MAMA'S BOYS AND WHY WE LOVE THEM

For the past month, I've been enjoying this early morning ritual of Whatsapping with my Soul Sisters from India, who are three fellow Harlequin/ HarperCollins authors. We text some crazy shit to one another, and in the post-view glory of Captain America: Civil War, we got into a discussion about:

Mama's Boys and Why We Love Them.

We've all heard of super bonds between Fathers and Sons, Mothers and Daughters, Fathers and Daughters and even applaud the examples, going all mushy when we witness them in person or virtually. But then why do we have this slightly negative reaction to the bond between a Mother and Son? 

ma·ma's boy

noun

unpunctuated: mamas boy; noun: mummy's boy; plural noun: mummy's boys; noun:mama's boy; plural noun: mama's boys

1. a boy or man who is excessively influenced by or attached to his mother.

   synonyms:

   milksop, namby-pamby, coward, weakling, mollycoddle;

And I'm thinking, have we as a society failed to understand the Mother and Son bond? We just may have because look who's 

BRINGING THE COOL BACK IN MAMA'S BOYS.

Don't ever mess with Superman's Mama...

Or, Batman's mother...

Even evil gods love their mothers...

Brothers will fight over their mothers...

And the biggest shocker is Spock getting sentimental with his Mama...

And this is why we love these Mama's Boys.

THE MYTH of INVINCIBILITY.

If not immortality, we mortals are obsessed with invincibility. We want no weapon to harm us, no disease to kill us, no misfortune to befall us. If we can't live forever, then we want the next best thing - to live a healthy and prosperous life into an old close-to-forever age.

It's a great aspiration. Something to strive for certainly, this state of invincibility, of being super protected. But, the thing is that the very nature of being mortal means that we can never achieve that goal. We forget that even Superman had Kryptonite to deal with.

Our ancestors did warn us...

What is myth? 

[ mith ]

1. ancient story: a traditional story about heroes or supernatural beings, often attempting to explain the origins of natural phenomena or aspects of human behavior.

Achilles and his pitiful Greek heel: 

The son of a mortal Peleus and the immortal Nereid Thetis, Achilles was the un-defeatable warrior-hero of the Trojan War (or most of it.) It is said that upon his birth, his mother held baby Achilles by his right heel and dipped him in the River Styx to make his body invincible. The catch? Where she caught him - his right heel remained vulnerable causing his fall, and thus the legend of Achilles' Heel was born.

Duryodhana and his vulnerable Indian groin: 

His name itself means "One who can't be defeated" or "great fighter," was the son on of the blind King Dhritarashtra and Queen Gandhari. Gandhari chose to blind-fold herself forever the day she married the blind king because she wished to "see" the world just as her husband did. That act of immense courage (ahem, crack-pot stupidity IMO) pleased the Gods and they granted her a powerful boon. Just before the terrible Mahabharata War began (or during it, I forget) she asked her oldest son, Duryodhana, to come to her unclothed. She untied her blindfold and only for a second opened her eyes (the ones with the power) to sweep them over her son, use the boon to make him invincible. Duryodhana did not strip naked, thinking to cover his groin from his mother (a gentlemen, to be sure) and thus that became the only part of him that remained vulnerable causing his enemy to strike him dead there.

In both Achilles and Duryodhana's cases, the protector strives to protect but fate (nature, understanding, limitations) gets in the way.

What is the lesson we're supposed to learn from these myths? Should we not strive at all as the outcome of our actions may not be in our hands? Can we not survive without might and power? Is vulnerability such a bad thing? Is being human not in our best interests?

(pic source: google search images)