Becoming part of the solution

In the quiet corners of suburbia, where white picket fences stand as silent sentinels to an era gone by, resides a quiet crisis that echoes through the lives of John and Jane. Picture John, a young man in his late twenties, wrestling not just with the expectations of his forefathers but with the evolving definition of his own masculinity. In a world where societal norms clash with the desire for authentic connection, John’s journey becomes a microcosm of the multifaceted crisis of masculinity. As he attempts to navigate the delicate dance between tradition and modernity, we are beckoned to delve into the complexities of 21st-century masculinity, where the personal becomes profoundly political, and the struggle for identity reverberates far beyond John’s suburban doorstep.”

Building upon this idea, in exploring the multifaceted nature of the crisis of masculinity, this essay contends that the evolving dynamics of societal expectations, historical roles, and contemporary challenges have given rise to a complex interplay of factor. The narrative explores seismic shifts in gender roles and the struggles men face in redefining their identities. It extends to encompass environmental concerns, ideological clashes, and the impact of ingrained societal preconceptions. Through an examination of inherent differences between men and women, beyond cultural constructs, and an exploration of consciousness as proposed by Tom Campbell, the essay advocates for a holistic understanding of the crisis of masculinity. It asserts that by acknowledging these complexities, fostering inclusivity, and embracing evolving gender roles, society can navigate the challenges and build relationships conducive to the flourishing of individuals and the broader community. At its core, this essay aims to illuminate the multifaceted aspects of the crisis of masculinity and propose a pathway towards a more inclusive and adaptable understanding of gender roles in the modern era.

Through an examination, as we delve into the diverse nature of 21st-century masculinity, it’s crucial to recognise the positive changes in gender roles that have unfolded over the past six decades. The advent of the contraceptive pill in the early 1960s marked a seismic shift for women, revolutionising reproductive autonomy. This transformative innovation provided women with unprecedented control over their fertility, enabling them to plan pregnancies and pursue education and careers. Liberated from the constraints of frequent childbirth, women gained newfound social and economic independence. The contraceptive pill catalysed a cultural revolution, challenging traditional gender roles and contributing to the feminist movement. By offering a choice in family planning, the contraceptive pill empowered women to shape their destinies, profoundly altering societal expectations and fostering greater gender equality. As gender roles underwent a revolutionary transformation, societal expectations shifted, giving rise to both opportunities and challenges for both genders.

It is essential to acknowledge that the progress in women’s empowerment has elevated humanity to unprecedented heights, affording women greater equality and significantly expanding their autonomy compared to previous generations, including their mothers and grandmothers. However, as with any seismic societal changes this progress has not unfolded without accompanying repercussions. Throughout much of human evolution, traditional gender roles were shaped by the demands of survival, reproduction, and resource acquisition. In hunter-gatherer societies, men typically assumed the role of hunters, engaging in physically demanding tasks to secure food and protect the group. Women, as gatherers, focused on gathering plant-based resources and caring for children. These roles were often influenced by biological differences, with men’s physical strength aiding in hunting, while women’s reproductive capabilities and natural empathy made them primary caregivers.

As societies moved to agriculture, roles became more structured. Men often took on the responsibility of farming and protection, while women managed domestic tasks and child-rearing. This division of labour contributed to social stability but also reinforced gender disparities. With the advent of industrialisation, the roles expanded, with men working in factories, mines etc. and women managing households. These traditional roles, deeply ingrained in cultural norms, persisted for centuries. However, science and societal changes, including the women’s rights movements of the 20th century, have challenged and reshaped these roles.

As societies transitioned it could be argued that women have more effectively adjusted to the contemporary status quo than men. While acknowledging the strides women have made, it is essential to recognise that societal change is complex and multifaceted. Men, too, grapple with evolving expectations and changing definitions of masculinity. The discussed crisis of masculinity reflects not only resistance to change but also a struggle to redefine identity in the face of shifting societal norms. To delve into the intricate challenges faced by men in adapting to these evolving roles, it’s crucial to examine concrete examples that underscore the complexities of the crisis of masculinity.

For instance, consider the case of a father juggling traditional expectations of being the primal breadwinner while also actively participating in the emotional and physical aspects of parenting.

Or Jake, a man hesitant to seek help for his mental health struggles due to societal expectations of self-reliance. Jake’s experience sheds light on the pervasive stigma surrounding men’s mental health and the reluctance to seek support, contributing to the broader crisis of masculinity in the realm of emotional well-being.

Consider the experience of Chris and Emma, a couple negotiating the complexities of modern relationships. Chris, raised with traditional expectations of dominance, faces challenges adapting to the more equitable dynamics Emma seeks.

Or Sally, whose mother experienced domination from her husband, influencing Sally to diverge from a similar trajectory. Sally values her independence, choosing to go out every weekend with friends to enjoy herself, prioritising this over spending the night in with her partner, who isn’t fond of dancing or drinking.

These real-world scenario highlight the tension arising when partners strive for a partnership that transcends historical gender roles.

In recent decades, there has been a growing recognition of the significance of active fatherhood, challenging the rigid confines of traditional masculinity. Men are increasingly expected to be fully involved in parenting, contributing both emotionally and physically to the well-being of their children.

While this shift signifies progress towards a more equitable distribution of caregiving responsibilities, it is also believed to have help trigger the discussed crisis of masculinity. Some men may grapple with the tension between entrenched traditional expectations and the evolving societal norms surrounding fatherhood. The crisis emerges not solely from resistance to change but also from a genuine struggle to redefine masculine identity.

As we navigate the complex terrain of evolving gender roles, the challenges within fatherhood exemplify the broader crisis of masculinity, shedding light on the intricate interplay of societal expectations and individual identity formation.

In the context of human evolution, such a shift in roles is considered positive. However, at times, we may underestimate the chaos and confusion that arise when traditional roles spanning 100,000’s years dramatically change within just a few decades.

For instance, in the discourse surrounding gender roles and characteristics, it’s essential to acknowledge the fluidity and individual variability of traits traditionally associated with femininity and masculinity. These traits are not inherently tied to one gender or another but have been historically ascribed based on societal norms. Moreover, it’s crucial to recognise that attributing a value judgment as ‘positive’ or ‘negative’ to these traits can perpetuate stereotypes and hinder a nuanced understanding. However, for the purpose of our discussion, we will explore how certain traits have been historically perceived and, at times, criticised.

Historically, traits associated with femininity have often been linked to nurturing and communal roles.

Positive Traits Associated with Femininity:

1. Empathy: A capacity for understanding and sharing the feelings of others, often associated with nurturing and caregiving roles.
2. Compassion: A genuine concern for the well-being of others and a willingness to offer support and kindness.
3. Collaboration: An emphasis on building relationships and working together to achieve common goals.
4. Resilience: The ability to bounce back from challenges, demonstrating strength in the face of adversity.
5. Adaptability: A flexibility and openness to change, often associated with multitasking and managing various responsibilities.
6. Intuition: Trusting one’s instincts and relying on intuition for decision-making.
7. Communication: Strong interpersonal communication skills, including the ability to express thoughts and feelings effectively.
8. Community Building: A tendency to foster connections within communities and nurture social bonds.
9. Inclusivity: A commitment to inclusivity, valuing diversity and ensuring that others feel included and heard.
10. Perseverance: Demonstrating determination and persistence in pursuing goals and overcoming obstacles.

Challenges Historically Associated with Femininity:

1. Submissiveness: Historically, women have sometimes been seen as passive or subservient.
2. Emotional Instability: Women have been described as being overly emotional or irrational, perpetuating the idea that they cannot make rational decisions.
3. Dependence: Traditional gender roles have often cast women in roles of dependency.
4. Irrationality: Women have sometimes been portrayed as more prone to making decisions based on emotion rather than reason.
5. Overemphasis on Appearance: There can be societal pressure for women to prioritise physical appearance over other qualities.
6. Gossiping: Women have been seen more likely to be gossipers, perpetuating the idea that they engage in negative social behaviours.
7. Indecisiveness: Women have been seen to be more indecisive than men or have difficulty making decisions.
8. Weakness: Traditional gender roles have associated physical and emotional weakness with women.
9. Lack of Ambition: Women have sometimes been characterized as lacking ambition or drive due to the former male role as the provider.

Similarly, traits traditionally associated with masculinity have been diverse, reflecting societal expectations and norms. It’s important to recognise that individuals, irrespective of gender, can possess a range of these traits, and their value is contextual.

Positive Traits Associated with Masculinity:

1. Strength: Physical and emotional strength, resilience, and the ability to handle challenges.
2. Courage: A willingness to face fear, take risks, and confront difficult situations.
3. Provider: A sense of responsibility and willingness to provide for oneself and others, often associated with financial stability.
4. Leadership: The ability to take charge, make decisions, and guide others in various situations.
5. Protectiveness: A natural inclination to protect and care for loved ones, fostering a sense of security.
6. Independence: The ability to be self-reliant, make decisions independently, and pursue personal goals.
7. Competitiveness: A drive to excel, achieve goals, and compete in various aspects of life.
8. Discipline: The ability to stay focused, set goals, and work diligently toward achieving them.
9. Loyalty: A commitment to supporting and standing by friends, family, and loved ones.
10. Humour: The use of humour as a positive and constructive tool to navigate situations and bring joy to oneself and others.

Challenges Historically Associated with Masculinity:

1. Aggressiveness: Traditional gender roles have sometimes perpetuated the stereotype that men should be aggressive or confrontational, potentially leading to harmful behaviour.
2. Emotional Suppression: Men may feel societal pressure to suppress emotions, contributing to difficulties in expressing and addressing their feelings.
3. Inability to Express Vulnerability: Traditional masculinity norms may discourage men from expressing vulnerability, leading to difficulties in seeking support or sharing their struggles.
4. Toxic Masculinity: Adherence to toxic masculinity norms, such as dominance, control, and the rejection of anything perceived as “feminine,” can be harmful to both men and those around them.
5. Stubbornness: The stereotype of men as stubborn or resistant to change can hinder personal growth and effective communication.
6. Risk-Taking Behaviour: Social expectations may push men toward riskier behaviours, such as impulsivity, crime, or dangerous activities.
7. Avoidance of Help-Seeking: Men may be socialised to avoid seeking help, which can contribute to delays in addressing physical or mental health issues.
8. Unwillingness to Share Responsibilities: Traditional gender roles may perpetuate the idea that men should not participate equally in domestic or caregiving responsibilities.
9. Competitiveness to Excess: While healthy competition can be positive, an excessive focus on competition can lead to negative behaviours and undermine collaboration.
10. Overemphasis on Physical Strength: The stereotype of men as physically strong can contribute to unrealistic expectations and pressures, impacting self-esteem and body image.

Viewing these lists, it becomes apparent that the traits associated with traditional gender roles have significantly evolved over time. Historically, positive traits associated with being a man include strength, courage, and the ability to provide and lead. These qualities, while valuable in many contexts, can become problematic in a world that increasingly values collaboration, emotional intelligence, and inclusivity. Men may face difficulties adapting to 21st-century gender roles due to the persistence of negative traits associated with traditional masculinity.

For example, the expectation of aggressiveness, emotional suppression, and an inability to express vulnerability can hinder healthy emotional expression. Men may find it challenging to navigate the complexities of modern relationships and workplaces when inner ‘program’ discourages them from sharing their feelings or seeking support. The concept of toxic masculinity, marked by dominance and rejection of “feminine” qualities, can perpetuate harmful behaviours and limit emotional growth.

Furthermore, the stereotype of men as stubborn or resistant to change can impede personal development and effective communication in a world that values adaptability. The emphasis on risk-taking behaviour, avoidance of help-seeking, and unwillingness to share responsibilities can contribute to delays in addressing physical or mental health issues and hinder progress toward more balanced and equitable gender roles.

On the other hand, women appear to be adapting more seamlessly to the changing gender landscape, drawing on historically valued positive traits. Traits such as empathy, adaptability, collaboration, and inclusivity have proven advantageous in navigating the evolving social and professional spheres. For instance, women’s natural inclination toward community building and strong interpersonal communication skills aligns well with the increasing emphasis on teamwork and relationship-building in contemporary society.

The negative traits historically associated with women, such as submissiveness, emotional instability, and dependence, are gradually being debunked as society recognises the value of diverse strengths and capabilities. In fact, traits like resilience, intuition, and perseverance, historically valued in women, are now recognised as universally beneficial, regardless of gender.

Let’s now delve into the perspectives of scholars like Jordan Peterson and explore how the concept of ‘original sin’ intertwines with societal preconceptions, influencing men’s behaviour.

The concept of original sin is a theological idea in some branches of Christianity, particularly in the Catholic and Protestant traditions. It refers to the belief that all human beings inherit a state of sin from the first disobedience of Adam and Eve, as described in the biblical story of the Garden of Eden. According to this doctrine, the disobedience of the first human couple resulted in a fallen state for all of humanity, leading to a separation from God and a sinful nature inherent in every individual from birth.

As a result human beings can bear an existential burden, a guilt ingrained in their relationship with nature and culture. Living in discord with the natural world and under the accusations of oppressive patriarchal social structures. This existential burden becomes weaponised, impacting conscientious young men who internalise a narrative associating their male nature with societal oppression and rapaciousness.

In other words men are wrestling with a weird guilt about not measuring up, being labelled bad for nature, and burdened by oppressive social structures. For many men, it feels like a setup for failure, as if they were born to cause problems

In the case of nature, historically the traditional role of men as providers has been closely tied to their ability to conquer and harness the environment for resources. With growing environmental concerns, such as climate change and resource depletion, the conventional narrative of men as providers is undergoing a transformation.

Men may find themselves grappling with a sense of inadequacy or a perceived failure in meeting traditional expectations, as environmental challenges redefine what it means to be a successful provider in a world that increasingly values sustainability.

As a consequence male remorse Peterson uses the metaphor of the devouring mother—a destructive false compassion that advocates a negative response to perceived societal wrongs. This false compassion, rooted in overwhelming guilt, drives conscientious young men towards extreme measures, metaphorically castrating themselves to absolve perceived guilt.

Hostility can be faced by those discussing masculinity, which can lead to ideological drumbeats of oppressive patriarchy, environmental concerns, and family breakdowns. It could be said that the breakdown of positive relationships between men and women, coupled with the absence of encouragement for both genders, further exacerbates the crisis.

It would appear that the ideology of power as the fundamental human motivation perpetuates the crisis. Power isn’t everything; what truly matters is the spirit of free and voluntary play. In simple terms, the best relationships are like a fun game, not about one person bossing the other around. Fathers play a crucial role in creating a structured environment (the walled garden) that fosters both security and the freedom to play, thus contributing positively to the development of children within a family unit.

So how could all this play out in life : John and Jane, a young couple in their late twenties, found themselves entangled in the complex web of societal expectations and the crisis of masculinity. John, raised in a family where traditional gender roles were emphasised, carried the burden of conforming to a stoic and dominant male archetype.

Their relationship faced communication struggles as John, feeling pressured to embody the tough exterior expected of men, found it difficult to express his emotions openly. Jane, on the other hand, yearned for a deeper emotional connection but struggled to understand John’s hesitance to share his vulnerabilities.

The concept of the devouring mother played out symbolically in their relationship. John, influenced by societal narratives associating male nature with oppression, unintentionally adopted domineering behaviours. This power dynamic created tension, with Jane feeling as though their relationship was becoming a battleground rather than a partnership.

When John attempted to discuss the crisis of masculinity, the conversation became hostile. Jane, influenced by societal notions and perhaps struggling with her own perceptions of masculinity, dismissed the conversation, leaving John feeling unheard and misunderstood. This silence perpetuated their misunderstandings, preventing them from addressing the societal pressures affecting their relationship.

The example of John and Jane serves as a poignant illustration of the challenges within modern relationships, emphasising the importance of communication, understanding, and the creation of a supportive environment, reflecting broader themes in the crisis of masculinity. His struggle to balance the societal expectations of dominance with the desire for emotional connection left him feeling inadequate in meeting Jane’s needs.

Despite these challenges, John and Jane had moments of breakthrough. John, recognising the importance of fostering a “walled garden” environment, actively worked to create a space where security and free play were encouraged. This positively influenced their interactions, providing a glimpse into the potential for overcoming the crisis of masculinity in their relationship.

It is noteworthy that the ongoing evolutionary process unfolds diversely across the globe. For instance, in countries like Saudi Arabia, women have achieved notable strides in recent years, securing increased equality and the right to publicly express their feminism. Nevertheless, these advancements may appear modest when juxtaposed with the progress in more liberal societies. In Asian nations like Vietnam, the shift has been comparatively subtle, with men and women steadfastly maintaining their cultural norms and taking pride in their distinct roles. Predicting whether this dynamic will evolve in the future remains challenging. However, the absence of the discussed turmoil in this essay is evident in Asian countries, where traditional feminine and masculine roles are still distinctly observed and embraced by the residents.

Recognising, embracing and celebrating the fundamental distinctions between males and females can offer a deep understanding of their dynamics. The question of whether there are fundamental differences between men and women at a consciousness level or if these differences are merely products of cultural and societal influences has been a topic of debate for centuries. Some scholars suggest that beyond cultural overlays, there are indeed fundamental differences between men and women. Here we will explore the idea that these differences are essential for personal growth and development, emphasising the symbiotic relationship between male and female perspectives.

Leading consciousness explorer Tom Campbell explains that when stripping away cultural influences and societal expectations it reveals intrinsic disparities between the consciousness of men and women. While acknowledging the impact of culture on individuals, the argument posits that the core differences are not merely a result of societal conditioning. This perspective challenges the notion that gender roles are entirely socially constructed and implies a deeper, inherent dissimilarity between the sexes. Delving into Tom Campbell’s perspective, let’s connect it explicitly to the crisis of masculinity and the evolving gender dynamics, shedding light on how it contributes to our understanding of these complex issues.

There is a discussion to be had that delves into the evolutionary basis of gender differences, highlighting the role of physiology in shaping the male and female experience. This theory acknowledges that the male-female dichotomy is deeply embedded in the evolutionary process, and it is a fundamental aspect of the rule set that governs our existence. Evolution, Campbell argues, produced this duality as an efficient means of navigating the complex environment.

Campbell in his work recognises the complexity of biological systems, noting that the expression of gender is not a binary but exists along a continuum. The randomness inherent in biology leads to a diversity of individuals with varying degrees of femininity and masculinity. He describes how these variations add richness and depth to human interactions, challenging individuals to understand and appreciate diverse perspectives.

Central to this argument is the idea that the challenges arising from the differences between men and women serve as catalysts for personal growth. The close relationships we form, particularly romantic ones, are presented as potent learning grounds. The struggles within these relationships are seen not as signs of incompatibility but as opportunities for individuals to confront their egos and fears, fostering personal development.

There is a mutual benefit derived from the inherent differences between men and women. For this reason they should be celebrated and not ignored or disregarded. The notion that individuals learn and grow more effectively from their significant others, regardless of gender, underscores the idea that these differences are not divisive but complementary. This idea promotes the understanding that relationships are a key aspect of personal evolution and that challenges within them contribute to the expansion of one’s perspective.

In resume Campbell is saying that there are fundamental differences between men and women that transcend cultural influences. These differences, rooted in evolution, serve as the foundation for personal growth and development. By acknowledging and embracing these disparities, individuals can navigate the complexities of relationships and use them as opportunities to evolve and mature. Ultimately he  encourages  a deeper understanding of the symbiotic relationship between men and women in the pursuit of individual and collective growth.

In addition to the previously discussed points, it is crucial to recognise the other challenges that hinder evolutionary changes. The 21st century is marked by a myriad of fears, the influence of outspoken social media figures, and the expansion of gender identities from a binary to a spectrum encompassing up to seventy-two possibilities. Moreover, a profound realisation has emerged that all genders encapsulate varying degrees of both masculinity and femininity.

Across all genders the most prevalent 21st-century fear, often inherited from childhood, is a general fear of not being good enough. This fear can stem from various causes, including a lack of encouragement from parents dealing with their own issues of perceived underachievement, parents who are too preoccupied trying to provide what they believe to be better lives for their children, or the absence of a father / mother figure in their childhoods. The list is extensive, but the resulting fears only serve to amplify the general issues already discussed.

For example since his early years, Francis’s mother consistently criticised his actions, frequently voicing complaints and attempting to ‘correct’ him as she saw fit. This pattern persists even now, despite Francis being married. Regrettably, one of the factors that drew him to his partner was an unconscious need for a dominant presence in his life. However, an unintended consequence of this dynamic is that both his mother and his partner now scrutinise his actions, leaving him challenged in establishing a secure environment to raise his family within the metaphorical walled garden.

Alternatively young men and women seeking insights into defining masculinity encounter a plethora of content from ‘noisy’ social influencers. Unfortunately, while these influencers may convey certain truths, their perspectives often align closely with 20th-century paradigms of traditional masculinity. This inclination is understandable, given that such information is commercially driven and tends to align with what is easily marketable. I propose that this guidance may not fully consider the evolution of humanity over the past century. Therefore, it is important to engage in a more nuanced conversation about their content, especially with impressionable young men. A general guideline is that if a message requires forceful delivery, the source and the content may not be as evolved as they wish to project. In my experience, truly evolved individuals do not need to raise their voices to effectively communicate their message.

As well as these  ‘noisy influencer’ the realisation that gender exists on a continuum, not within a binary framework introduces further complexity when navigating the evolution of gender roles. Hermaphrodites, found in plants and certain invertebrates, produce both male and female gametes, favouring efficiency in reproduction. Human evolution, in contrast, has predominantly adopted gonochorism, where distinct male and female genders emerge.

For some the current paradigm acknowledges up to seventy-two genders, further challenging traditional notions. Agender individuals, for example, lack a specific gender, androgynes identify as neutral, while genderqueer individuals defy stereotypes. This evolving perspective confounds many, and can complicate further the understanding of masculinity for cisgender males, i.e. people who align their gender identity with their assigned biological sex.  The survival and impact of  diverse new understanding of gender on evolutionary processes remain uncertain, but the resulting crisis in comprehension is evident, adding to the complexities of debating masculinity in the 21^st century.

As a result it becomes imperative to recognise and appreciate the fluidity and individual variability of traits traditionally associated with both femininity and masculinity. Beyond the binary framework, it is important  to acknowledge that all individuals, irrespective of their gender, inherently possess a spectrum of both masculine and feminine characteristics, or ‘energ’y as it is also referred to.  This acknowledgment lays the foundation for a more nuanced understanding of gender roles and contributes to the evolution of personal and societal perspectives.

In Chinese philosophy and culture this concept is referred to the yin and the yang. In the yin-yang symbol, yin is associated with qualities such as receptivity, passivity, darkness, and femininity, while yang is associated with qualities such as activity, assertiveness, light, and masculinity. The interplay and balance between yin and yang are believed to be essential for harmony, equilibrium, and the natural order of the universe.

In the journey of self-discovery and adaptation, individuals are challenged to recognise and embrace the diverse traits within themselves. Rather than adhering strictly to societal norms or predetermined gender roles, I suggest that the real skill in evolving lies in acknowledging and utilizing both masculine and feminine traits for personal growth and the betterment of relationships.

As we navigate the complexities of evolving gender dynamics, it is proposed that individuals can harness their prominent traits to help define their gender identity while leveraging the opposite positive traits to enhance various aspects of their lives. For example, a person may identify with the predominant masculine traits within themselves to establish their gender identity, while drawing on their feminine traits to foster emotional intelligence, collaboration, and adaptability in personal and professional spheres.

Likewise, masculine traits, such as strength, courage, and leadership, can be harnessed positively when balanced with emotional intelligence, adaptability, and collaboration. The evolving nature of gender roles necessitates a departure from rigid expectations and an embrace of the full spectrum of human characteristics, allowing for a more inclusive and adaptable understanding of masculinity in the modern era.

While acknowledging the conventional associations of positive and negative traits with masculinity and femininity, it is essential to surpass these values as mere judgments. Embracing the inherent value of each trait and comprehending its contextual relevance paves the way for a more holistic perspective.

To gauge the perspectives of a loved one in this intricate scenario, a straightforward approach is to inquire about their own perceptions of masculine and feminine. Pose the question without specifying whether the traits should be considered ‘negative’ or ‘positive.’ The responses may prove to be surprising! The initial challenge lies in the difficulty many people face when attempting to even answer this question. Without prompting, once responses begin to emerge, the prevalence of traits whether positive or negative (as outlined in the earlier lists) will indicate their perception of traditional gender roles. The more negative traits listed implies a higher level of confusion.

Ultimately, the task to evolve and adapt to the discussed masculinity challenges of the 21st century falls on ‘cisgender’ men. However, this process can be expedited if we collectively adopt a nuanced perspective on the matter. The benefits of this evolution extend not only to men but also to their partners. Partners seek resilient, capable individuals, not ‘castrated’ whimps. They desire strong partners who can actively engage and contribute to creating a nurturing environment—a ‘walled garden’ that provides both security and the freedom necessary for a healthy family unit.

As we wrap up our exploration of masculinity’s complexities, spanning societal expectations, historical roles, and contemporary challenges, let’s summarise the key insights and emphasise the call to action for a more inclusive understanding of masculinity. The crisis of masculinity, as articulated in this essay, is not a singular phenomenon but a complex interplay of societal, cultural, and individual factors. The seismic shifts in gender roles, particularly over the last six decades, have reshaped the landscape of masculinity, challenging traditional norms and fostering a re-evaluation of identity.

The examination of positive and negative traits associated with both men and women reveals the intricate nature of societal change. While women have adeptly adapted to evolving gender roles, men grapple with the weight of historical expectations, manifesting in resistance to change and a struggle to redefine their identities. The metaphorical devouring mother, symbolising false compassion rooted in guilt, adds a layer of complexity to the crisis of masculinity, influencing societal perceptions and shaping individual behaviour.

The narrative of John and Jane serves as a poignant illustration of the challenges within modern relationships, emphasising the importance of communication, understanding, and the creation of a supportive environment. The clash between ideological drumbeats, environmental concerns, and family dynamics underscores the need for a more nuanced and inclusive understanding of masculinity.

Moreover, the consideration of inherent differences between men and women at a fundamental level, beyond societal constructs, introduces a thought-provoking perspective. Tom Campbell’s exploration of consciousness suggests that acknowledging and embracing these differences can be a catalyst for personal growth and development. The symbiotic relationship between male and female perspectives, rooted in evolutionary processes, offers a profound understanding of the complementary nature of these differences. The yin-yang concept is invoked to highlight the ancient importance of balance and harmony in the evolving dynamics of gender roles.

As we contemplate the intricate tapestry of masculinity, consider this: In a world that is constantly evolving, how can we, as global citizens, contribute to reshaping narratives around masculinity to ensure that individuals of all genders thrive in an environment of acceptance, understanding, and mutual respect? The answer lies not just in acknowledging the challenges but in actively participating in the ongoing dialogue that shapes the future contours of masculinity. How will you contribute to this transformative journey?

In summary, this essay advocates for a holistic approach to the crisis of masculinity, urging recognition of challenges, embracing inherent differences, and fostering a more inclusive and adaptable understanding of what it means to be a man in the modern era. Through open dialogue, empathy, and a commitment to personal and collective growth, society can navigate the complexities of evolving gender roles and build relationships that are not only equitable but also conducive to the flourishing of individuals and the broader community.

Written By Stephen Griffin and ChatGPT