# What ever happened to the Renaissance Man?



## Fanille (Sep 3, 2009)

I was going to do another blog post on Brain Typing, but one of ape's recent threads, along with some past discussions in other threads, prompted me to think of something different.

No, I'm not going to get into the debate of the evolutionary benefits of a physically strong male vs. whatever reason the women who want to defend their love for geeks/nerds/whatever have for doing so.

Instead, what I want to ask is, why does it have to be one or the other? Is there some kind of rule against well-educated men being physically strong and athletic? Or against men who are tough enough to protect their wives yet sensitive enough to care for their children?

If there is, I guess I never got the memo. Maybe I'm just greedy. Maybe it was because I went to a high school where sports team captains happened to make the honor roll, where people weren't willing to put themselves into a box. Maybe it's because I attended an Ivy League University and therefore know what the Ivy League actually is (it's an athletic conference, believe it or not) rather than relying on the stereotypical descriptions. Maybe it's because I'm of the "type" that doesn't give a shit about rules that say I can't become a well-rounded individual (and if you can't tell, I'm using the word "type" sarcastically because I don't think that trying to become more well-rounded is something that should only be restricted to certain types).

Stereotypical jocks are boring, but so are stereotypical nerds (to me, anyway). *Stereotypical anything *is boring.

Me? I'd rather not limit myself to one dimension.


----------



## Nightriser (Nov 8, 2008)

Thank you. One of the things that bothered me about the cited study in that thread is the false dilemma inherent in the statement "Women who are ovulating prefer men with good genes, while women in other parts of their cycle prefer 'provider' types." (That isn't a verbatim quote, but similar to what the study mentioned.) Since when are "providers" necessarily lacking in good genes?


----------



## sartreality (Aug 5, 2009)

The renaissance man died somewhere around the late 1970's with The Six Million Dollar Man  Who killed the renaissance man? Extreme feminism that marginalized the strong male qualities and somehow made degraded them. By the 1970's traditional good male qualities became a bad thing. So a divide happened. It used to be that men could be smart, sensitive (in their own natural male way) AND strong and protective and were looked up to as ideals. Once the protective thing was stereotyped as machismo and bad, then things got screwed up. It's really unfortunate and I think it has mixed up a lot of the gender relations.


----------



## Maximus (Jun 5, 2011)

I'm a believer in the Renaissance man revival, but I don't have the same definition of it as you do. To me, a Renaissance man (or woman) is a person who's a genius or proficient in many different subjects, areas of knowledge, and skills. It's mostly a mental thing (with perhaps tactile applications). The reason why the polymath is in the history books, is because modern education is geared toward specialization, and has been since the Industrial Revolution. There are few examples of modern polymaths, but many aspects of their broad knowledge may not be taken seriously without specialized credentials. 

What you're discribing is someone who's both physical and intellectual; like an athlete and a genius; a jock and a nerd. Although this is a better, or more well rounded man, it doesn't specifically go into their many areas of knowledge or multiple skill-sets that is usually characteristic of polymaths. 

But I totally agree with you. There's no reason why society should create a schism between mind and body. They say one of the best ways to keep a young and healthy brain is to be physically active and exercise regularly. So a nerd could benefit from being more active. And an athletic person, if wishing to excel to higher levels of performance will have to educate them selves on proper techniques, nutrition, anatomy and physiology, etc...That to maintain a strong body requires one to _know thy self_, and that's a philosophical question that demands the contender to think about.


----------

