I'm a stay at home Dad of 2 sons and the supporting partner of an incredible woman / physician / leader in her practice. I was raised by a young, single Dad and surrounded by 'traditional' masculinity.
Positive masculinity to me embraces sensitivity and flexibility as strengths. I try to lead by example by volunteering in my community, practicing self-care, and being present for my family.
I'm doing my best to just be a positive person - a thoughtful, gentle, caring human being - and in doing those things and acting in ways that are aligned with my own personal North Star, I'm modeling a different type of 'masculinity' for my sons and others along my path (fellow dads, other kids at my sons' elementary school, etc).
I've thought quite a lot about what constitutes being positively masculine. To me, it translates to "which qualities would I like to have as a man ?". And I finally realized I appreciate all these qualities in women too.
So I've given up on the question "how to be a good man", and transformed it in "how to be a good person" :)
Thank you for getting at the historical, political, material roots of gender oppression for men and women. Any writing that goes beyond presenting these problems as if they exist in a contextless background is something I'm going to dig into. Knowing that you're a leftist, have you read any of Silvia Federici's work? She has some great writings on social reproduction and the transitions from feudalism to capitalism.
Wonderful article! I enjoyed reading it a lot. Two close friends and I have 3 y/o daughters and infant sons. All of our boys are so much more sensitive. We’re excited to see how they develop within a supportive and loving community.
I don’t know if masculinity and femininity are real (instead of arbitrary). But, I do think there is one main important difference in biological men and women which is that the egg in a woman exists from in utero but the sperm is produced continuously. As a result, the egg is susceptible to accumulation of toxins or really any extreme environment. Some cultural and psychological epiphenomena may result as men can move towards more risk taking or freedom of nourishment while women should limit fish intake etc. so as to preserve egg quality.
Thanks for reading and commenting, Amy! I'm super curious about biological differences. I think gender is socialized, but there are biological sex differences. I want to read more about those differences, so I have the facts. That's one of my goals this year!
The biological sex differences are indeed interesting but also require context. They are nearly meaningless without scarcity. The capacity of the male to be healthy with lower body fat, for example, would have been meaningful when food was scarce and maintaining reproductive and lactation capacity was needed. All of the differences have a similar significance. The cultures decision to hold onto or create deeper meaning from these realities which persist beyond functional times is the most interesting to explore for me.. I suspect much of the rigidity is due to a lack of cultural energy and healthy integration allowing new stories to form
Just finding this newsletter, and what a great intro topic to start with! As a newly minted dad, I think my concept of positive masculinity is really a brand of positive humanity. I want my 2 kids growing up to believe in things that matter to all of us: bodily autonomy, consent, compassion, and honest communication.
I love this take. I'm really starting to question the usefulness of the term "masculinity" when it comes to talk about what cis men should and shouldn't do. I think what we should aspire to is, as you said, positive humanity.
This was a great article! I enjoyed reading and I like that you debunked some common myths about emotions and masculinity. If I had to answer what does positive masculinity look like? In my opinion, the number one thing would be being able to express a wide range of emotions [and even more points if you are in tune with your own emotional state and able to regulate and express emotions. This is something I require for both genders as it's a pretty difficult skill.] Secondly, would be self-care. I am big on self care myself. So I encourage men to also do what they need to do in order to be the healthiest version of themselves. Therapy, doctors appointments, male grooming, hobbies, etc. Nurturing is another masculine quality I like. I am a very physically affectionate person so I like men that are comfortable with cuddling, kissing, holding hands, hugs lol give me all of it. GREEN FLAG! Also along with the nurturing quality I appreciate when men are authentic and honest [I like these qualities in anyone to be honest its a good foundation for all relationships]. I feel that attributes like being a protector or a provider require a bit more nuance. I don't naturally expect a man to protect me [I know crazy right?] but I would appreciate if he does protect me or even if he can't physically protect me he looks out for my safety (calls me to make sure I got home safe or I share my location so he knows where I am, etc.) Those are simple ways after you have built trust to let someone know you care about their well-being. As far as being a provider, I am bias 😂 baby, life cost money. And you better not come without any!
I have this idealized vision that we can still adopt "traditional" views of a protective provider type of masculinity, but it needs to be flexible for it to be positive. We have to remember to see men (and people overall) as multi-dimensional.
One can be dominant/confident in one aspect of life, AND be uncertain/timid in another. Imo, things become toxic once we impose the idea of ALWAYS having to be "the man" in everything, and taking one facet of a person as a representation of a whole.
I generally agree with that. I just don’t think we should conflate masculinity with being a provider, being dominant, being confident, etc. Those are human things.
I see a lot of parallels to the ongoing conversation about Whiteness and culture/cultural appropriation. Because "White" is not a culture, and was created and defined by "not being Black," it is an identity devoid of characteristics. Hence no White culture, but there is Irish culture and Italian culture and so on and so forth.
Masculinity in modern society is defined by "not feminine" and is therefore lacking in characteristics. I find it easier to describe characteristics of positive masculinity by focusing on specific subtypes of men that I've seen who display an identity that isn't just "trying not to seem like a woman." There are many masculinities, and they don't all have the same characteristics.
Thank you for opening up this conversation. I’m not a man and therefore commenting on this from a female perspective - but it seems to me than in both genders (and depending what culture you’re from) there is a lot of conforming to ideals and repression of certain emotions. Positive masculinity (and positive femininity by default) therefore would be an enlightenment and ability to feel the full range of emotions freely, and to not conform to cultural norms. I appreciate your willingness to explore this. Definitely not a fan of alpha males!
Powerful and true statements throughout this piece. I have to believe that men do not really want to go back to that mythical "traditional period". But because many are lost that may appear the easiest path when, in fact, it is a soulless path.
...“traditional masculinity” limits our humanity. It ties our self-worth to productivity. It makes us look down on women and other people with marginalized gender expressions. It makes us lonely, less healthy, and less fulfilled.
I enjoyed your thoughtful post. It's dovetailed with a book I listened to recently: For the Love of Men.
What makes for positive masculinity? Being emotionally vulnerable. Adjusting the idea of "provider" to include non-monetary providing, including providing comfort and domestic labor. Doing the same things for men as for women (holding the door for them, helping them with a big load, hugging them). Doing the same things for women as for men (speaking to them with respect, listening to them, accepting their influence).
Oh, also: In For the Love of Men, she talks at the end about how when men were asked "how to be a good man," they supplied much more positive things than when asked "how to be a real man." Focus more on the good man and less on the real man.
I followed the link expecting to find the origins of the "gender binary" idea.
Instead I find this quote:
Many studies on the gender binary and its origins argue that colonisation introduced harmful gender-based roles and behaviours.
And this one:
The gender binary didn’t just come from one source. It was a product of European colonialism, from countries like Britain and Portugal, which forced Western ideals onto racialised and Indigenous people.
What am I to take from this? That gender only started because of colonialism?
So the gender binary didn't originate in the colonialist's home country? They created the practice when they started colonizing?
So no gender roles existed in pre-colonial times?
But every feminist argues that gender roles existed in those times, and that's where we should all look if we intend to find the roots of the patriarchy.
Even the dissertation that this same article cites to support the claim that gender binary didn't originate from one source explicitly says that gender roles existed in pre-colonial times.
It's almost like people are so afraid of certain topics, they are unwilling to actually explore them and instead take whatever the cultural representatives say as gospel, even when what the representatives are saying is intended to further an ideological narrative, is unsupported by facts, or objectively inaccurate.
Why do we now live in an age where people's feelings are more important than what is objectively true, particularly if the people can claim some kind of victimhood?
Or has it always been like this and the internet just conspired to make it worse?
Sometimes I read about what went on during the Crusades and I wonder to myself ... Wait? These Christians, these royals, these preachers and philosophers, these warriors acting at their direction, these regular folk attending all these public spectacles and telling lies about their neighbors to have them denounced as heretics...
Thanks for reading and commenting. I think my answer to your questions is that the gender binary is newer than the concept of gender. The gender binary is the idea that everyone is either a man or woman, and therefore everyone is either "naturally" designed to provide and protect or "naturally" designed to be more emotional and care for children. Capitalism intensified the existing gender roles in colonial countries. There were gender roles, but the lines between genders were more blurred than they expected to be now.
we could also ask what kind of suffering leads the rich and powerful to need to become more rich and powerful--and importantly, what can we do to heal them
I enjoy your writing and perspective. It's not just men enforcing 'traditional masculinity' tropes though. How do you have conversations with women who uphold patriarchial and misogynistic views (not all women, obviously) against their own best interest?
100% Agree. I've never been like your typical guy. Plus, I'm Autistic which, obviously complicates things with all my relationships. My friends have almost always been women.
I'm a stay at home Dad of 2 sons and the supporting partner of an incredible woman / physician / leader in her practice. I was raised by a young, single Dad and surrounded by 'traditional' masculinity.
Positive masculinity to me embraces sensitivity and flexibility as strengths. I try to lead by example by volunteering in my community, practicing self-care, and being present for my family.
I'm doing my best to just be a positive person - a thoughtful, gentle, caring human being - and in doing those things and acting in ways that are aligned with my own personal North Star, I'm modeling a different type of 'masculinity' for my sons and others along my path (fellow dads, other kids at my sons' elementary school, etc).
👏🏼
I've thought quite a lot about what constitutes being positively masculine. To me, it translates to "which qualities would I like to have as a man ?". And I finally realized I appreciate all these qualities in women too.
So I've given up on the question "how to be a good man", and transformed it in "how to be a good person" :)
Same! That’s why I didn’t include “masculinity” in the title of the newsletter and put it in quotes in the headline of this post. Totally agree.
Thank you for getting at the historical, political, material roots of gender oppression for men and women. Any writing that goes beyond presenting these problems as if they exist in a contextless background is something I'm going to dig into. Knowing that you're a leftist, have you read any of Silvia Federici's work? She has some great writings on social reproduction and the transitions from feudalism to capitalism.
Great work!
Thanks, Jacqueline! Silvia is one of my biggest influences. She’s amazing?
Amazing!
Absolutely! I've learned so much from her over the years.
Wonderful article! I enjoyed reading it a lot. Two close friends and I have 3 y/o daughters and infant sons. All of our boys are so much more sensitive. We’re excited to see how they develop within a supportive and loving community.
I don’t know if masculinity and femininity are real (instead of arbitrary). But, I do think there is one main important difference in biological men and women which is that the egg in a woman exists from in utero but the sperm is produced continuously. As a result, the egg is susceptible to accumulation of toxins or really any extreme environment. Some cultural and psychological epiphenomena may result as men can move towards more risk taking or freedom of nourishment while women should limit fish intake etc. so as to preserve egg quality.
Thanks for reading and commenting, Amy! I'm super curious about biological differences. I think gender is socialized, but there are biological sex differences. I want to read more about those differences, so I have the facts. That's one of my goals this year!
The biological sex differences are indeed interesting but also require context. They are nearly meaningless without scarcity. The capacity of the male to be healthy with lower body fat, for example, would have been meaningful when food was scarce and maintaining reproductive and lactation capacity was needed. All of the differences have a similar significance. The cultures decision to hold onto or create deeper meaning from these realities which persist beyond functional times is the most interesting to explore for me.. I suspect much of the rigidity is due to a lack of cultural energy and healthy integration allowing new stories to form
Just finding this newsletter, and what a great intro topic to start with! As a newly minted dad, I think my concept of positive masculinity is really a brand of positive humanity. I want my 2 kids growing up to believe in things that matter to all of us: bodily autonomy, consent, compassion, and honest communication.
I love this take. I'm really starting to question the usefulness of the term "masculinity" when it comes to talk about what cis men should and shouldn't do. I think what we should aspire to is, as you said, positive humanity.
This was a great article! I enjoyed reading and I like that you debunked some common myths about emotions and masculinity. If I had to answer what does positive masculinity look like? In my opinion, the number one thing would be being able to express a wide range of emotions [and even more points if you are in tune with your own emotional state and able to regulate and express emotions. This is something I require for both genders as it's a pretty difficult skill.] Secondly, would be self-care. I am big on self care myself. So I encourage men to also do what they need to do in order to be the healthiest version of themselves. Therapy, doctors appointments, male grooming, hobbies, etc. Nurturing is another masculine quality I like. I am a very physically affectionate person so I like men that are comfortable with cuddling, kissing, holding hands, hugs lol give me all of it. GREEN FLAG! Also along with the nurturing quality I appreciate when men are authentic and honest [I like these qualities in anyone to be honest its a good foundation for all relationships]. I feel that attributes like being a protector or a provider require a bit more nuance. I don't naturally expect a man to protect me [I know crazy right?] but I would appreciate if he does protect me or even if he can't physically protect me he looks out for my safety (calls me to make sure I got home safe or I share my location so he knows where I am, etc.) Those are simple ways after you have built trust to let someone know you care about their well-being. As far as being a provider, I am bias 😂 baby, life cost money. And you better not come without any!
I have this idealized vision that we can still adopt "traditional" views of a protective provider type of masculinity, but it needs to be flexible for it to be positive. We have to remember to see men (and people overall) as multi-dimensional.
One can be dominant/confident in one aspect of life, AND be uncertain/timid in another. Imo, things become toxic once we impose the idea of ALWAYS having to be "the man" in everything, and taking one facet of a person as a representation of a whole.
I generally agree with that. I just don’t think we should conflate masculinity with being a provider, being dominant, being confident, etc. Those are human things.
I see a lot of parallels to the ongoing conversation about Whiteness and culture/cultural appropriation. Because "White" is not a culture, and was created and defined by "not being Black," it is an identity devoid of characteristics. Hence no White culture, but there is Irish culture and Italian culture and so on and so forth.
Masculinity in modern society is defined by "not feminine" and is therefore lacking in characteristics. I find it easier to describe characteristics of positive masculinity by focusing on specific subtypes of men that I've seen who display an identity that isn't just "trying not to seem like a woman." There are many masculinities, and they don't all have the same characteristics.
Thank you for opening up this conversation. I’m not a man and therefore commenting on this from a female perspective - but it seems to me than in both genders (and depending what culture you’re from) there is a lot of conforming to ideals and repression of certain emotions. Positive masculinity (and positive femininity by default) therefore would be an enlightenment and ability to feel the full range of emotions freely, and to not conform to cultural norms. I appreciate your willingness to explore this. Definitely not a fan of alpha males!
Powerful and true statements throughout this piece. I have to believe that men do not really want to go back to that mythical "traditional period". But because many are lost that may appear the easiest path when, in fact, it is a soulless path.
...“traditional masculinity” limits our humanity. It ties our self-worth to productivity. It makes us look down on women and other people with marginalized gender expressions. It makes us lonely, less healthy, and less fulfilled.
I enjoyed your thoughtful post. It's dovetailed with a book I listened to recently: For the Love of Men.
What makes for positive masculinity? Being emotionally vulnerable. Adjusting the idea of "provider" to include non-monetary providing, including providing comfort and domestic labor. Doing the same things for men as for women (holding the door for them, helping them with a big load, hugging them). Doing the same things for women as for men (speaking to them with respect, listening to them, accepting their influence).
Oh, also: In For the Love of Men, she talks at the end about how when men were asked "how to be a good man," they supplied much more positive things than when asked "how to be a real man." Focus more on the good man and less on the real man.
I really don't understand this perspective or the people peddling it.
You said this in the article above:
Even the idea that there are two distinct genders—"the gender binary”—is only a few hundred years old.
And you cited to: https://sparkandco.co.uk/blog/lgbtq-history-month-history-gender-binary
I followed the link expecting to find the origins of the "gender binary" idea.
Instead I find this quote:
Many studies on the gender binary and its origins argue that colonisation introduced harmful gender-based roles and behaviours.
And this one:
The gender binary didn’t just come from one source. It was a product of European colonialism, from countries like Britain and Portugal, which forced Western ideals onto racialised and Indigenous people.
What am I to take from this? That gender only started because of colonialism?
So the gender binary didn't originate in the colonialist's home country? They created the practice when they started colonizing?
So no gender roles existed in pre-colonial times?
But every feminist argues that gender roles existed in those times, and that's where we should all look if we intend to find the roots of the patriarchy.
Even the dissertation that this same article cites to support the claim that gender binary didn't originate from one source explicitly says that gender roles existed in pre-colonial times.
That is here: https://globalstudies.trinity.duke.edu/sites/globalstudies.trinity.duke.edu/files/file-attachments/v2d2_Lugones.pdf
What is with this lazy argumentation?
It's almost like people are so afraid of certain topics, they are unwilling to actually explore them and instead take whatever the cultural representatives say as gospel, even when what the representatives are saying is intended to further an ideological narrative, is unsupported by facts, or objectively inaccurate.
Why do we now live in an age where people's feelings are more important than what is objectively true, particularly if the people can claim some kind of victimhood?
Or has it always been like this and the internet just conspired to make it worse?
Sometimes I read about what went on during the Crusades and I wonder to myself ... Wait? These Christians, these royals, these preachers and philosophers, these warriors acting at their direction, these regular folk attending all these public spectacles and telling lies about their neighbors to have them denounced as heretics...
These are the good guys?
Thanks for reading and commenting. I think my answer to your questions is that the gender binary is newer than the concept of gender. The gender binary is the idea that everyone is either a man or woman, and therefore everyone is either "naturally" designed to provide and protect or "naturally" designed to be more emotional and care for children. Capitalism intensified the existing gender roles in colonial countries. There were gender roles, but the lines between genders were more blurred than they expected to be now.
The articles you cite don't support this position you are articulating.
Gender is different from gender roles and gender roles are different from sex.
And as far as I can determine, in humans at least, sex is binary. You are either male or female, irrespective of your gender or your gender roles.
I got the “intensified” point from Nancy Fraser’s first answer in this interview: https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/nancy-fraser-interview-capitalism-crisis-of-care/
Appreciate you.
Thank you for the information.
🙏🏾
Journey continues.
we could also ask what kind of suffering leads the rich and powerful to need to become more rich and powerful--and importantly, what can we do to heal them
I enjoy your writing and perspective. It's not just men enforcing 'traditional masculinity' tropes though. How do you have conversations with women who uphold patriarchial and misogynistic views (not all women, obviously) against their own best interest?
100% Agree. I've never been like your typical guy. Plus, I'm Autistic which, obviously complicates things with all my relationships. My friends have almost always been women.