Masculinity: Should we explode it? That's the question posed by Sexist commenters in last week's battle over the M-word and its place in the education of men and boys. So: Should we redefine masculinity to encourage boys to be manly-but-in-a-good-way, or should we blow the whole concept to smithereens in a strangely masculine display of destruction? Let's find out!
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (2)
Sam wants to hear the positive side of masculinity:
Why does talking about gender and gender relations, particularly with younger/teenage boys, always, always seem to have to revolve around the notion of toxic masculinity?
I mean, really, masculinity seems to be less defined these days by what it is, than what it is not supposed to be—not much of “do”s, but a whole lot of “don’t”s.
I want to talk about the dos, not just the don’ts.
Kit-Kat says that even positive traits coded as “masculine” are inherently limited:
Our view of men in this culture right now seems to be so narrow: men are defined by being not-women. To be manly, they must avoid anything that smacks of femininity. It’s so crippling, this warrior-view of manhood. I would love it if men were given more space to be themselves, if the arts and fashion and academics and the color pink and emotions other than anger were not seen to be the purview of women and gays.
- 3 votes
I'm all for blowing it to hell along with socalled social norms for women
- 2 votes
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |



