​

https://preview.redd.it/zudsmuymie551.jpg?width=3072&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6cbd89469e990257f31c0f3d822c51a2f1e99152

One conservative response to the recent negativity around masculinity has been to reaffirm a connection between virtue and masculinity as the solution. That is, boys need to be taught that being good is what makes you a man. Interestingly, this response is also used by many well-meaning progressives but with the specific virtues moved around in emphasis. Where the conservative ideal of virtuous masculinity might focus on leadership, provision and responsibility, the progressive positive masculine ideal might focus instead on equality, vulnerability and nurturing in deliberate contrast with the loathed "toxic masculinity". We see this positive masculinity promoted, among other places, in the infamous Gillette ad of early 2019.

There have been ancient, medieval and modern attempts to formally link particular virtues with particular genders, often in a spiritual or religious context, but the popularity of such models had been out of fashion for a while until recently. It is obvious that both men and women can attain the same basic virtues, though they may draw on different resources and life experiences to do so.

This temptation to tie virtue to masculinity may be coming from a fear about how to define masculinity in a positive way, but it should be concerning for male advocates for two reasons:

1. It pushes Male Disposability into overdrive

Most men's advocates are aware that masculinity historically carries a performative element that is not carried with femininity. The phrase, "to be a man" – implying a set of behaviours and status that is earned in some way - does not have a significant parallel in femininity*.

This performative aspect is, I think, at the heart of Male Disposability. It is a method by which men can be controlled and corralled into economic systems and cultural and military projects, especially ones which would otherwise be obvious as not to their own benefit.

Assigning virtue to masculinity reaffirms and strengthens Male Disposability because it ascribes a Higher Purpose to the performance of masculinity, adding to the honour-shame dimension. It is the White Feather being handed out.

2. It fuels the assumption of men's hyper-agency

Men's advocates and MRAs frequently bemoan the lack of sympathy and action towards causes in which men are victims, even when the statistics should speak for themselves.

I agree that a key part of this lack of acknowledgement by culture is the assumption of men's hyper-agency. As is often said, our society still has an underlying assumption that a woman is and a man does. Therefore, male victims exist because they aren't using their superior agency to fix their problems, not because there are failures and flaws in established systems.

Assigning virtue to masculinity but not to femininity fuels the assumption of men's hyper-agency because virtues are generally embodied in action.

(Note, I'm not saying that men need to see themselves only as victims, but there's a clear gender imbalance between the assumption of victimhood and agency.)

Conclusion

Tying virtue to masculinity takes us backward, strengthening old enemies of men's wellbeing that should instead be consigned to history.

Virtue is important, I would argue more important than masculinity. I am not dismissing the value of cultivating virtue for either gender, whether that's through a faith community or philosophical path, or both.

As for masculinity, I think a more useful model going forward is to see it as an energy source, one which is morally nonaligned (True Neutral, if you will) and which just is, not something to be sought or earned. If you are male, congratulations! You're masculine. Here's your Man Card. It cannot be revoked.

If you're a visual person, you might picture this model with virtue as a fire kindled in the heart and hands, and masculinity as energy already flowing through the legs and core. You have the ability to draw on that energy, perhaps in ways that are different to a woman. Perhaps you can even improve your ability to draw on that energy, just as you can cultivate virtue.

I'm aware that such a model feels very individual, and may not sufficiently resolve the pressures of community, peers and family. I think maybe it can be adapted to do so.

​

\ (except in some wholly outmoded cliches for particular contexts and the transition to adulthood, eg. a girl "becoming a woman" by having sex with a man for the first time – and even this one requires performance on the part of a man.)*