Jewish World Review Feb. 15, 2002 / 4 Adar, 5762

Leonard Pitts, Jr.

Leonard Pitts, Jr.
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

In search of manhood, some make a fatal decision

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- It wasn't the fact that a young man had been killed that made me stop.

The unfortunate truth, after all, is that young men are frequently killed. So, in itself, the shooting of 20-year-old Ibrahim Khoury in Coral Gables, Fla., seemed sadly ... ordinary.

No, the thing that demanded a double-take was the professed reason he was killed.

According to a story published last Thursday in The Miami Herald, Khoury was an altar boy and engineering student who dealt pot on the side. Miami-Dade police say he and his cousin, George Khoury, had the misfortune to encounter three prospective customers, all teen-agers, who had no intention of paying for their purchase. When Ibrahim Khoury handed over the bag of marijuana, one of the teen-agers, 18-year-old Andres Carvajalino, allegedly pulled a gun and pointed it at George Khoury's forehead.

George Khoury dared him to shoot. Meanwhile, Ibrahim snatched the bag away. And Carvajalino, according to police, shot him instead. Right through the heart.

Why?

"He felt his manhood had been challenged." That's how Detective Jeff Lewis explained it.

Carvajalino could not, in other words, have maintained his good opinion of himself, could not have walked with his back erect and his head high, had he not - allegedly - fired the gun. Had he not pulled the trigger, he would have been less than a man.

G-d help him. G-d help us all.

For generations, the ability to access violence has been one of the primary ways we defined manhood. From John Wayne to Clint Eastwood to Bruce Willis, the iconic man, the one boys were taught to celebrate and emulate, was the one who was good with his fists. A principled fellow, deeply moral in his way, a good-tempered sort who would never be the one to start trouble. But, oh, could he finish it. If you got on his bad side you were, as they used to say, cruising for a bruising.

We could argue ad infinitum about the appropriateness of that model. Deliberate the need to champion other means of conflict resolution against the reality that some enemies - Osama bin Laden is a better-than-average example - will not respond to any coercion short of violence. But in the end, the debate is academic, because the model is obsolete.

Many boys and young men have, in a sense, cut to the chase. Forget the stuff about principles and morals and good temper - when do we fight? When do I get to prove that I can handle myself? When do I get to show that I am a man?

Our cities are full of boys, some much older than 21, desperate to prove that they've crossed that invisible line. Boys figuratively and literally tugging on their crotches, packing weapons in their waistbands, swaggering through life, in the expectation that somehow this will make them men.

The curious thing is, while the old model of manhood certainly included the capacity for violence, it was never limited to that. It also involved the willingness to take a stand, the love of competition, the ability to provide for a family and the confidence that comes of feeling that one is simply ... capable. Equal to the challenges of life.

Manhood meant those things, too, back in the day. But this is a new day, and for many would-be boys-to-men, the capacity for violence is all that's left, the one reliable means by which to demonstrate their manhood. Can any of us be surprised? We've minimized the importance of the lessons men teach boys. It has become politically correct to consider mother and father not just equal, but interchangeable.

The fallacy of that thinking can be seen in the faces and lives of a thousand lost boys searching for a shortcut to something they only dimly understand. But there are no shortcuts to the real thing. Neither prodigious violence nor prodigious sex will get you there. This is what we need to help our sons to see.

Otherwise, there's a danger that many more will end up like Andres Carvajalino, doing some stupid and irreversible thing to protect their manhood. Wrecking lives to defend something they never truly had.

Comment on JWR contributor Leonard Pitts, Jr.'s column by clicking here.

02/08/02: Time for blacks to give the same respect they demand
02/05/02: A question of character and "unlawful combatants"
01/31/02: There's only so much a parent can influence a child
01/29/02: Mike Tyson is incapable of embarrassment
01/25/02: Acts of patriotism or acts of desecration?
01/18/02: Waiting for tears in the rain at Ground Zero
01/15/02: A little cultural respect works both ways
01/11/02: Can blacks be racist?
01/07/02: What price for the priceless?
12/21/01: An intriguing study on race
12/18/01: To err is me
12/14/01: Admit it, folks, If you've ever been 16, you can probably relate to Walker
12/11/01: Blacks-on-blacks poll is a healthy project
12/07/01: The best defense against government excesses
12/05/01: Better hoist caution flag
12/03/01: Martin Luther Ka-CHING!
11/27/01: Beauty reflects an ugly truth
11/22/01: Another reason to be thankful
11/19/01: If only they knew our names
11/12/01: Watching a 'dying' man live
08/01/01: Should a man be put in jail for what he's thinking?
07/27/01: It's your responsibility to invade their privacy
07/20/01: Is optimism for fools?
07/17/01: Everybody should have a white man

© 2002, The Miami Herald