Over at Bitter’s place, I saw this post about fatherhood and manhood. Apparently this is the subject of a piece in Time Magazine, but here’s the post that got me thinking.

“Masculinity has traditionally been associated with work and work-related success, with competition, power, prestige, dominance over women, restrictive emotionality. . . But a good parent needs to be expressive, patient, emotional, not money oriented. Basically, masculinity is bad for you.”

That comes from Time, btw, not the blog I just linked to. But the blogger responds in part by saying:

The problem with ideas like masculinity and manhood is not that they are bundles of bad behavior. The problem is that they’ve been hijacked by half-men. The droves of males we see advancing themselves in their careers by neglecting their children should not rightly be called real men. They are boys playing at the game of man. It is a man-boy who thinks money is his measure. It is a man-boy who works long hours so he can win the approval of his CEO. It is the man-boy who thinks he is something because he can get women to do his bidding.

A real man, on the other hand, protects and provides for his family, and partners with his wife to train up his children in the way they should go. He isn’t necessarily gabby, but his children know in their souls that he loves them. He is patient and kind. He lays down his life for his family every day.

Fifty years ago, we all knew these things. Today, however, we are beset by a host of intellectuals who haven’t the sense to recognize that fewer and fewer males know how to become real men. The problem is not that masculinity is rotten. It is that so few men live up to it.

Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! This is why books like the “Dangerous Book for Boys” are so popular right now. Some of us recognize that our parents didn’t raise Generation X, they raised Generation Wuss.

But here’s the thing: you don’t get to be a man’s man by caring about being a man’s man. You don’t get there by reading Time freaking magazine say that masculinity is a bad thing. You get there by not caring. You don’t give a damn what the neighbors say, or whether or not your sister-in-law is going to cluck over your decisions. The only thing you care about is this:

“Is this the best thing for my family?”

Because being a man (once you’re a father) is all about your family. For the vast majority of us (Teddy Roosevelt not included), the legacy we will leave to the world is not our job, or our bank account. It’s our kids.

This doesn’t mean we drop everything in order to cater to the whims of our offspring… quite the opposite. If you’re lucky enough to be one of the few well-adjusted Americans that remain in this glorious Republic, you and I probably share some similar experiences from childhood.

- Our lives weren’t structured to every last minute of every last day. Sometimes we simply had to amuse ourselves.

- Our parents weren’t our friends. They were our mom and dad, and we clearly knew the difference. It was easier (and certainly more pleasurable) to imagine kissing our 2nd grade teacher Mrs. Wilcox than it was to imagine calling our mom or dad by their first name.

- We didn’t get our way. I don’t mean we didn’t get our way until we pouted for twenty minutes, or we didn’t get our way 20% of the time… I mean it was common for us to get told “No”, and that was the end of the discussion… unless we kept whining “please please please” and then we got punished for that.

- We knew our parents loved us. You don’t need a Ferrari on your 16th birthday to understand that. You need to be told, and you need to be shown. A hug and a kiss, an “I’m proud of you” or “You did a great job!” go a long freaking way.

We weren’t babied, we weren’t coddled, we had actual responsibilities and obligations even as kids. We weren’t abused, but bullshit wasn’t tolerated in large amounts. We were punished when we needed to be punished, and we got cool treats that were completely unexpected at times. And we turned out fine.

At least I think I did. Honestly, I really don’t spend a lot of time thinking about it. I guess I’m secure enough in my manhood and fatherhood that I don’t ponder these things. The sad thing is, apparently enough Americans feel differently that Time Magazine devotes an entire article to this phenomenon.

You don’t need a self-help book to be a better man or a better dad (of course, I reserve the right to disavow this statement if I ever write such a book). Honestly, it’s not that freaking hard. “Is this the best thing for my family?” That’s all it takes. Well, that and the ability to answer that question without lying to yourself.

This, from the Club for Growth, is an excellent idea.

In 1930, Congress passed and President Hoover signed into law the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. At the time, this protectionist measure was vigorously opposed by 1,028 of the nation’s top economists. They rightly predicted the tariffs would devastate the economy. And, in fact, the country subsequently plunged into the Great Depression.

Now some in Congress are considering ways to enact similar protectionist policies against China. Once again, 1,028 of America’s top economists, from all 50 states and top universities, have signed the following petition sponsored by the Club for Growth in opposition to protectionist policies against China.

The Club’s petition illustrates the same point that the 1930 original did — protectionism is folly.

I’ve been enjoying a few days off, visiting family in San Antonio, Texas. Yesterday, I had the chance to visit Sea World San Antonio and, thanks to the hard work of one relative (she knows who she is) to take advantage of a special Sea World offering.

I’d been to Sea World before. A few years ago, my wife and I visited Sea World San Diego. We did the usual things — checked out the penguins, laughed at the walruses, and saw the dolphin, killer whale and sea lion shows. I remember leaving a little underwhelmed, but at the time, I couldn’t really put my finger on the reason.

Nevertheless, I was looking forward to yesterday’s Sea World visit, because I was going to experience something very cool — I was going to don a wet suit and get into a pool with several Beluga whales.

Beluga whales are native to the arctic, which explains their white coloring. According to the folks at Sea World, they cruise around widely, but have never been sited south of the South Lawrence River. Interestingly, Belugas are one of the few whales species that are essentially non-migratory. They like the cold water of the arctic, and so there they stay. Your basic Beluga is a little larger than a dolphin. At Sea World, the Belugas perform in a thrice daily show called Viva, which also incorporates acrobatic platform divers and some excitable dolphins.

So, after watching an educational video in air conditioned comfort, we were fitted with wet suits and aqua socks and made our way out to the pool. Why the wet suit? Well, as I mentioned, Belugas like their water cold — about 58 degrees Fahrenheit as it turns out — so we needed the wet suits to prevent hypothermia.

Once at the pool, we split up into small groups, a couple of us joining a a friendly “trainer” named Michelle.

Michelle instructed us on how to enter the pool and warned us that the first couple of minutes would be exceedingly cold while the wet suit warmed up. Nevertheless, she said, it’s important to keep still and not hop around lest the whales decide that they aren’t interested in meeting you after all. Sure enough, when we slid into the pool, it was cold. But in seconds one the four whales in the pool with us swam over and said hello, and the chilly water was quickly forgotten.

The whales were great fun, and interacting with them was an incredible experience. Their skin is very much like our own, and the melon at the front of their head — which acts as the transmission point for their sonar — was unique in my experience. Imagine the feeling if you didn’t have a skull and could move your brain around with your hands.

Most interesting was the fact that Belugas, unlike dolphins or orcas, have diffused vertebrae. That means they can turn and swivel their heads like we can. They diverged from other whales in another key respect as well: Belugas don’t have a dorsal fine. Instead, they have a bony ridge at the top of their back which they use for breaking breathing holes in arctic ice.

We spent the first few minutes taking pictures. The whales were trained to kiss us on the cheek, give us a hug, and lay next to us at the edge of the pool.

Over the next thirty minutes or so, we got to visit with each of the four whales, and Michelle demonstrated the various behaviors that each had been trained to perform on cue.

Michelle had mentioned earlier that she was not a marine biologist, general biologist, or chemist. In fact, her degree was in psychology, a background that she found to be perfect for working with the Belugas because, she explained, she was an expert in understanding and shaping behavior. Marine biologists, she said, focus on a large ecosystem. Biologists are more interested in physiology. No, she said, psychology was perfect for her job at Sea World as an “animal trainer.”

It was during this conversation that I realized what had been bugging me about Sea World.

At other zoos and aquariums that I have visited, there has always been a commitment to science. Often, this commitment is only the flimsiest pretense, but it is ever-present. Naturally, some zoos and aquariums do better than others in justifying their claims with action. But even the pretense is important. If the animals are there for study, then they are NOT solely there for our entertainment. Instead, we are holding them in captivity, at least in part, for our enlightenment or in an attempt to save their species from extinction. Ultimately, it is, at least in part, about them.

Thanks to its proximity and the fact that I am member, the bulk of my experience in such matters is with the National Zoo in Washington, D.C. There, biologists, veterinarians and zoologists participate in dozens of programs to help salvage species that are on the brink. A few that leap to mind include the Cheetah, Golden Lion Tamarin, Asian Elephant, and, of course, the famous Giant Panda. At their research facility near Winchester, Virginia, National Zoo scientists are also working to save a number of species of African grazing animals. The National Zoo also concerns itself with conservation. Conservation messages dot its campus, as the Zoo captures the opportunity to deliver those messages to zoo visitors at at the very time they might do the most good — when they are staring face to face with the kind of animal that they might help save.

At America’s foremost aquarium, the Monterey Bay Aquarium in California, scientists are making huge progress in understanding and saving species like the California Sea Otter. Indeed, their efforts to rescue orphaned pups and return them to the wild have set the standard for such programs all over the world. To the extent that facilities like Monterey Bay or the National Aquarium in Baltimore, Maryland, train animals like pacific bottlenose dolphins, they do so within the framework of having the animals exhibit behaviors that they would display in the wild — all the better for the guests to fall in love and help take action to keep wild dolphins from getting caught up in massive tuna nets.

Not so at Sea World.

Simply put, Sea World fails to put on even the barest pretense regarding conservation, as Michelle’s explanation of her educational background illustrates. If Sea World were interested in understanding Beluga whales, the person assigned to spend hour upon hour each day would have the background to understand and glean insights from their behavior. Instead, Sea World has assigned someone trained to understand and manipulate their behavior. Indeed, the person assigned to interact with guests in the presence of these great whales might spend a few minutes educating folks about what the whales’ life in the wild. (We wouldn’t have learned anything beyond what was in the video if we hadn’t asked.)

In short, it’s not about the animals. It’s about entertaining us.

This was brought home yet again later in the day when we attended the afternoon killer whale show. Instead of a simple show with the majestic whales exhibiting their behavior for all to see, we encountered a multi-media extravaganza, complete with jumbo-tron and contrived plot. And it was that plot that was so revealing. The story wasn’t about a whale. It wasn’t about marine life at all. And it certainly wasn’t about conservation. It was about a kid who wanted to be an animal trainer. Called “Believe,” the show was a shockingly self-indulgent — even for SeaWorld — masterpiece of self-congratulation. The whales, with all of their wondrous natural talent were relegated to props for the heroic trainers to ride to and fro. (Incidentally, as I scanned the audience during the show, I was struck by the fact that no one was watching the video. Everyone was looking for the whales. Note to Sea World: Your guests are there to sea the animals. Not the trainers.) The irony came together at the culmination of the show, which involved four trainers swimming a pattern across the pool and then perching on the pool edge to wave to the crowd. There were no whales in site.

It was after the show that I encountered the first and only conservation message that I witnessed during the entire day. It was a simple color flyer, promoting the Sea World / Busch Gardens conservation fund. I encountered it on the wall above a urinal.

I know that Sea World claims to be committed to conservation. I recall seeing coverage, from time to time, of Sea World Florida’s on-going effort to save injured Manatees. I vaguely hearing of grants and the like to scientists.

But in San Diego and San Antonio — the Sea World parks that I have visited — Sea World is evidently making a conscious decision to pass on a golden opportunity. Instead of embracing the opportunity for a day-long teachable moment, Sea World has rejected it in favor of employing their animals as nothing more than props.

Now, someone is going to argue that Sea World is in business to make money, and that they make money by entertaining their visitors. Well, duh. But Sea World can successfully conduct its business, entertain its guests, and demonstrate a commitment to a greater responsibility. That seems like a no brainer to me. And it should to them, too.

Sea World has the power to reach a lot of people, to teach them about our oceans and the life within — much of which is threatened by overfishing, pollution and countless other perils. But they choose not to.

Certainly, that’s their choice. Just as it’s my choice to spend my money elsewhere. And that’s just what I’ll be doing from now on. Even though I really enjoyed my morning with the Beluga whales.

UPDATE: Another person in my party reports seeing a good deal more information than I did about the conservation fund. There was also a quiz before the killer whale show that purported to be about conservation, but all of the questions were about the size and lifestyle of the whales at Sea World. Nothing about conditions in the wild or how to preserve them.

This person also suggests that the clearest message from Sea World or its parent, Anheuser-Busch, throughout the day were the repeated messages, signs and information celebrating visiting veterans. While I strongly support this effort, and was glad to join an ovation for the vets in attendance at the killer whale show, it underscores the utter failing when it comes to conservation. If Sea World could deliver a compelling (and well deserved) thank you for the troops, they could certainly do the same with a conservation message for their guests.

UPDATE II: It just hit that during my search to round up all of the links for this post, I had an incredibly hard time even finding anything about conservation on Sea World’s various websites. Just another proof point…

Cam: Full disclosure requires that I state I have family members that work for Sea World’s parent company… so make what you will of my comments.

I have never been to Sea World, so I cannot speak with any first-hand knowledge of their conservation efforts. I will only say that it took me literally seconds to find information about conservation on Sea World’s website. I see that Sea World has given more than $2.2 million dollars in grants for conservation efforts since 2004. The fund has helped detain more than 250 poachers. And the fund has helped engineer a design change for fishhooks that reduce the number of sea turtles caught by 90%. So there.

I realize this might put me on Al Gore’s shit list, but I don’t constantly need to be reminded of the urgent need to SAVE THE PLANET! Sometimes it’s cool to go and see some neat creatures without it being drummed into my head that if only I wasn’t so greedy and consumerific that there’d be more of these majestic sea slugs for the world to enjoy. Sometimes I just want to see a dancing whale. Though I have to say, the whole “Trainer” thing does sound kinda lame.

Shempu: Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! You want to see a dancing whale, huh? You weren’t saying that the other day when I was doing the Lambada in the living room.

Cam: That’s because A) Thongs on whales aren’t appealing, and B) I was trying to eat at the time.

Jim: Fascinating stuff, Marshall. I’ve never been to Sea World, and so I can’t evaluate whether the criticism is fair. I do know the Baltimore Aquarium, a pretty darn good one, does a good show with quite a bit of education of species, etc.

I have been to the National Zoo quite a bit, and the last time I was there (summer 2004, I think? Hey, I’ve been out of the country for two years) it looked more than a little run down. I’ll have to check it out to see if the facilities have improved.

So, if you saw the post about In-n-Out, you know that I’m in Los Angeles. I’ve come west to attend Windpower 2007, a major convention and trade show put on by my client, the American Wind Energy Association. (And I should say that I almost never blog about my clients. Indeed, this will be only the second time. But my test is simple: I would blog about this even if my client wasn’t involved. And I promise that my coverage will reflect the fact that I like both my client and the issue.)

I arrived Saturday, and watched as exhibitors put the finishing touches on nearly 100,000 square feet of exhibitions. The floor is, in a word, incredible. Every facet of the industry is represented. From the major players like GE, Vestas, and Clipper that build the massive turbines and generators to the folks who build every component of those turbines. (Yesterday, for reasons that remain a mystery even to me, I snapped a photo of a table full of pipes and conduit. I’m telling you, they have everything here.) They even have small turbines that you can add to your home or business.

A few months ago, I wrote a post about my visit to a wind farm in rural Pennsylvania. The title of the post was “Wind Energy is for Real”. After seeing the show floor here at Windpower, that title seems even more unnecessary and silly than it did at the time. Don’t believe me? Check out the show’s Flickr feed. (Full disclosure: I’ve had the privilege of shooting some of the show’s photos with my cool new Cannon Digital Rebel XTI.) You’ll see unbelievable displays, including a complete “nacelle” — that’s the part of the turbine that sits on top of the tower and houses the generator — brought in by Spanish turbine maker Gamesa. The nacelle weighs 170,000 pounds and was positioned to the millimeter on the show floor to ensure that it wouldn’t fall through the floor into the parking garage below.

I have to say though, in my personal opinion, the coolest display at the show isn’t the giant nacelle. It’s the Vestas booth, which brings home the advantages of wind energy in the starkest possible terms.

Last week, Jim and I debated whether and how it was appropriate to combat global warming. Here’s a great example of how we can do it in a way that helps our environment, and creates new jobs in a high-tech manufacturing industry.

Indeed, just last week, the National Association of Manufactures Shoptalk blog wrote favorably about wind power.

As I commented to a friend at the time, finally, we have a way to help the environment that left and right can agree on.

I’ll be reporting from Windpower 2007 as the week goes on. So will a number of other great bloggers including our friends from Green Options, Treehugger, New Energy News and others. Thus far, the folks at Renewable Energy Access are providing the best minute-by-minute coverage.

If you have comments or questions, throw them in the thread below. I’ll try to answer them whenever I can.

One of my Edel-colleagues is working on a master’s thesis, wherein he is studying the impact of RSS on how people consume information on the net. He’s prepared a short survey. Do him a favor and go through it. The more data he collects, the better his study will be.

Take the survey here.

Shempu: Wheee! I like surveys. I like to click things with my flippers!

Cam: Sorry about that Marshall. I left the door to the bathroom open and Shempu got out of the tub.

Jim: Sigh. I hate Shempu.

Marshall: Here, Shempu. Have a fish. Good boy. Now back in the tub with you.

Cam, do you find Shempu takes full advantage of RSS?

Cam: I’m surprised Shempu can find the computer, so I’d be shocked if he uses RSS feeds. I know I don’t. I’m not sure why really, other than the fact that I enjoy surfing around from one site to another.

My company, Edelman, last evening welcomed Capt. John Powers, an Iraq war vet with an extraordinary idea. Capt. Powers screened a documentary called Gunner Palace and talked with the audience for more than an hour about his idea for helping kids in Iraq. Unfortunately, I didn’t get to go to the presentation, but my friend Jeff Harrell did, and he tells the story a hell of a lot better than I could have.

The tale opens this way:

Jon Powers never meant to become a soldier. He wanted to be a teacher. He joined the ROTC not out of an overwhelming sense of patriotism, but because the program paid for college. He graduated in 2000 with a degree in education, a second lieutenant’s bar and a debt to his country. It was a debt he was happy to repay: three years and out, and back to the life to which he’d aspired, the life of a schoolteacher.

Jon was stationed in Germany on September 11, 2001.

Seriously — you need to follow the link, go to Jeff’s blog and read the every word.

The central element:

In late 2003, Jon was on a routine — if anything in such a place can be called routine — humanitarian mission to a Baghdad orphanage called St. Hannah’s when one of the nuns took him aside. She asked him not to come visit the children again. If the insurgents, who were always watching, saw the American soldiers visiting the orphanage again, she said, they would massacre the children.

Jon Powers never meant to be a soldier. He wanted to be a teacher. He didn’t want to put kids in danger. He wanted to take care of them.

It was in that moment, that horrible, sinking moment, that the idea for War Kids Relief was born.

Here’s a bit more:

He never forgot those kids, the kids he helped there, the kids he and the other Gunners inadvertently put in harm’s way.

See, Jon got to come home. Jon and the other Gunners did their time in Iraq, they served their fourteen months, and then they got to come home.

But those kids are still there.

The ones that haven’t been murdered, anyway.

In November 2005, Jon launched War Kids Relief, a program of the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation. Not to support the war and not to impede it, but simply to help twelve million Iraqi kids grow up a little safer and with a little more hope.

And the final bit:

The soldiers in Iraq have done their jobs, and we honor them for it, and we thank them for their continued sacrifice. But what Iraq needs now is not just soldiers, but teachers.

Jon Powers never meant to become a soldier. He wanted to be a teacher.

The VVAF is accepting donations. You can give as little as $2.

I’ve visited the VVAF’s site and made my contribution. I hope you will, too.

And I’ll just add in passing how great it is that the place I work had the chance to have Capt. Powers in to talk about his experiences, and his amazing idea.

More about the War Kids Relief effort here.

UPDATE: When you make your contribution, make sure to mark the option on the left side for supporting kids in Iraq.

UPDATE II: Jim comments over at TKS.