Ideas of masculinity change with culture. The reigning version was invented in the U.S. around WWII in order to ship men to die in war while selling cars, household appliances and houses in the suburbs to those who made it back.¹ Spread through ads and Hollywood movies, it worked for war and the post-war economic boom. So many things have changed since, but others not so much.
Current western notions of masculinity still center around power, competition and dominance. The image of the strongest most successful “alpha” male ruling above all others in a heavenly ordained natural hierarchy is very much alive (and growing!). The term comes from the long debunked myth of the Alpha Male. In 1970, North American biologist L. David Mech described wolves in captivity fighting each other until one emerged as the leader, or ‘alpha’.
Turns out he had seen the equivalent of wolf inmates fighting, but in the wild ‘alphas’ are the loving, caring parents in a wolf pack. He very publicly and consistently corrected himself since but it changed nothing —he couldn’t stop his own book from being reprinted! The alpha narrative was a perfect ingredient in the ‘masculinity as competition’ Kool-Aid. Politicians, business schools and other charlatans keep spreading it more than 20 years after it’s been debunked.
Since then it’s been widely proven that social animals choose leaders based on trust and reliability, not strength or violence. They are changed if they lose that trust. We can still see this style of leadership in human societies that have resisted capitalism and colonization, chiefly indigenous cultures all over the globe.² Leaders don’t ‘rule’ but instead serve the community through empathy, mediation and care; all typically perceived as “feminine” qualities.
Unifying the “masculine” and “feminine” has been seen as virtuous or sacred in many places and moments in time: Ancient Egyptian leaders adopted gender fluidity as a symbol of divine power, the samurai learned flower arrangement and incense arts as part of their warrior training and, to this day and despite the best efforts of colonization, gender non-conforming individuals are still seen as spiritual leaders in many cultures.³
The “masculinity is dominance” Kool-Aid glamorizes and rewards violence against ourselves and others. It disconnects us from our bodies, needs and feelings so we can become agents who keep perpetuating that violence. Considering the state of the world, it seems like a very small amount of people are benefiting from all of this. Perhaps it’s time for a different drink?
Footnotes
¹ References to gender roles constructed to benefit war and capitalism borrow heavily from the 2024 expo Subúrbia: La construcció del somni americà (Suburbia, The Construction of the American Dream) at the Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona. Both Catalan and Spanish editions of the catalog contain English alongside it (ISBN: 978-84-19091-90-1).
² Some examples include the Iroquois, Andean and Amazonian tribes in America, the Igbo in Africa, Maori in Oceania, Ainu and Orang Asli in Asia, the Sami in Europe.
³ In Polynesia —the fa’afafine in Samoa, fakaleiti in Tonga and māhū in Hawaii and Tahiti— and many American Indigenous tribes. Often seen as spiritually stronger, officiating ceremonies, involved in preservation of language, cultural activities and traditions related to connection to the land.
Expanded notes
Hi, this is DoubleA. Nick thought it was important we include this section to frame the rest of the pieces we were working on. These were some very relevant ideas and texts I came upon while researching the piece.
1) The Organizational Construction of Hegemonic Masculinity: The Case of the US Navy by Frank J. Barret in Gender, Work and Organization, July 1996. You can read it here.
This text offers incredible insight into the ways men in different positions build their self worth in a highly patriarchal and violent system, where adherence to certain masculine ideals is the most important currency. It was written by a US Navy Official, based on 48 interviews from aviators to the supply officers. Some highlights include:
- The idea of “socializing boys to be men”, creating worth in withstanding and committing violence: “Recruits learn the value of appearance, cleanliness, exacting detail, and respect for rank and tradition. They come to value conformity and obedience, and learn display rules for exhibiting aggression and courage in the face of risk.”
- The way men in different positions and situations build their identity to comply with the way they fall short of the masculine ideal. Within the Navy supply officers are seen as “pussies” by aviators and the way they, in response, fold to rationality and responsibility as masculine traits: “The more the masculine theme of discipline and endurance is emphasized, the less important it is to exhibit autonomy and independent control.”
- Going through great abuse not to be stripped of masculinity: “No one would call me a quitter. You can strip everything away but you can’t touch my pride.” There’s also several instances of trauma and violence bonding.
- Normalizing very public constant humiliation and aggression in order to receive group acceptance, insecure self worth that perpetuates the violence: “Masculinity is very public, but never secure. It must be continually demonstrated.” as well as “Investment in masculine discourse is a strategy deployed to compensate for negative experiences of degradation.The persistent sense of fragility and precariousness generates a need to display worth.”
2) There is much to say about masculinity, but I did not intend to write a long essay. Many essays have already been written on the subject by people much better equipped than myself. It is clear to me that we must transcend identity politics and tackle these subjects in a transversal way, taking into consideration who holds resources and power. I want to point to related ideas or works I couldn’t include in the text, for those who might be interested:
- “The Purpose Of a System is What It Does”, this applies to male loneliness as well.
- Works around the idea of the ‘patriarchal dividend’ illustrate the problem in a very nuanced and actionable way.
- The idea that what sustains patriarchal systems is rewarding violence in order to dissociate men from their bodies so they may continue to perpetuate violence on themselves and others.
- Ursula K. LeGuin’s essay of The Carrier Bag Theory of Fiction. Short and easily found online for free, shows how masculine storytelling structure steers reality and describes other ways to tell stories about ourselves and the world.
- The videogame Undertale by Toby Fox. It looks silly, but it’s a masterful exploration of violence.
- The idea that most violence perpetuated by men who are invested in hegemonic masculinity is corrective violence, especially for those who willingly refuse to participate in it. You’ll never be a ‘real man’, but how dare you choose not to try anyway? (like they have been doing).
- The idea that dysmorphia in men is often rooted in gender dysphoria.
- Dysphoria mundi by Paul B Preciado. The text that inspired me to take on writing this whole series. It is a heavy read, but it displays a transversal understanding of the problems the world faces while inspiring us to dream and build better realities.
3) Zernechel, Alex and Perry, April L. (2017) “The Final Battle: Constructs of Hegemonic Masculinity and Hypermasculinity in Fraternity Membership,” College Student Affairs Leadership: Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 6. You can read it here.
Another interesting and relevant read.