JUST PUBLISHED: Masculinity Isn’t in Crisis — But Some Men Are
I was recently speaking at a major public event in Leeds where men and masculinity were under discussion. The panel of four (male) speakers, of which I was one, were asked, “Is masculinity in crisis?” My three colleagues answered an assured “yes”; I answered an equally assured “no”. A rather counterintuitive, if not provocative, response, given that men and masculinity are now under critical question in most countries around the world.
So why answer “no”? First off, masculinity is not singular but multiple. There are countless ways of men performing maleness, manhood, masculinity. The current media focus is on “toxic masculinity”, or traditional ways of being a man, but this is not a fixed biological condition. It is not predictable across the male species. As I show in this article, not all men perform this type of masculinity, and toxic masculinity itself has different levels or intensities, ranging from casually chauvinistic to extreme male fundamentalism.
Importantly, it is not the only masculinity out there: its opposite – progressive (or positive) masculinity – is a popular masculinity in countries such as the UK, the USA, Canada, Australasia, and Western and Northern Europe, and in those places where men have been exposed to, and adapted to, what I term “independent femininity”: a way of being a woman that is assertive, agentic, confident, singularly minded, and aspirational. Studies regularly show that upwards of 40% of men in such countries perform a liberal masculinity. A 2023 survey of American adults showed 43% of men identifying as feminist, and there is little difference between Gen Z and Millennials in this identification. Theirs is not a masculinity in crisis.
However, if we ask a rather different question – “are men in crisis?” – then we can see that a great many are struggling to find a place in the world that values them as men. Many cisgender youths/men are suffering depression, social isolation, and suicidal thoughts, living solo or silo lives without love and attention. They are emotionally dysfunctional and consequently are being rejected by women as potential partners. These men, often through no fault of their own but as a result of social conditioning and circumstance, are male castaways: unable to envision a positive future for themselves, yet lacking the opportunity, self-love, resolution, and confidence to let go of traditional ways of being a man and embrace the social changes ushered in by women with independent femininity. While they may well be unreflective of their casual chauvinism and deep-rooted sense of male entitlement, they are a greater danger to themselves than to women or LGBTQ+ people.
These male castaways are in crisis, though it is possible to reach out to them through education, counselling, and appropriate professional support. Such support is now available in a great many countries, especially the UK, and is growing. What type of masculinity do these men have? I name it “collapsed masculinity”.
But there is also another type of masculinity – a way of being a man that is not easily reachable by any intervention. In my new book, The End of Sex, I term it “male fundamentalism”.
Male fundamentalism is an unapologetic, explicitly anti-female, misogynistic position adopted by men. It transcends religious affiliation, culture, nationality, race, ethnicity, and other identity variables. It privileges heterosexuality and male power and assumes an unchallengeable and inevitable biological and/or religious basis to men’s supremacy over women. Male fundamentalists believe in the right to control women in the public and private spheres through the maintenance of an inflexible gender binary, reinforced by a judicial system and, if necessary, physical force.
Examples of organised, systemised, institutionalised, and extremist male fundamentalism in the world today would include the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Shia radicals of Iran, and the Wahhabi movement of Saudi Arabia, all of which promote and install gender apartheid in their regimes. Additional countries imposing some aspect of gender apartheid include Malaysia, Indonesia, and Pakistan, along with numerous others in the Middle East.
More randomised, dispersed male fundamentalists would include incels, individual male adherents of radical Christian, Jewish, and Muslim Orthodox religious discourses, and those men supporting extreme right-wing political policies that are anti-feminist, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-choice, and anti-inclusion. A current “leader” and powerful advocate of male fundamentalism is US President Donald Trump.
Those groups, and the individual men who adhere to male fundamentalism, are fully prepared to protect male privilege and patriarchal structures in any way they see necessary, including institutionalised and random violence against women and any of their allies. The physical and psychological threat to females posed by male fundamentalists is very real and needs to be challenged globally. While its most obvious manifestation is the explicit gender apartheid now being carried out in Afghanistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, the actual form such apartheid takes may well differ from country to country, regime to regime.
These male fundamentalists are not in crisis and indeed are convinced of their masculine supremacy over women and LGBTQ+ people. They assume their entitlement to rule by virtue of having been born cisgender males. The vast majority are not suicidal, depressed, isolated, or in retreat from women and society. But they are extremely dangerous.
The term “toxic masculinity” is useful as a shorthand description of more negative, harmful, violent, anti-LGBTQ+, and emotionally constipated ways of being a youth/man, but it does not tell the whole story about modern men. While the male castaways can be said to be in crisis, the same cannot be said of male fundamentalists, nor of pro-feminist or liberal-minded men.
The good news is that global society is now having the essential conversation about men and their diverse masculinities. This is a first. It has never happened at any previous time in human history. Until we have this conversation, we cannot advance human rights or human civilisation. For this, we must thank the gender revolution of the past 75 years and the women (and men) who have unceasingly fought for justice, inclusion, diversity, and equality – and, de facto, to bring into the world a generation of men who are safe, secure, confident, self-loving, and of no threat to anyone, including themselves. This fight will not stop; it must continue. But as the last seven decades have shown, history is on the side of the emancipators.
