Why Men Need Friends

November is recognized as Men’s Mental Health Month (Movember), so it seemed apropos to discuss an important issue around men and mental health: the declining level of friendships that men have. Friends (i.e., community) are categorically important for good mental health, and many great historical thinkers and modern researchers have come to the same conclusion. Robert Putnam wrote his famous book Bowling Alone to document the atomization of society that he connected to the decline of bowling leagues. Of course, that atomization is not directly caused by fewer bowling leagues, but it is a stand in for how social organizations and individualized entertainment (television, video games) caused people to spend less time with friends. In addition, there has been a major decline in socializing institutions for boys to make friends as society decided boys no longer needed separate spaces to flourish and grow. This has had a tremendously deleterious impact on society, especially men, and the problem has only gotten worse since Putnam first offered his thesis in 2000.

According to survey data by the American Enterprise Institute’s Survey Center on American life, there are several indicators of problems men face with friendships. Only 48% of men are completely or very satisfied with their number of friends. The percentage of men who have at least six close friends went from 55% in 1990 to only 27% in 2021; in the same time period the number of men with zero close friends went from 3% to 15%. The fact more men have fewer friends is overall negative for their mental health, and multiple studies have demonstrated this.

Studies on the importance of male friendships are varied and offer interesting insights for different problems faced in life. For example, one study showed that friends offer a bulwark against psychopathology when there are weak parental structures. The research also shows that male friendships are seen as more helpful and loyal than cross-sex friendships. Then there is a fascinating study on “bromances” that found men who had these types of friendships ranked them as emotionally intimate and beneficial as heterosexual romantic relationships. These are, of course, merely broad advantages from male friendships, but there are studies that show direct and concrete benefits. As the Mayo Clinic notes , “Adults with strong social connections have a reduced risk of many significant health problems, including depression, high blood pressure and an unhealthy body mass index (BMI).” In a meta-analysis of 148 studies, researchers found that there was “a 50% increased likelihood of survival for participants with stronger social relationships” in all-cause mortality. Another longitudinal study found that friendships improved academic performance in school.

The Philosophy of Friendship

From the Hellenistic philosophers to the biblical prophets, our greatest sages recognized how necessary such friendships were. In the world of Ancient Greece, this type of love was called philia as the Greeks recognized many different types of love depending on the kind of relationship. Aristotle offered many examples of philia, including lifelong friends, fellow soldiers, members of the same tribe, or even city-states. In The Nicomachean Ethics (Book VIII), the great philosopher offers us wisdom as to why friendships matter. He wrote, “In poverty and other misfortunes of life, true friends are a sure refuge. The young they keep out of mischief; to the old they are a comfort and aid in their weakness, and those in the prime of life they incite to noble deeds.” Furthermore, for Aristotle, friends are one soul in two bodies.

The biblical authors also promote intimate friendships as an important part of life. Proverbs 27:17 declares, “Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another.” Male friendships are important because they make us better versions of ourselves, which cannot happen in isolation. John of Patmos wrote in his Gospel, “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). That chapter in John is Jesus talking to the Apostles, and he is explicitly acknowledging the sacrifice he will be making for his friends. Any soldier or warrior can describe the extraordinary bonds developed in war, and they know precisely what Jesus is describing. However, male friendships are about more than making ourselves better or sacrificing for a noble cause. Friendships also speak to the higher order of the soul. As the Christian author C.S. Lewis wrote his book on love, “Friendship is unnecessary, like philosophy, like art, like the universe itself (for God did not need to create). It has no survival value; rather it is one of those things which give value to survival.” (The Four Loves, p. 71). That is to say, friendship matters because it is fundamentally important to give life meaning.

?

“Patriarchy” and History

Some modernist and postmodernist commentary on the lack of intimate male friendships surround the idea that “patriarchy” has socialized a type of masculinity that denudes male friendships of deep emotional connections. Examples of such shoddy research are here and here . However, this assessment is not only demonstrably fallacious, it is rooted in subpar research by academics with an agenda. What people criticize when it comes to isolating tendencies and lack of intimacy are not endemic to Western views of masculinity. Rather, this is a holdover from Victorian values of the upper class in Britain and America that loathed all emotions in both men and women. (This is the same time period that developed the idea of “hysteria ” for women who were too emotional, an actual medical diagnosis at the time.)

Both modern anecdotal examples and observed history show the utter nonsense of the position that highly masculine spaces and male socializing institutions prevent emotional intimacy. Concerning modern anecdotal examples, hyper masculine spaces tend to create the most intimate and long-lasting male friendships imaginable. These include fraternities, sports, and the military. VA News described such friendships, “The camaraderie and shared experiences that come with serving in the armed forces create friendships that can last a lifetime.” A primary reason such spaces create life-long friends is the shared tribulations. Robert Cialdini articulates this in his book Influence in which he discusses how some forms of suffering (hazing rituals, bootcamp, summer practices) lead to a more unified group. Male friendships born in these hyper masculine spaces tend to be deeper and longer lasting than friendships made elsewhere.

[Note: I recommend reading the research by Anthony Bradley on this subject, especially his latest book Heroic Fraternities. Dr. Bradley also keeps a "masculinity resources list" available here .]

Historically, men had significantly intimate friendships that were well documented, and these friendships existed in societies that were far more "patriarchal" than our own. They were considered--even through the Elizabethan period--as the highest level of intimacy. The documentary evidence from the 18th and 19th centuries shows an intense bonding and affectionate language. For example, the great orator and senator Daniel Webster would typically begin letters to his male friends with “My lovely boy” and end them with “Very affectionately yours.” Even the epitome of masculinity Theodore Roosevelt was known to use sentimental language that would make men today uncomfortable in its level of saccharine overtures. Famous examples of well-documented deep male friendships include Alexander Hamilton and John Laurens, George Washington and Robert Morris, Richard Somers and Stephen Decatur, William Clark and Meriwether Lewis, Robert Fulton and Joel Barlow, and William Wirt and Dabney Carr. Of course, then we have the famous literary examples of Sherlock Holmes and John Watson, Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn, Fitzwilliam Darcy and Charles Bingley, Hamlet and Horatio, and Pip and Herbert.

It is clear from observable examples and documented evidence that historically men were able to have great friendships with each other in which they supported one another. Masculinity is not anathema to male friendships, and in fact, the evidence seems to support it helps those friendships form.

Conclusion

Returning to the biblical narrative, the Deuteronomistic historian’s narrative gives one of the most potent examples of male friendship in David and Jonathan. When David and Jonathan met, they immediately had a deep, lasting kinship in which Jonathan “loved [David] as his own soul” (1 Samuel 18:1-5). Their friendship was extraordinary because it represents all the most important parts of male friendships. Jonathan warned David of the threats Saul made against him and advocated on his behalf, speaking well of David to Saul (1 Samuel 19:1-7). During the continued conflict between David and Saul, Jonathan offered spiritual support to David as well (1 Samuel 23:16). When David found out about Jonathan death, he wrote a lamentation and grieved profusely (2 Samuel 1). Notice each of the points: Jonathan loved, protected, and advocated for his friend even during the hardest of times when it would have been easier to simply abandon him. This example shows what is extraordinary and heartwarming and beautiful in the love and kindness found in male friendships that are completely supportive and uplifting.?That is why men need friends. It improves their lives mentally and spiritually, and that support will help them even in the darkest of days.

Here is to all the amazing men in my life I call friend.