The Dichotomy of Masculinity: Old Narrative vs. New Paradigm
Throughout my life, writing has served as a significant outlet for expression and learning (although I have always felt I wasn’t very good at it). One topic I've consciously sidestepped until now is the widespread conversation about the 'Crisis in Masculinity.' Growing up in the patriarchal society of South Africa, I am well aware of the traditional masculine narrative.
My formative years were marked by a striking sense of detachment from the conventional 'male' activities that were enthusiastically embraced by my peers. Sports team 'tribalism,' boisterous bravado, and the incessant need to be the 'alpha' in the group seemed alien and unappealing to me. Despite these disconnects, I found myself immersed in what is widely considered a traditional male occupation - a martial arts instructor, teaching other men the art of combat.
This irony wasn't lost on me. Even as I excelled in my role, my indifference towards the competitive spirit and my reluctance to engage in the 'alpha' dynamics often cast me as an outsider within my professional sphere. Yet, as I reflect, I realise my inclination towards martial arts wasn't driven by a need to fit in or conform. It was, instead, a cathartic response to my childhood experiences, deeply influenced by the personal trauma endured in my early life at the hands of my mother.
This background, unconventional as it may be, serves as the launchpad from which I explore the existing narratives about masculinity, their impacts, and the need for an evolved understanding - one that embraces the complexity and diversity of masculine experiences in the modern world.
The crisis in masculinity has always been a contentious subject—now more than ever—with its roots deeply entrenched in the divergence of traditional and contemporary perspectives. On one end of the spectrum, the old narrative paints men as tough, rugged providers and protectors, a model fondly referred to as 'Alpha Maleness.' This paradigm has been prevalent for ages and still has a significant grip on many societies today.
In stark contrast, we have a rising tide of 'Wokist' Culture, fueled by the fight for social justice and inclusivity and a renewed perception of masculinity. This paradigm shift seeks to displace the traditional archetype of an Alpha Male with a more evolved, sensitive, and tolerant male figure. However, this change is often misconstrued by proponents of the old narrative as the 'pussification' of masculinity.
The Intersection of Cultural Awakening and Masculinity
It's crucial to mention that this mostly ‘Western’ cultural shift is not merely a matter of men becoming 'softer.' It is a profound cultural awakening, a shift in societal attitudes and behaviours towards the broader spectrum of gender roles and expectations. The purpose is not to emasculate men but to encourage a more comprehensive understanding of masculinity that doesn't confine them to stringent roles and behaviours.
The backlash against this evolution is intense. Some men feel threatened by this shift, clinging tightly to the traditional model of masculinity. They view the dismantling of the old ways as a direct attack on their identity and societal roles.
Jordan B Peterson, a renowned figure in contemporary discussions on masculinity, brings substantial value to the dialogue. Despite this, one of his most quoted remarks, "A harmless man is not a good man. A good man is a very, very dangerous man who has that under voluntary control," has provoked a great deal of controversy and discomfort, including for myself. This quote has resonated within the circles I frequent - those characterised by the presence of 'fighters.' It's often used as a validating mantra for actions that, I would argue, are less than beneficial to the growth and understanding of masculinity.
Stripped of its context and accepted at face value, Peterson's statement appears to propagate a potentially restrictive, if not harmful, view of what constitutes a 'good' man. Nevertheless, the prominence and influence of Peterson's words offer an invaluable opportunity to delve deeper into alternate perspectives on masculinity. This process of examining, challenging, and refining our understanding is critical for evolving our perceptions of masculinity.
The Shortcomings of Peterson's Assertion
At a glance, Peterson seems to advocate that a man's value is inextricably tied to his capacity for being dangerous and subsequent self-control. However, this perspective can be seen as overly reductive, as it implies that 'goodness' is a function of one's potential for harm and ability to manage it. It risks perpetuating the idea that men must inherently be ‘dangerous’ to be valuable, which can feed into damaging stereotypes about masculinity.
The crux of the issue with Peterson's assertion lies in its suggestion that a man's worth—his 'goodness'—is derived from his potential for being dangerous. This perspective not only oversimplifies the concept of 'goodness,' but it also inadvertently endorses a traditional, potentially harmful interpretation of masculinity. For example while personal strength and the ability to defend oneself and others are indeed admirable traits, they should not be the defining characteristic of a man's worth or his 'goodness.' A man's value should instead be evaluated through a broader spectrum of traits, including empathy, kindness, and respect for others, which are often overlooked in the traditional narrative.
Moreover, the idea that men must be dangerous and then exercise self-control over this ‘ability to be dangerous’ oversimplifies human behaviour and moral decision-making. It's crucial to understand that men, like all individuals, can embody a range of behaviours, from being nurturing and empathetic to being assertive and resilient. These qualities do not diminish a man's value or 'goodness.' Peterson's perspective serves to highlight the persistent challenges we face in broadening our understanding of masculinity. We must recognise that masculinity is not a monolithic concept, defined solely by potential dangerousness and controlled aggression, but a spectrum that includes a multitude of behaviours, attitudes, and emotions.
To address the current crisis in masculinity, we need to move beyond these limiting definitions and embrace the diversity and complexity that masculinity can and should represent. Emphasising the balance of personal strength with emotional acuity, empathy, and respect for others, we can start to shape an understanding of masculinity that is not only more realistic but also more beneficial for both men and society.
Clearly, there is a flawed binary perception of masculinity. The prevailing issue here lies in the stark dichotomy we've created around the concept of masculinity. We've painted a binary picture of masculinity: the old versus the new, the Alpha Male versus the Woke Man. Yet, this black-and-white depiction fails to encapsulate the true essence of masculinity, which is as diverse and multifaceted as the men who embody it.
I'd argue that neither the traditional nor the evolving narrative has hit the nail on the head when it comes to defining masculinity. They both seem to oversimplify a complex matter, reducing it to caricatures and stereotypes that do not account for the individuality of men.
Towards an ‘Integrated Masculinity’: A Blended Model
Our society's challenge lies in crafting a narrative that embraces all the nuances and variations of masculinity without fostering division or intolerance. We need to move away from rigid definitions and instead promote a more encompassing and accepting narrative. The key is to respect individual interpretations of masculinity and to value, as I noted earlier, emotional acuity, empathy, and resilience as much as strength, assertiveness, and courage.
In essence, we need to redefine our understanding of masculinity, freeing it from the shackles of stereotypes and allowing it to evolve and adapt to our changing world. The crisis in masculinity is a symptom of our struggle to break free from the confines of the past and embrace a more inclusive, holistic future. Perhaps the solution isn't about choosing between old and new but about finding a balance that respects and values all manifestations of masculinity.
Redefining our understanding of masculinity demands a significant shift from binary models towards a more integrated concept. In this holistic model, often termed as 'Integrated Masculinity,' we find a balance that amalgamates both traditionally masculine traits and the newer, evolving characteristics that the societal discourse is actively encouraging.
Defining Integrated Masculinity
Integrated masculinity isn't a singular, predefined template. It instead revolves around the acceptance of a wider spectrum of attributes and behaviours, allowing each man to define his masculinity independently. It recognises the strengths and merits of both traditional and contemporary concepts of masculinity, integrating them into a more balanced, flexible, and adaptable construct.
This model values emotional acuity and empathy as much as strength and assertiveness. It understands that a man can be nurturing and caring while also being courageous and resilient. It allows room for men to be emotionally expressive without questioning their masculinity and equally respects those who align more with traditional masculine norms. I believe this will be the hardest for many men to get right: accepting how each man defines their masculine independence. To be honest, this may be where most men are struggling right now - not being able to fit into the current ‘binary model’ of masculinity – and as such, end up feeling disenchanted with society and the world at large. It is disorienting and unnerving and makes many men feel the easy path is simply to opt out of society altogether. This not being able to fit in with the ‘binary model’ also invariably pressures many men to choose a side; even though they don’t want to, they try nonetheless (we are social creatures, after all, and we crave and need connection). I am, therefore, not surprised by the rise of personalities like Andrew Tate.
Implementing the Integrated Masculinity Model
Implementation of the integrated masculinity model begins with societal acceptance. We must dismantle toxic stereotypes and biases that confine men to rigid roles and expectations. Education, media, and social institutions play a critical role in this transformation. They should emphasise teaching young boys that it's okay to express emotions, be kind and nurturing, and be strong and resilient (is this really that different for any human?)
Simultaneously, we should encourage open conversations about masculinity, allowing space for men to share their experiences, fears, and hopes. These dialogues will facilitate understanding and empathy, providing opportunities for men to redefine their masculinity on their terms.
The Evolution of Masculinity: A Continuous Journey
In conclusion, it's important to understand that the evolution of masculinity is an ongoing process. As societal attitudes and understanding evolve, so should our concept of masculinity. While encompassing various traits, the integrated model should remain flexible and open to further evolution.
Integrated masculinity aims to remove the tension between the 'old' and the 'new' by acknowledging that masculinity cannot be boxed into singular definitions. It's about time we expanded our narrative to reflect the rich diversity and individuality that men bring to their masculine identities. Only then can we truly address the crisis in masculinity, moving towards a society that appreciates, respects, and values all manifestations of masculinity.
SUMMARY OF THIS ARTICLES MAIN TAKEAWAY POINTS
The author reflects on his unique experience growing up in South Africa, feeling detached from traditional masculine activities but ironically becoming a martial arts instructor, exploring his perspective on the current crisis in masculinity.
There is a contrast between the traditional 'Alpha Male' narrative and the emerging 'Wokist' Culture, which encourages a more inclusive and evolved perception of masculinity.
This cultural shift is not about men becoming 'softer' but aims to encourage a broader understanding of masculinity that does not restrict men to specific roles and behaviours.
There's significant backlash against this shift, with some men feeling threatened by the perceived attack on their traditional identity and societal roles.
The author critiques Jordan B. Peterson's assertion that a good man is a dangerous man who can control his dangerousness, arguing it oversimplifies and potentially harms the understanding of masculinity.
The author emphasises the importance of evaluating a man's worth through a broader spectrum of traits, such as empathy, kindness, and respect for others, which are often overlooked in the traditional narrative.
The issue lies in the dichotomy created around the concept of masculinity: the old versus the new, the Alpha Male versus the Woke Man. Both narratives oversimplify and don't fully capture the complexity and diversity of masculinity.
Society needs to move beyond rigid definitions and promote a more inclusive narrative that respects individual interpretations of masculinity. This involves a shift from binary models towards a more integrated concept, termed 'Integrated Masculinity.'
Integrated masculinity is not a predefined template but an acceptance of a wider spectrum of attributes and behaviours, integrating traditional and contemporary concepts of masculinity into a balanced, flexible construct.
Implementation of this model involves societal acceptance, dismantling toxic stereotypes and biases, and promoting education that fosters emotional expression, kindness, strength, and resilience.
The evolution of masculinity is an ongoing process. The integrated model aims to remove the tension between the 'old' and the 'new,' recognising that masculinity cannot be confined to singular definitions.
The ultimate goal is to move towards a society that appreciates, respects, and values all manifestations of masculinity.