If you have stepped outside of the rules of “normal” for your culture, you have probably become attuned to language that reinforces those rules.

For example, I never realized how monogamy-centric the majority of American fiction is — books and movies — until I delved into adult communities online. There, many people explore alternative relationship styles like polyamory and group unions, in the relative anonymity of the internet. In that realm, it is “safe” for men to be emotional and for women to have sexual desire and multiple partners.

(If you have ever wondered why so many awesome men love Heinlein and remember clearly the lessons they learned about sex and love from him as adolescents, before cultural realities kicked them in the balls as adults, the answer might lie herein.)

Dr. Charlie Glickman provides some interesting commentary on the language choices in a Time Magazine article about emotional openness and male mental health.

Emotional Skills Help Men Live Longer | Good Vibrations Magazine

Anytime boys or men step outside the box of being a “real man,” we run the risk of being fag-bashed. In many ways, this is comparable to slut-shaming women. In both cases, when someone violates the rigid boundaries of gender by doing something that the “other group” is allowed to do (for men, showing emotions; for women, wanting to have sex or multiple partners), they get attacked, shamed, and assaulted. And even when reporting on research that shows that these inflexible rules cause problems for the people who comply with them, the writer still managed to get some digs in at men who don’t fit the stereotypes.

I think the Time Magazine article uses phrases like “mama’s boy” and “stop sniveling and ‘be a man’?” deliberately, to draw attention to cultural attitudes about masculinity, to create just enough controversy to drive traffic to the story without pissing off the advertisers, and to be humorous. I like to the think that the author wants to show how easy it is to reinforce the repression of natural male instincts — including the expression of tender emotions, the ability to form deep bonds with other men, and respect for their mothers as people not just objects in need of protection and reverence — simply by using common American sayings.

I might be projecting based on my own language choices in certain Sex Drive columns. Also, I have some experience with the pressure editors and publishers can apply, encouraging one to push buttons so that bloggers will be offended and write posts about (and therefore link to) the story. Maybe it’s wishful thinking on my part, seeing benign and even benevolent motives that aren’t actually there.

But I noticed that the title bar says “Emotional Openness May Be Good for Your Health,” an accurate summary of the article content, genially and neutrally expressed. Very likely, this was the original headline, entered into the meta data fields of the publishing tool.

Then a copy editor came along and said “well, gee whiz, this is the blandest title I’ve ever seen,” and changed the headline to its current rabble-rousing state: “Being a Mama’s Boy: Good for Your Health?”

Which one are you more likely to click?

The one that creates an emotional response, of course.