Paul Eastwick, a psychologist and relationship researcher, has recently released a book promising to bust all the manosphere myths about relationships. His solution to the masculinity question? BRING BACK CHIVALRY!

PassengerCultural421 · 2026-03-13T12:52:53+00:00

Typical "positive masculinity" that is just traditional masculinity with feminist gaze bs.

Exavior31 · 2026-03-13T13:00:16+00:00

It always upsets me that whenever someone presents a solution to 'toxic masculinity' (the consequences of traditional gender roles for men), their solution almost always turns out to be repackaged traditional gender roles for men. Liberation of men is still an inconceivable thought for so many.

CavilIsBestSuperman · 2026-03-13T13:48:43+00:00

Paul: “Hey Chuds! Watch this!”

promotes traditional gender roles but only the ones feminists like

Katastrofiaines · 2026-03-13T14:50:19+00:00

You know, in a twist of irony, this eerily reminds me of how feminists describe ways in which patriarchy harms women.

In The Second Sex Simone De Beauvoir argues that society, which is largely structured by men, defines what women are supposed to be. Women are cast as “the Other,” meaning their identity is shaped in relation to men rather than independently, into roles that men wanted them to fulfill (wife, mother, caretaker, object of desire). “Humanity is male, and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him.”

And here Paul Eastwick is, framing masculinity in terms of service to others, especially women. Does this not create a dynamic where men's identity is defined by their role relative to others, rather than by their own self-definition?

And he's not even proposing anything new here, he's just essentially promoting the old masculine role of stoic protector. But did anyone ask men if that is the role they want to define themselves by? Did anyone even plan to ask?

Specific_Detective41 · 2026-03-13T14:56:51+00:00

It's always traditional gender roles for males framed as "positive masculinity" that male feminists advocate for. They never ask the average man how they feel about it. As long as it's acceptable for feminists you are part of the in group, otherwise you're a "toxic male".

ExternalGreen6826 · 2026-03-13T12:47:08+00:00

Idk why we make blueprints for mean that don’t involve who men want to be and their own desires themselves

Argumentium · 2026-03-13T14:07:08+00:00

Legitimately kinda laughing at "a reimagined version of masculinity revolves around protecting friends and family", as if he was presenting some never-heard-of idea of masculinity when it's literally just traditional masculinity repackaged in progressive language.

DesoLina · 2026-03-13T14:12:21+00:00

So men have to be men, but women have to be nothing? Ok lol

Enzi42 · 2026-03-13T14:50:44+00:00

"Positive Masculinity"= Parasitic Masculinity.

I'm not even throwing out a meaningless ad hominiem that sounds cutting or witty; if you think about how parasites work, the vision these feminists and their allies have for men and masculinity has a huge parallel to the way obligate parasites operate.

To elaborate---in nature, parasites target a host, latch onto it, and then siphon resources from it to enrich themselves without giving anything back, often weakening/sickening the host organism in the process.

But since so much of nature is a biological arms race, most if not all life has developed immune systems and/ or other defenses against such invasions.

So parasites respond by developing mechanisms to evade or even outright attack those defenses.

Think of some intestinal worms that secrete a hormone that dampens the immune response to their presence or bacteria that create toxins that actively harm immune cells that attack them in response to an intrusion into the body. Or even bloodsucking insects that numb the skin of their prey to avoid being detected.

A lot of these movements employ the same strategy. They frame Positive Masculinity (tm) as sacrifice and service, but devoid of the mirroring devotion of the female gender role.

Now the "immune system" immediately kicks in and calls this out as unfair and opportunistic, thus causing many men to reject the new model or at least balk at it.

Here is where the "suppress the immune system" aspect of this social parasitism arises. When met with pushback, these things appeal to men's biological and social conditioning. They put on an air of wounded faux innocence and play up how tired and victimized they are and act as if all they are asking for is the bare minimum.

Or they attack any doubters with accusations of wanting to go back to the "bad old days" or they frame pushback as lacking empathy for their struggle.

Or they minimize the magnitude of what they require. Or they just pry apart the cracks in the masculine identity by saying that this is what a "strong and confident" man would do, and resistance makes you "weak".

It is enough to sway most men or at least weaken their resistance. And worst of all, they don't have to really focus effort on those men who do fully resist...because the men who do succumb will pressure, browbeat and even threaten them into compliance.

This isn't even about destroying the immune system; it's making most of the immune cells serve the parasite, while ensuring that the minority that remain uncorupted are outnumbered and attacked by the compromised ones.

It is pure cold blooded exploitation by people who see themselves as entirely justified in doing so. It is the natural parasitic model that is adapted and enhanced by human ingenuity and malice.

Local-Willingness784 · 2026-03-13T17:14:40+00:00

its weird how so many people (men and women but especially women) really fucking hate and mock the "Nice Guys(tm)" and then a guy is supposed to still do the same bullshit not only for nothing, obviously, but somehow be proud of being so subservient? serving women, families, society and obviously never himself....

and as an aside, on lots of subs and places that give advice to men struggling, especially romantically, there is so much of this double speak with men, do all this but dont be expecting anything, dont even pretend this is about getting something, you are good because thats the good thing to do and if you arent or you complain about it you are a *insert slur here*.

Poyri35 · 2026-03-13T17:20:02+00:00

How hard is it for these people to see men as their own persons? Why can’t a man work on himself for the sake of himself? Why is his needs always need to be second or even third place?

They pour hours of work just to justify their own biases and sexist ideas, while as the solution is just to see them as human

While it is deeply important to be kind and helpful, you must define yourself based solely by your own self. Basing your identity (or worse, creating an identity for others and push it to them) is no more free than a puppet

griii2 · 2026-03-13T12:40:58+00:00

"grit and perseverance"? You mean like sToiCiSm? /s

Centaur_Warchief123 · 2026-03-13T13:32:33+00:00

Honestly anyone that uses the words “toxic/healthy masculinity” should be promptly ignored. Who the fuck are you to try to tell men how you should live their own lives? You never see this “toxic masculinity” people ever utter the word “toxic femininity”.

It is always the same thing, men must bend over backwards for women because women have intrinsic value in our society, men do not. You will literally never see anyone talk about how women should treat men. I occasionally get snarked by women, especially middle aged ones, after I open doors or give them seats. Why the fuck would any men be “chivalrous” when the woman look at me like I killed her fucking dog after I give her my seat?

Excellent_Client_796 · 2026-03-13T20:03:40+00:00

I would love to see what Paul Eastwick thinks positive femininity is. Like, I want to see it written down in a coherent sentence.

Gnome_Child_Deluxe · 2026-03-13T14:02:59+00:00

Lmao fuck masculinity, and not in the common "fuck men" kind of way, but genuinely, fuck anyone trying to tell you that you have to do something because you're a man.

I think that the problem that a lot of feminists and progressives have is that behind all of their critiques and essays and podcasts and literature and whatnot, they still kind of want to control the definition of what masculinity is because they think that it's a useful way to control men's (or rather males') behavior. Language is power, feminists know that better than anyone.

That's the dirty little secret, but the wall that they keep running into is that what they're trying to sell as masculinity is a lot less appealing and a lot less enticing than what the traditional conservatives are selling.

They're both lying, mind you, but one is a succubus promising you the time of your life while secretly trying to kill you and the other is a piece of dogshit that thinks that putting a bowtie on itself is going to make it look more appetizing.

Trying to appeal to someone else's definition of masculinity is one of those games where the only winning move is not to play. Okay, maybe I'm not considered to be masculine by you, and then what? What are you going to do about it? In my mind the most masculine thing you can do is not care.

I do want to stress that I usually have to say that to conservatives though, most feminists and progressives are generally a lot more chill and a lot more understanding, but if they want to play stupid games they can win stupid prizes as well, just like anyone else. Call it equal treatment or something.

Edits are grammar

Punder_man · 2026-03-14T02:17:10+00:00

Remember, when it comes the feminist notion of "Positive Masculinity" equates to anything which is beneficial for women or that men pay the cost for.

In this case, the idea of men being protectors.. its just veiled behind the use of "protecting friends and loved ones" rather than outright claiming men should be protecting women.

I also love how many feminists bemoan the decline of chivalry but they seem to treat it as some sort of zero sum game where men are expected to be held to the rules / dictates / gender roles of chivalry, but women are not expected to be held to the standard of being respectful or doing anything to earn men being chivalrous towards them.

Well i'm sorry but its 2026, Feminism has won! They wanted women to be considered "Strong" and "Independent" and to not beholden to gender roles..
Men who were chivalrous towards women by holding doors open for them or offering to help lift heavy items have been repeatedly scorned and told they are being misogynists for assuming women are so weak they can't open doors or carry things.

So as a result men are checking out and refusing to be chivalrous anymore as men are deciding that we too will no longer be held to gender roles anymore.

Local-Willingness784 · 2026-03-13T17:18:37+00:00

also too many men buy into this bullshit, either by wanting desperately not to be a loser or be accepted or because they dont fail at another proxy of masculinity and want to believe its all about their efforts and how good they are instead of maybe questioning the standards and bullshit they or other men have to go thru to be accepted , its fucking nuts

Tvcypher · 2026-03-13T18:22:23+00:00

Yeah all the same traits are "Wrong" when done for someone else's side and "Right" when done for "Our" side.

Everyone wants to turn you into a soldier for their team. Nobody ever asks if we even want to be a soldier at all.

Honestly the only winning move is not to play. However you have to deal with other people in life, so if you have to be a soldier for something be a soldier for yourself. I have gone full Ronin as far as I see it.

If it is against my best interests you better be making it worth my while, before you even CONSIDER having expectations of me.

SpicyMarshmellow · 2026-03-13T16:06:17+00:00

That reads like it could just as easily be a 150 year old description of how to be a good man.

Razorbladekandyfan · 2026-03-14T02:43:25+00:00

No they dont think men have any internal value.

Draggonzz · 2026-03-13T21:35:52+00:00

Wait, does an actual published non-fiction book have the phrase 'come at me, bro'?

sunyata150 · 2026-03-14T01:47:33+00:00

Defining men's else's existence to alleviate your own fears or concerns and for your own personal benefit is if anything demonstrating toxicity towards men themselves. This is only going to backfire in the long run.

Ok-Studio-4493 · 2026-03-14T14:44:52+00:00

Gender roles for women such as cooking and cleaning for a man are oppressive, but apparently a man dedicating his entire career and income to a a woman, and sacrificing his life for her in a fatal situation are completely fine and expected.

There's no "male loneliness epidemic", it's men actively choosing not to date and chase women because of these nonsensical double standards.

AutoModerator · 2026-03-13T12:27:48+00:00

Thank you for posting to r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates. All new posts are held for manual review and may take up to 48 hours to be approved. Please don’t message the moderators, we’ll make sure to review your submission as soon as possible. If this is your first post, be sure to review our rules to ensure it meets our criteria.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Electrical_Sky_5572 · 2026-03-14T19:58:33+00:00

Men like this is why Myron Gaines is justified

Global_Estimate7021 · 2026-03-13T21:00:49+00:00

Mens liberation is a paradox due to the lack of biological grounding. We identify as men not because of what our bodies do but what we do for others, so without the "good masculinity" we don't have any glue to hold us together as an identifiable gender.

That's why this is such a fringe topic for most people. It's hard to explain why men can't just "libertate themselves" without going deep into what makes a man in the first place.

Comments