The novelty of male teachers is a curious situation. In person, the position is granted doubt yet on paper Daniel Meier of “One Man’s Kids” (1987) addresses not only his own weaknesses but also the bareness of his fellow men. Daniel Meier loves his job, his students, and does not want to change that for a more male-appropriate position. More is said about society than the individual when male teachers are uncommon.
A teacher can empathize, protect, and possibly quibble. These are the lesser responsibilities where women are better conditioned yet Daniel was vying for the job. He interviews with principals, male authorities, and consciously advertises himself not as soft, feeling, and kindly but more much more objective (Meier 7). Daniel chooses to say “contribute to the intellectual growth of the maturing mind” (7) instead of “helping a child to write her name for the first time” (7) as his motivation, and is praised for it. The formal answer is to appeal to the male principal. Daniel deliberately focuses on a manliness that is about Goals, but in exchange suppresses sentimentality, the cherishing of Moments that he would like to see satisfied in others. Nevertheless, Daniel’s deliberate, “male answer” (7) is approved of for being brain-powered and not heart-oriented. This is the quality that would grant him the “advantage over female [teachers]” (7) but not amongst men.
Daniel Meier is a Caretaker. This is docile in relation to his friends and other men, but Daniel admits he is nothing like them anyway. He does not have the characteristics of the lawyer, surgeon, businessman, or construction worker (5); the “achieving, conquering, or cornering” (5) personalities we, as a society appreciate more openly. These men deal with paperwork and dire moments, transacts and exactness—and Daniel is playing with kids. More than that, though he is unappreciated, he teaches the students to be better people, well-minded; “my energy,” he says, “is spent in encouraging, supporting, consoling, and praising my children” (6). “Encouraging, supporting, consoling, and praising” (6) are not features of the male workman but it is women’s work and Daniel is comfortable with that. Though Daniel’s wellbeing is placed in the company of six-year olds, he adores them, “my children” (6) as his own. Juggling without notice, he is nurturing young and energetic minds who lose footwear, need help making friends, require both a shoulder and tissue to cry on (6), and Daniel wouldn’t choose otherwise. He is a Giver. These are the matters adults overlook and are set aside for him to handle. This doesn’t make Daniel less of a man to be a professional multitasking, babysitter but it does bring up what others think of him.
While Daniel is particular in his field, he is not a leader. When expected to climb higher to the role of principal, dean, or administrator, he is personally uninterested (7). Compared to the doctor, agent, and worker, Daniel can’t because his values are intrinsic instead of being molded by money or intellectual-aggression. Daniel’s occupation is not “traditional male work” (5), but to be a part of it is simply marginalizing. This is pronounced when men respond to Daniel with questioning what he did to obtain such a job and how much is he paid to handle it—and then “the conversation stops” (11). There is nothing more to say and this attitude outlines Daniel as inferior. He is subordinate not only to other men, but lowly enough, feminine enough to deal with young children all the time. But Daniel is not inferior but worthful. Grant it, he has to be “soft around the edges” (6) to do so well but clearly women respond better to his career. And women not only acknowledge Daniel’s quirk but immediate open the conversation to “talking shop” about childcare (11)—something that the men cannot do with exception to Daniel. Though his position stifles opportunities with his peers, Daniel is steered into a company who better regards his efforts. It’s a circumstance that a male teacher cannot only appreciate but be reenergized to continue what they enjoy.
Daniel being able to discuss childcare with women but be dissociated by men is not strange. Who nurtures? Women. Who unsurprisingly encourages, multitasks, and tutors? Women. Who naturally or professionally cares for children most often? Women. The men are out distinguishing themselves, pursuing intellect, providing means, climbing career ladders—they are out of the home and away from the children. Daniel wants to stay amongst them, in contact and a part of their lives. For other men to have little to say about children is a rather conditioned response. It makes sense for men to be much wiser about stocks than when a child learns the alphabet. As a man who happens to be a teacher, Daniel mothers his children, and they are all his. A more subjective, male voice would label them as Students, but Daniel cares for each of them and helps bring those children closer to seeing her self, person, and thought represented in the immediate world. That is not an embarrassing job description to compete for.
Daniel Meier is a teacher. He is not a man of lesser value. He is stronger, sensible, and selfless because of it. He tends to our growing children.
Works Cited
Meier, Daniel R. “One Man’s Kids”. 1987.
