American men don't cry because it is considered not characteristic of men to do so. Only women cry. Cry is a "weakness" characteristic of the femele, and no American male wants to be identified with anything in the least weak or feminine. Crying, in our culture, is identified with childishness, with weakness and dependence. No one likes a cryboby, and we disapprove of crying even in children, discouraging it in them as early as possible. In a land so devoted to the pursuit of happiness as ours, crying really is rather un-American. Adults must learn not to cry in situations in which it is permissible for child to cry. Women being the "weaker" and "dependent" sex, it is only natural that they should cry in certain emotional situations. In women, crying is excusable. But in men, crying is a mark of weakness. So goes the American belief with regard to crying.

"A little man," we impress on our male children, "never cries. Only girls and crybobies do." And so we condition males in America not to cry whenever they feel like doing so. It is not that American males are unable to cry because of some biological time clock within them which causes them to run down in that capacity as they grow older, but that they are trained not to cry. And so the "little man" controls his desire to cry and goes on doing so until he is unable to cry even when he wants to. Thus do we produce a trained incapacity in the American male to cry. And this is bad. Why is it bad? Because crying is a natural function of the human organism which is designed to restore the emotionally disequilibrated person to a state of equilibrium. The return of the disequilibrated organ systems of the body to steady states or-dynamic stability is known as homeostasis. Crying serves a homeostatic function for the organism as a whole. Any interference with homeostasis is likely to be damaging to the organism. And there is good reason to believe that the American male's trained incapacity to cry is seriously damaging to him.

It is unnecessary to cry whenever one wants to cry, but one should be able to cry when one ought to cry - when one needs to cry. For to cry under certain emotionally disequilibrating conditions is necessary for the maintenance of health.

To be human is to weep. The human species is the only one in the whole of animated nature that sheds tears. The trained inability of any human being to weep is lessening of his capacity to be human - a defect which usually goes deeper than the mere inability to cry. And this, among other things, is what American parents - with the best intentions in the world - have achieved for the American male. It is very sad. If we feel like it, let us all have a good cry - and clear our minds of those cobwebs of confusion which have for so long prevented us from understanding the natural necessity of crying.

美國的男子漢一般都不會哭。因為男子漢要哭了，那就被認為這個人不具備男子漢的特征。只有婦女才哭。哭是女性軟弱的表現。不論做什么事，沒有任何一個美國男人想要讓人家認為有絲毫懦弱或者像個老娘們似的。在我們的思想文化觀念當中，哭哭涕涕總是跟孩子氣、懦弱、不能自立聯系在一起的。沒有任何人會喜歡一個哭鬧的孩子，所以即使對兒童們來說，我們也不贊成他們哭，盡可能從很小的時候起，越早越好，鼓勵孩子們不要哭。在像我們這樣一個熱衷于追求幸福快樂的國家里，哭哭涕涕實在不太合乎美國人的風度了。成年人都必須知道，凡在允許小孩子哭的情況下，成年人都不應該哭。因為女性是一種"軟弱的"、"依賴男人的"性別，女性在特定的環境下引起感情波動，若是哭一通也是很自然的。對婦女們來說，哭是可以原諒的。可是對男人來說，哭就會給人留下軟弱無能的印象。于是美國人對于哭泣的看法就這樣產生了。

我們讓我們的男性兒童銘記在心："一個小男子漢永也不會哭的，只有女孩子和剛剛生下來的小娃娃才會哭。"所以每當美國的男性想要哭的時候，我們就訓練他們憋住別哭。這并不是因為他們隨著年齡的增長，體內某個生物鐘上的哭的能力已經消耗殆盡，而是因為他們被訓練的不許哭。于是這"小男子漢"想哭的時候，也老是憋著不哭，憋著憋著一直憋到甚至當他想哭的時候也不會哭了。這樣，我們就致使美國男性被訓練成不會哭的人了。這很不好。為什么不好呢？因為哭是人的有機體中的一種很自然的功能，有一這一功能就是為了讓那些感情上失去了平衡人，能恢復到感情上平衡的狀態。把人體失去了平衡的器官體系恢復到穩定狀態或恢復到正常運作狀態下的穩定狀態，被稱為原狀穩定或體內平衡。對體內平衡的任何干擾都有可能損害人體的有機體。所以，我們有充分的理由相信，把美國男性訓練得不會哭，這會對美國男性造成嚴重的損害。

一個人不論任何時候想哭就哭--這實在是沒有必要；但是當一個人應該哭的時候--也就是一個人需要哭的時候，應該能夠哭出來。因為哭上一通在某咱內心感情失衡的情況下，對保持身體健康是必要的。

只要是人就會落淚，把整個動物世界里，人類這個物種是唯一的會流淚的物種。把一個人訓練成不會落淚的人，這就在降低了他作為一個人所應有的能力。不具備作為一個人所應有的能力，這一缺陷比僅僅是不會哭泣在意義上要深遠得多。而這一點，尤其是這一點，正是那些心懷著人間最美好的用心的美國父母們一心給美國男性養成的。簡直是太可悲了。如果我們想哭的話，那就讓我們好好地哭上一通吧，把那些很長時候以來使我們不能理解哭這種天性的需要、像蜘蛛網一樣束縛人思想的種種糊涂想法，從我們的腦海中清除的干干凈凈吧。