The Difference Between "Men" and "Guys"
A New York Times writer divides males into "guys" and "men." We wonder if it's so simple.
New York Times' recent Modern Love column—"Forget the Men, Pick a Guy"—explores a quandary many of us ladies face in the post-collegiate dating scene.
Do we date Door no. 1, the fun (if not entirely responsible) guy. Or Door no. 2, the settled, respectable (if not a bit boring) man. Dating A Rich Guy: More Important Than You Think
Exciting guy. Dull man. That is the question? Really? Is it that black and white? We don't think so, but writer Catherine Calbert certainly does and tells us within the first sentence which she prefers.
I've never liked men. I like guys. Guys are often in between things like jobs and houses, which means they're more likely to stay up with you all night, drinking wine and playing gin rummy. They'll rub your belly. They'll lick chocolate off it. They'll like your cute little dog. A guy is never going to shoot Old Yeller in the woods.
Along with not being tied down by big boy jobs, Calbert goes on to say guys dress better then men ("Guys wear the kind of clothes they wore as boys even when their hair silvers: cool jeans and baseball jackets coupled with stupid T-shirts boasting faded logos from exotic locales. Men like innocuous dress shirts or pastel polos with colors as nauseating as chewable Tums."). The Dos And Don'ts Of Traveling As A Couple
Guys are down for therapy, men not so much. Guys aren't afraid to "wallow in confusion" where men are decisive and emotionally closed, which she admits has its upsides.
I want the E.M.T.'s who show up when I've collapsed to be men, not guys. I don't want someone responsible for saving my life to be torn up about the death of his dog or how some chick hurt his feelings.
Calbert's father was a man, not a guy. He would grumble home, bottled up with manly angst, and the family would scatter in his wake. If he were alive today, Calbert doesn't think he would approve of her "feminist, atheist, poet" lifestyle. In fact, many of the professors she works with at Rhode Island College are guys not men. She likes the "surprise and fire in their eyes" and their "eagerness and curiosity."
While we'll meet Calbert halfway and certainly agree we like emotionally available men who are curious and sensitive, but if we can't trust those types to (perhaps metaphorically) save our lives, why would we want to marry them?
Discussion
Funny, as a male, I've always thought of "guys" as being big boys...still emotionally immature to some degree, not actually capable of maintaining a long term relationship, drifting from job to job with no real ambition towards an actual career, and ultimately kinda self-serving.
A "man" on the other hand I've always thought of as the embodiment of all things male. Strong, stable, ambitious, family oriented, self-confident, embracing both his masculine and feminine sides to be a whole person. There is still passion and fire for both family and career, and the surety that he will be there to support his loved ones, or to "save" them when it needs to be done.
Maybe I have a naive view on it, as a male striving to be the best "man" I can be. I've always focused on being the total best that I can be, passionate about loved ones and the work I do, strong when I need to be and weak when I have no choice but safe in it because I've surrounded myself with great people I can depend, understanding and communicative but decisive when its called for.
Hey, we can all dream about what we wanna be when we grow up!
I think the author, Calbert, just doesn't want to settle down herself. To everything there is a season. Her definition of "guy" sounds a lot like "young" to me.
The world is full of real men and women who manage to have feelings and hold down jobs. For many of them, the reason they hold down the job is that they have feelings about their families.
Going back to the essay, I think Calbert is mad at her father (for some good reasons). Guys are men who are different from him.
Another oddity - she talks about preferring guys because they're often between jobs and homes, but she's a tenured poet herself with an extremely steady job. Most academics have houses, families, etc. Academics are part of the bourgeoisie, although they may not want to admit it.
She seems to have a younger husband. Perhaps that is part of it all.
