Introduction

An important component of optimal male development is a man’s ability to be emotionally fueled by, rather than resistant to, the obligations of his life.  He finds joy and meaning in responsibilities to his family, friends, professional colleagues, and the community.  These obligations are not experienced as interfering with, or detracting from, his own self-interests.

 

In fact, although self-interests remain important for the mature man, they are not as important as they used to be, and, for the most part, are pursued secondarily.  What is primary, and what yields the most satisfaction, is acting for and in the best interest of those whom he loves.

 

Moreover, for the psychologically healthy man, emotional maturity can be characterized in part as the transition that occurs when self-interests are experienced not as distinct from, but intertwined with, obligations to others.  In other words, the distinction between what I do for myself(“self”) and what I do for others(“other”) implodes, and there is a kind of “self/other” merging.

 

By the very nature of this merging, any prior conflict between these two realms of experience — likely a central tension in childhood and adolescence — is resolved.

 

The merger of self-interest and the obligatory roles a man assumes in his relationships is so important because it fortifies his capacity for love and intimacy.  It is what Robin Williams’ character in Good Will Huntingdescribed as the criterion for authentic grief: “it is something you experience only when you love something more than yourself.” 

 

When a man has not achieved this self/other merger, life can be difficult and stressful because he is essentially experiencing conflict wherever he turns.  He lacks a clarity of focus as his own self-interests are chronically in opposition with what he feels he must do, but would rather not, for others.

 

For such a man, commitments and obligations tend to be reduced to the status of chores, and ultimately evolve into resentments. Further, acts of love for and service to others are not especially gratifying; in the man’s mental economy, they subtract from, rather than add to, his degree of contentment and personal satisfaction.

 

I have worked with many men in psychotherapy who, unfortunately, have experienced breakdowns along the developmental pathway leading to self/other merger, and these have hindered or blocked its achievement. When self/other merger is not attained, what typically ensues is a proliferation of problems and interpersonal difficulties and, inevitably, an inability to find fulfillment.

 

In what follows, I describe the developmental pathway (beginning early in life and extending into young adulthood) that ultimately leads to the psychological achievement of self/other merging in men. I will showcase how the capacity to form “personas” during adolescence marks a pivotal intermediary point between the self-interests of childhood and the self/other merging of adulthood.

 

The Evolutionary Press to Crawl

By six months of age, most children begin to crawl. This activity, biologically sanctioned by the legacy of evolution, triggers the child’s brain and nervous system to begin to separate from caregivers, if only briefly, in order to pursue the surrounding environment.

 

In the act of crawling two “self-experiences” form and become organized in the child’s mind: the experience of what I want to do and the experience of what my mother prefers, wants, and expects.  This is the dawn of the child’s recognition of his own instinctual drive to do his own thingthat exists but only within the context of something else,i.e., the watchful gaze (and demands/preferences/expectations) of the parental figure.

 

For most boys, early in development these two self-experiences are notin conflict.  In fact, the young boy is often encouraged by his parents to pursue the environment and his parents, in turn, take great delight in the child’s fascination with whatever he finds of interest.  After these bouts of exploration and momentary episodes of his nascent autonomy, the boy returns to the lap, embrace, and safety of the parental figure.  All is well!

 

Self vs. Other

By middle to late childhood, however, these two self-experiences (what I want vs.what others want of me) gradually and inevitably fall into opposition.  That is, the boy’s self-interests (what he finds pleasurable; how he wants to spend his time; what he chooses to do) exist in conflict with the gradually increasing obligations of the external world, e.g., not only parental rules and expectations, but also the demands of teachers coaches, the competing preferences of siblings, etc.

 

In fact, a central occurrence of the latency period (roughly 6 to 12 years of age) in male development is the intensification of this conflict.  The boy increasingly identifies who he is and what he likes; simultaneously, he also recognizes what he does not like but has to do.  Each informs the other, and in the young boy’s psyche they are mutually exclusive, i.e., the more quickly I get done my homework (or don’t do it at all), the more time there will be to play my video games.

 

As the latency period draws to a close, the boy’s negotiation of this brewing conflict is rudimentary at best and approached rather concretely, i.e., I must maximize my opportunity to do what I want by getting out of, or merely paying lip service to, what I don’t want to do.  For example, the boy must find a way to negotiate his distaste for the parental expectation of eating dinner all together and socializing as a family; he may simply eat quickly and make little effort to engage with family members in order to return as quickly as possible to his room and his own preferences.

 

The Male Teenager in Conflict

By early adolescence, for most male teens these two components of self-experience (self-interests vs. obligations) widen even further and become polarized.

 

Acknowledging the significance of this fact, many developmental theorists suggest that a central focus of male adolescence is the boy’s ability to identify and proclaim his own emerging own self-interests while also pushing back against the intruding demands and obligations of authority figures.

 

This resistance is psychologically useful because it helps to further define and delineate the male adolescent’s forming value system and personal preferences.  If his self-interests cannot be defined and illuminated in that which he resists, there is a chance his self-interests may never crystallize nor become a source of pleasure later in development.

 

For example, if the male teen has “gone along” with his parents’ religious beliefs and practices throughout his childhood, adolescence provides an opportunity for him to protest and articulate whatever opposing beliefs or ideas he may have.  If he does not do this, or if he does and his views are vehemently attacked or denied, there is the chance he may disengage from his own religious convictions all together.  If this occurs, a pattern may develop that is characterized by withdrawal from whatever he truly believes or wants.  He is then vulnerable to developing a diluted personality organized largely around the appeasement of, and compliance with, others.  Numerous manifestations of insecurity, low self-esteem, and narcissistic/co-dependent problems may  flourish as a consequence of this resignation.

 

The Capacity to Form “Personas”

If, throughout early adolescence, the male teen has been able to express his emerging self-interests and these have been accepted, even encouraged, by his parents and other authority figures, mid- and late-adolescence afford the male teen the opportunity to learn how to more effectively navigate the tension between what he enjoys for himself and what he is obligated to do for others.

 

Essentially, he learns how to compartmentalize and actively engage in two, and, for the time being, opposing realms.  He understands and abides by what he is expected and obligated to do (for teachers, parents, the law, etc.), but also invests his energy and time functioning within a mentalspace that is his and his alone.  This spaceis crucial in male development because it structures and supports the budding private selfof the male adolescent; he is no longer entirely transparent to his parental figures and others close to him.

 

Privately, he is himself; publicly, in the social world, he is able to adhere to rules and expectations which may not reflect his self-interests butalso no longer threaten them, as had been the case earlier in development.

 

In order for this occur, the adolescent male develops the capacity to form a “persona.” With a persona, he learns how to summon forth a variation of his own authentic identity.  He selectively edits or censors in order to interact in situations which are advantageous to his progression and growth.

 

Persona-forming in male adolescence covers a gamut of ubiquitous, yet deceptively complex, scenarios ranging from wearing the school uniform, to assuming a romantic/sexual identity, to differentiating what interpersonal situations call for particular ways of being.

 

It may be a rather surprising and somewhat counter-intuitive point, but learning how to live in, manage, and balance the realms of the private self and situational expectations is appropriate and psychologically healthy for the advancing male teen.

 

Persona-forming should not be viewed negatively, i.e., as merely an attempt to fit in, superficial political correctness, or a form of strategic manipulation or “brown nosing.”  Instead, it is more akin to emotional intelligence; it is the mechanism by which the male adolescent learns how to recognize and then satisfy contextual demands, all the while remaining connected to his own private convictions.

 

You can probably think of examples of male teenagers whose capacity to form personas is under-developed.  Often for this subgroup, personal convictions must be aggressively pronounced at the expense ofcontextual demands, which are denounced and denigrated.  This may lead to, among other outcomes, violations of the law, counter-cultural attitudes and values, and the stubborn avoidance or withdrawal from capstone events that mark important developmental  transitions and serve as portals to increasing levels of autonomy and independence (such as obtaining a driver’s license or graduating from high school).

 

Self/Other Merging

As the male adolescent moves into young adulthood, independent activity such as beginning college or obtaining a job and apartment outside of the family home takes center stage.

 

With the increasing autonomy these experiences encourage, and in the context of the developmental events that occurred previously,  the young man paradoxically begins to experience a greater awareness of others, including what others, namely his parents, have done for him.

 

It’s as if the full immersion in this new developmental period, one that emphasizes his own self-interests, actually advances his level of interpersonal attunement and sensitivity to others.

 

Building on the emotional intelligence forming in adolescence, the young man now becomes interested in the other person as an important entity outside of his own self-interests, a distinct identity who has wishes, fears, tendencies, sensitivities, and needs just as he does. The young man increasingly becomes interested in and eager to pursue the unique psychologies of the significant persons in his life.  The renowned psychological researcher, theorist and clinician Peter Fonagy identified this flourishing interest as “mentalization.”  Having been deeply understood and empathically accepted by others who have committed themselves to him throughout his life thus far, the young man would now like to do the same.

 

Once mentalization is online, it is only a matter of time for self-interests to recede.  With advancing levels of empathy for others, the young man becomes emotionally and psychologically oriented toward the needs of those he cares about, and finds pleasure in meeting those needs.  Personal sacrifice and compromise, previous sources of conflict, are now the routine components of his relational life.  And purely self-oriented interests, once infused with vigor and excitement, subside, relegated to earlier stages of development and representing nothing more than outdated values and motivations.

 

Conclusion

To close with a final illustration, think of the curfew. In adolescence, the curfew symbolizes the essence of the conflict between self-interest and obligation.

 

Ideally, the male adolescent finds a way to tolerate the curfew and act in accordance with it.  That is to say, at some point in an evening out with his friends he was enjoying the engagement of his “private self.  And then, he was able to dis-embed from his friends, locating within himself a persona that helped him to comply with his parents’ directive.  He returned home on time, not resentful, but perhaps wishing he had more time with his friends.

 

Fast forward in time: now married, he would like to play another round of golf on a Saturday but realizes that as much as he would enjoy it, his wife and children await his return at home, needing him in different ways. At that moment, with self/other merged, there is no choice because there is no conflict.  He heads for home.

 

James Tobin, Ph.D. is a licensed psychologist based in Newport Beach, CA.  His psychotherapy practice consists of individual, couple, and family therapy, with an emphasis on interpersonal patterns and relational dynamics that obstruct one’s access to truth, fulfillment and intimacy. The executive coaching component of Dr. Tobin’s practice focuses on helping executives and teams identify and navigate psychological dynamics in the workplace.