact that our ideals of masculinity actually encourage men to behave in problematic ways is ignored. This is accompanied by a sense of insecurity that right-wing conservative parties deliberately exploit.
There are quite a few men who train themselves not to feel themselves.
What effect does this have on boys and young men?
If it means you have to demonstrate strength and dominance in every situation, then I can't turn to myself and my feelings at the same time. When I notice that I am doubting, struggling, afraid of failing, I suppress these feelings – because they are considered unmanly per se and I thus risk falling behind in the hierarchy of recognised boys. There are quite a few men who train themselves not to feel their own emotions and instead race through life on autopilot – with all the negative consequences that entails.
Let's talk about one of the possible consequences. In the spring of this year, the British mini-series «Adolescence» was broadcast. It was conceived as a response to increasing misogyny and the spread of a toxic male worldview, even among young people. In the first episode, the 13-year-old main character kills a female classmate. He was radicalised online by the so-called manosphere. What is that?
A generic term for those digital spaces where men complain that they are no longer allowed to be men. These spaces are home to a network of diverse groups. They are united by one thing above all else: latent or overt misogyny. This arises because these men defend the – naturally untenable – image of the natural superiority of men and feel threatened by the equality of women. A well-known idol of the scene is the influencer Andrew Tate. He is considered the «king of toxic masculinity» and many teenagers love his alpha male persona.
What makes him and his theories so appealing?
The simplicity and consistency of his statements. His offer may be overly simplistic, but it is an offer nonetheless. This is appealing when young men cannot find guidance elsewhere on how to be a man today.
What is his announcement?
Behave hypermasculinely and you can have anything. You can take anything you want. The world is made for you. Consideration, respect, fairness – none of these values mean anything to Andrew Tate. As a man, you can do anything and don't have to justify yourself for anything.
In doing so, he offers a supposed solution to the dilemma described above.
Absolutely, at least on the surface. It narrows the perspective by portraying male dominance as a natural destiny. Men are justified in taking what they want, by force if necessary . This gives boys who experience a lot of powerlessness – especially the feeling that they are not allowed to be close to themselves – an enormous sense of power. He creates an extremely attractive counterpoint to the boy's everyday experiences. But the promise remains hollow because the patent remedy does not work – or only in very specific contexts.
How many boys and men are receptive to this world view?
The University of Zurich is currently conducting a representative survey of the population entitled «Masculinity in Transition». Thanks to this survey, we will soon have a more accurate picture. Taking into account a wide variety of sources, we estimate that around 30 to 40 per cent of young men have internalised patriarchal ideologies of masculinity – and this trend is likely to be on the rise. Around 30 per cent reject these ideologies and a further 30 per cent are ambivalent.
Boys need a variety of male role models in their everyday lives.
Do social media and their algorithms reinforce these tendencies?
Yes. A study by the University of Dublin shows that once users have shown interest, algorithms quickly flood them with content from the manosphere.
The case in Adolescence was fictional. Could something like this happen in real life – even here?
If so, then more likely among older adolescents. It is clear that these developments are worrying and that we, as experts, are also entering uncharted territory. It is extremely difficult to say to what extent calmness or alarmism is appropriate.
What is needed to prevent adolescent boys from being attracted to such movements?
As a society, we must not leave the field to figures such as Andrew Tate, but must offer solutions ourselves and provide support and guidance.
What does that mean specifically?
We must acknowledge that we send out mixed messages about masculinity and strive to resolve them. This applies to schools, but not only to schools. At the same time, we must ensure that boys encounter a variety of male role models and figures they can identify with in their everyday lives.
We are a long way from that: in nurseries, around five per cent of employees are male, as is the case in kindergartens, and 17 per cent in primary schools. The trend is downward. So the likelihood of a boy encountering men in his everyday life before he reaches the age of ten is low. Statistically speaking, his father is also hardly ever available on weekdays. As a society, however, we cannot simply delegate the problem to parents. Political measures such as higher wages, better working conditions and so on are needed to make the teaching profession more attractive again.
The muscular male body is probably the last refuge where traditional, patriarchal masculinity is considered reasonably unproblematic.
What would more male contacts bring?
Boys would no longer be forced to model themselves on virtual heroes. They would see that there is not just one way to be a man. Not all men like to play football or want to ride motorbikes. It is just as masculine to be caring or to prefer spending time at the theatre rather than at the football stadium. A boy needs to see that all of this is valid and okay.
Today, there is much discussion about disadvantaged or marginalised boys when it comes to our education system.
I would be cautious about drawing such conclusions. There is a recent study by education experts Stefan Wolter and Chantal Oggenfuss that suggests a general disadvantage in grading. But it also shows that not all boys are equally affected, but mainly foreign-language boys and those from less educated backgrounds. We should pay particular attention to this group.
Let's talk about family: What should I do as a mother or father if I notice misogynistic attitudes in my 12- or 14-year-old son?
Take a clear stance, but don't immediately pass moral judgement and come in with statements like «That's not right» or «You mustn't do that». Instead, engage with your son and ask: «Why do you think that? What does that give you? What do you like so much about Andrew Tate?» And be prepared to listen. This can quickly become painful, because these are the antithesis of what we as parents want to model for our children.
Healthy eating, fitness, financial independence: doesn't Andrew Tate also have some positive approaches?
I am critical of this – and my response encompasses the entire segment of men's coaching, in which men are supposed to be coached towards a supposedly healthy life: with an optimised diet and exercise plan, a body like a machine and a tough routine. This is a very mechanical understanding of health. In a comprehensive sense, it would be healthy if this plan were linked to self-acceptance and self-love and also focused on mental health.
Parents should offer their children as many sensory experiences as possible.
But gyms are becoming increasingly popular – especially among teenage boys.
The muscular male body is probably the last refuge where traditional, patriarchal masculinity is considered reasonably unproblematic. It is something that earns you recognition, at least among your peers. And it is tolerated by parents and schools, as long as you don't overdo it with muscle building or anabolic steroids.
A muscular male body is, so to speak, the last bastion to which boys can retreat. There, they can still «just be men» without immediately having to go to the school social worker. If the gym remains one area of life among others, as a father I would not view going to the gym negatively. The question is rather: how can we enable boys to grow up in conditions that allow them to perceive and appreciate themselves?
Yourself as a person?
Yes, and especially one's own body. Not as an instrument, simply as an organism, as a home.
What can parents do?
You should offer your children as many sensory experiences as possible. Mothers and fathers should accompany their children and not suppress their strong feelings with phrases such as «It's not that bad» or «Come on now!».
So, having long conversations with your son instead of going biking, skiing or to a football match?
It's not about talking, it's about being present. It's also not about not being allowed to have fun anymore, not pushing yourself to your limits anymore. It's about consciously perceiving this physical exertion. Perhaps asking, after a strenuous climb to the top of a mountain: «Hey, what are you feeling most strongly right now?» Body signals and emotions are extremely valuable information for navigating the world. And boys and men who are unable to feel themselves, neither their body signals nor their emotions, have a hard time.
Children need help finding a vocabulary for emotional events.
Why is that?
Because they lack key information. For example, if I am not trained to perceive resonance, i.e. what happens between two people, I am completely unsure when I find a girl attractive. I can't tell the difference: am I just feeling excited or is there something happening between us? Any lad who can tell the difference is much less likely to become abusive. He can sense whether the interest is mutual and he can take things a little further, or whether it's just him and he should hold back.
I could imagine that many boys or even girls, once they reach a certain age, no longer feel like talking to their parents about their feelings.
As I said, conversation is only a tool. It is better to train babies' sensory perception from an early age: how does it feel when you stroke your arm with a soft woollen blanket, or with a terry towel? How does it feel when sand trickles through your fingers? Or accompany your three-year-old during a tantrum and offer them words to describe their feelings. You have to help children find a vocabulary for emotional events; that's part of the parental education mandate. Fathers are also called upon in this regard.
But aren't today's fathers better at this than previous generations?
What has certainly changed is the model of fatherhood. Today, fathers want to be present in their children's everyday lives and build an emotional relationship, be a caregiver for their child – and this paternal affection certainly benefits the children. But even men who are now in their 30s and 40s have generally not been trained in topics such as emotional intelligence. How could they be? There has been no fundamental debate about male conditioning and patriarchal structures.
Parents can set an example of equality for their child. But at some point, the child will start nursery or school, and that is when outside influences will start to come into play – along with statements about what is typical for boys or girls.
We cannot isolate our children from all influences. Parenting requires humility. I would definitely advise against proselytising. If your daughter, not to mention your sons, has precise ideas about what a girl does, wears and acts like, you could perhaps ask her and give her some food for thought: Is that really what you want? Or do you just think you have to want it?
But I wouldn't impose my own view of things. Of course, it can be depressing when children orient themselves towards these powerful stereotypes that are conveyed to them by the media and society. But the good news is that parents do have an influence on their children, albeit a limited one. It's not their fault.
