MENS-WELLBEING.COM

Absent Fathers and their Children’s Sexual Behaviour.

Conventional opinion has held that children of absent fathers are more likely to sexually mature earlier, and have their first sexual experience earlier, than children of fathers who remain in the family.  The conclusion has always been that it is the absence of the fathers that cause the early sexual maturation and activity.  New research is suggesting that this might not be the case.

 

Jane Mendle examined data from the US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and compared the age of first intercourse with genetically related individuals such as twins, sisters and cousins.  What the researcher found was that the more closely related the children were, the more likely they were to be close in terms of first intercourse, and this was the most important factor regardless of absent fathers.

 

What this research demonstrates is that correlation (fathers presence/absence with age of sexual maturity/first intercourse) does not necessarily imply causation.  It also shows that researchers in the past have been too quick to ‘blame’ absent fathers for their children’s sexual behaviour.

Dr Phil Tyson is a Men's Psychotherapist based in Manchester in the UK.  He offers counselling in Manchester, psychotherapy in Manchester, cognitive behavioural therapy in Manchester and telephone counselling nationally and internationally.

Homosexuality Can’t be ‘Cured’ – but can we accept it?

Over the last 200 years or so, there has been ongoing debate about the relative role of psychology and biology in a range of human behaviours.  Autism and homosexuality are two good examples that research has placed firmly on the side of biology.  For many years professionals tried talking therapies to help people with autism and homosexuality overcome their ‘afflictions’.  In both cases all they served to do was increase the distress of the patient, and their families, by making them feel responsible for their behaviour.

 

With respect to homosexuality, the psychiatric profession for many years held it to be an illness.  This is no longer the case.  Although the causes of homosexuality are still debated in nuance, there is increasing consensus that it is biology that determines a person’s sexuality, not psychology, upbringing or indeed, personal choice.  Interestingly there are different biological reasons for male homosexuality and female homosexuality, rather than a unified reason that accounts for both.

 

Furthermore, a survey of all published research about therapies that have tried to change a person’s sexuality has shown that it has always failed to do so, and often causes harm.  This has recently led to the American Psychological Society issuing a declaration that therapy to change a person’s sexuality does not work, with the implication that it is unethical to try to do so.  Pressure is being put on the British Psychological Society and the Royal College of Psychiatry to issue a similar statement.

 

Given this backdrop it is alarming that a recent study in MBC Psychiatry found that as many as 1 in 6 therapists have attempted to change at least one person’s sexual orientation  in their professional career.  On the face of it this seems to go against the evidence.  I wonder, though, if something more subtle is going on – namely a difficulty knowing how to deal with gay clients who are unhappy about their sexuality.

 

In the life history of most gay men there is likely to be a period when they couldn’t accept their sexuality, and therefore really didn’t want to be gay.  The pressures of family and society to conform to a heterosexual norm seem insurmountable for many men.  It is clear that many gay clients have a lot of soul searching to do before they form an acceptance of their sexuality.  Indeed, it could be argued that many gay men, though superficially accepting and adopting a gay lifestyle, still suffer from a hangover of ‘internalised homophobia’ that continues to impact on their emotional wellbeing and ability to form meaningful relationships.

 

Given the very real unhappiness that finding oneself gay can bring to a person, it seems understandable, if ill advised, to try and help the person to lead a straight lifestyle.  I suspect this, rather than a real belief in its possibility, that has led so many of my colleagues to try and change a persons sexuality.

 

It is within this backdrop, however, that the real danger to gay men’s well-being lies – namely in those religious organisations that still offer ‘treatments’ for homosexuality. Against the grain of science but in the name of God, such organisations can only serve to enhance gay men’s unhappiness with their sexuality, and not in fact offer any real solution to it.  At best all they can hope to achieve is an asexual life where sex and relationships are sacrificed for a supposed ‘greater’ ideal of ‘what God wants’.  I can’t see this being beneficial to the individual, or, indeed, society.

 

Homosexuality will continue to be a contentious issue, not least because it raises tensions between individual behaviour and social and religious mores. All I can do as a therapist is help everybody, gay or straight alike, to be more accepting of homosexuality.  It is in accepting others how they really are, that we are best able to learn to accept ourselves as we really are.  Psychological health, after all, starts by seeing the world as it really is, rather than how we think it should be.

Dr Phil Tyson is a Men's Psychotherapist based in Manchester in the UK.  He offers counselling in Manchester, psychotherapy in Manchester, cognitive behavioural therapy in Manchester and telephone counselling nationally and internationally.

Hormones and Men’s Parenting Behaviour.

What kind of dad are you?  Research is beginning to show that the kind of parent you are is to some extent controlled by a number of key hormones.

 

In the journal Hormones and Behaviour the anthropologist Alexandra Alvergne studied the level of the hormone testosterone in men’s saliva, and how this correlated with family behaviour.  On average, the higher the levels of testosterone in the saliva, the less time and money the man invested in their wives and children.

 

Another study, by Ruth Fieldman, reported to the Society for Research in Child Development in Denver, Colorado, indicated that when men become fathers they undergo biochemical changes which affect how they relate to their children.  The study looked at the hormone Oxytocin, also called ‘the cuddle hormone’.  Fieldman found that the levels of oxytocin raised after the birth of a child in both fathers and mothers.  Furthermore, the more oxytocin was present in the fathers, the more they were seen to play, bond and attach to their children, then men who had low levels of oxytocin.

 

What both these studies appear to show is that your parenting style has something to do with your biology.  Indeed this makes sense in terms of evolutionary theory, as “investment” in offspring could be seen to be an evolutionary relevant trait, and therefore mediated by biology. 

 

Whether it is better, from an evolutionary perspective, to father many children and offer them poor support, or fewer children, and offer them more support, is an interesting backdrop to understanding men’s parenting preferences.  To reason from biology to morality, of course, is an example of what philosophers call ‘the naturalistic fallacy’.  However, some men, or so it might seem, are going to have to fight against their biology in order to become ‘responsible’ parents.

Another Aggression and Gene Link Found in Men.

Research by Kevin Beaver at Florida State University has found a link between the low-activity version of the gene MAOA and gang behaviour in men.  This gene, which is rarely found in women, has been shown to be related to aggression in men who have been abused as children.

 

Beaver found that men with low-activity MAOA were twice as likely to join gangs as men with the normal version.  Furthermore, of gang members, men with low-activity MAOA were four times as likely to have used a weapon, compared to men with the normal version of the gene.

 

This is the latest in a number of studies that relate genetics to aggression in some men, some of which I have reported here.  Men with the XYY chromosome variation have long been identified as more aggressive than the more common XY chromosome variation, and are overrepresented in the prison population.

 

What these studies are showing is that, for some men, aggression is likely to be a problem for them, and those around them – for genetic reasons.  Furthermore these men, in principle anyway, could be identified by genetic testing.  It follows that these men could be targeted for early intervention before their aggression causes them difficulties.

 

Anger is the only emotion that, if seen in excess, is dealt with by the criminal justice system rather than the health care system.  What is disturbing about this is that the criminal justice system may be good at ‘containing’ these aggressive men, but offers precious little to address their underlying emotional regulation issues.  In fact I have worked with many men who have received repeated prison sentences for aggressive behaviour – in none of these cases did the criminal justice system offer anything to help the man understand and moderate his aggressive behaviour.

 

I can’t help thinking that if ‘aggression’ was something identified by women as an issue within their ranks, aggressive behaviour would have become a health care priority a long time ago. 

 

Things might be about to change.  The American Psychiatric Association has been reported recently to be considering ‘aggressive behaviour’ as a distinct clinical diagnosis.  If they proceed with this, and I hope they do, this might force service providers and clinicians to provide services for these men – many of whom, as I have repeatedly shown, often have a biological predisposition to aggression.

 

It seems to me to make sense to address the cause of aggressive behaviour in some men.  Such a strategy may well reduce the burden on the criminal justice system, and the social distress these men’s behaviour causes, not least to the men themselves.

 

 

Dr Phil Tyson is a Men's Psychotherapist based in Manchester in the UK.  He offers counselling in Manchester, psychotherapy in Manchester, cognitive behavioural therapy in Manchester and telephone counselling nationally and internationally.

Roids, Bigorexia and Men’s Body Image.

With the passing of the new year my attention turned to what I want to achieve in the next twelve months.  Yet again I find myself resolving to go to the gym more often, and when there, work harder for longer. 

What is it I want to achieve while I’m there?  Well for me the most important reason for working out  is that it improves my mental health: a good workout gives me a sense of achievement, purifies my body of stress toxins, and releases the ‘happy’ chemicals, endorphins, that lift my mood.  Then there is looking more attractive: as I am getting older, or so I reason, my body is one area that I still have some control over.  Alarmingly, making an improvement in my physical health comes a poor third in my list of priorities. 

I suspect it’s the same for a lot of men.  What is interesting is the increasing pressure men face to ‘own’ the beautiful body.  We can’t do much about our faces, but we can change our physique, right?  But which physique?  For many years the fit and toned look epitomised by David Beckham was the gold standard of male physical beauty.  But ever since Daniel Craig emerged from the sea in Casino Royale in 2006 there has been something of a shift to a more rugged muscular build.  The pressure is on to not only slim down to a percentage body fat that reveals a washboard stomach, but also pile on the muscle to create that more angular ‘masculine’ silhouette.

What are these pressures doing to men?  Well for many men it is simply no longer acceptable to abuse your body and accept the middle age spread as an inevitable consequence of growing older, just like a receding hairline.  In some ways this is a good thing.  Bodies that are worked out, generally speaking, are healthier than those that never see the inside of a gym. 

For some men, though, this has simple gone too far.  The eating disorders of anorexia and bulimia, once diseases mainly restricted to women, are becoming increasingly prevalent in men, particularly young men.  This is understandable when you realise you need a percentage body fat below 14 to reveal your abs (however big they are), and that maintaining this level of body fat is both difficult and unhealthy.

To these can be added a related, but peculiarly male disorder: bigorexia.  There have been many attempts to define this condition, and they tend to come under guises such as ‘exercise addiction’ or, more formally, ‘muscle dysmorphia’, but they all capture one essential feature: the man is unhappy with how muscular he looks and, however big he builds up his muscles, he still feels that he is too small.  Even if the man is asked to compare himself with another man of similar physique, he still sees himself as being smaller.

Bigorexia, in this sense, is closely linked to anorexia and bulimia, in that all three stem from a problem with the way the person perceives their body.  Just as anorexia and bulimia leads to secondary problems, such as the use of laxatives or throat and teeth damage, men with bigorexia, can also develop a dependence on anabolic steroids – or ‘roids’.

Roids are freely available in most gyms around the country, and hold the advantage that they can make you bulk up on muscle really quickly.  You still have to put the hours in at the gym, but you get better results from the time you spend. 

Sound ideal?  Well consider the side effects of roids.  First there are the risks of psychological dependence and the kind of physique they produce.  Second is the disturbance in mood that roid use can bring about, particular making men more irritable and aggressive (hence the expression ‘roid rage’).

The dangers are not just psychological, but physical.  Many men develop acne on their face and back.  Roids can also stimulate the latent breast tissue in men causing what is sometimes referred to as ‘bitch tits’.  The long term damage can also be severe, causing serious hormone regulation problems.  If you use needles to inject the roids (which is not uncommon), there are also the risks of infection including hepatitis and, if needles are shared, HIV.

For guys with bigorexia though, these dangers are worth the price.  In fact this is the real danger of bigorexia, the men who have it don’t identify as having a problem.  For them, getting bigger becomes an all consuming passion, even an obsession, and they can’t see that they are doing themselves harm, and certainly wouldn’t consider getting help.

So where is the dividing line between wanting to shape up and look fit, and exercising to the point you are doing yourself psychological and physical harm?  Well for me the real point of danger is if you consider using roids to boost your muscle bulk.  If you need to change your body shape so badly, there is a potential problem. 

For many men concern over their physical appearance is just one of the ways they experience low self worth.  It’s not just men with bigorexia who are unhappy about their shape.  Inevitably as men’s bodies continue to be object of fashion and used to boost commercial products from films to talcum powder, such low self esteem is set to continue to grow.

What can be done about it?  The good news is that if you are continually obsessing about your body shape there are things that can be done.  Learning to identify and change your style of thinking is central to therapy in this area and, provided you can accept you have a problem, is highly effective.  The trick is to catch it early.  If you leave it until you have full on bigorexia, you have probably left it far too late.

 

Dr Phil Tyson is a Men's Psychotherapist based in Manchester in the UK.  He offers counselling in Manchester, psychotherapy in Manchester, cognitive behavioural therapy in Manchester and telephone counselling nationally and internationally.