Stolen entirely from an old /r/menslib post:
When we ask “what is a good new model for masculinity?” The conversation tends to devolve quickly. I think this is due to a miscategorization of what we actually are talking about. It’s asked as an identity question, and it’s answered as an identity question.
Men are not asking what a good model for masculinity is because they are interested in constructing a personalized identity for themselves. They are not trying to construct an aesthetic. It is not a self-generated identity which is being hunted for.
What is desired so very strongly by these men is a rubric.
Much criticism of toxic masculinity is not a condemnation of a previously-assumed-to-be neutral quality of the masculine gender role. It is the fundamental rejection of a system of valuation, and most notably what is considered it’s ideal and/or reward structure. The expectations placed on men by toxic masculinity are, even if unfair, unrealistic, and unhealthy, the model by which men are evaluated. It is how men figure out how they are doing, and how they are likely to be treated by others. It’s how they figure out what they can expect in reward for performing their role in society well.
What I cannot underline hard enough is that the worth referred to here is not self-worth. We are not talking about self esteem, although a high valuation of one’s own self can, for obvious reasons, be fed by the praise of others. Instead, many behaviors, attitudes, and models now seen as toxic were what young men would look to and imitate in efforts to be worthy of the recognition and the praise of others in society. It is the “witness me” desperation of the War Boys from Fury Road, at its rawest and most extreme, but stripped to its components it’s the most basic human instincts to fit in, aspire, imitate, and be loved. Those instincts are human and natural. What information those boys are fed, about what is desirable, what makes someone attractive, successful, enviable, or by contrast pitiful, pathetic, and unlovable…those are where toxic patterns can take root.
When people ask “what is a nontoxic model for masculinity?” What they are asking is “I grew up being told that if I did specific things, I would be loved and respected and valued. Now I am told that if I do them, I won’t be loved or respected or valued, I will be bad. I will be rejected…”
“…Okay, what specifically do I do instead? I want to be a good man. What does it look like to do that? I need to know.”
The answer cannot be “whatever you want.”
It can’t.
That’s a perfectly alright answer to a completely different question. It’s the answer to the question “I don’t want to be held to those rules. I don’t care what people think of me. Who can I be?”
Billions of men are out there. They are not going to all just do like, you know. Whatever they feel like. Because some are doing to be more successful than others. Some are going to gain social status, affection, respect…things all people want. And other people who want that same praise and status will obviously try and imitate what those men are doing. And largely, because we aren’t inventing a whole world from scratch year zero with no preexisting expectations, the people who succeed in that way will be the ones doing the old things. The ones people are already trained to like. If everyone just does what is already valued, they’ll do the toxic stuff. Even if it kills them.
Our side is not bargaining from a position of power, folks. We do not have the luxury of having no counter offer to the claim “it’s problematic but girls all want this more anyway” or “if you work yourself to the bone you’ll have cash and people will think you’re valuable.” Even if those claims are wrong, lies defeat silence every time. Merely saying “that won’t actually get you social status” helps noone if you have no alternative route for people to gain the praise of others. We need some sort of obvious model for behavior that people can aspire to and play out with the rational expectation that it will be met with praise.
That’s not a popular position in this sub. There is an obvious draw to the idea that no rules is best. Any system to provide value will, even just by rewarding some, deprive others. Any trait that could be regarded as virtuous will have some people incapable of having or obtaining it due to no fault of their own.
Taking that to the conclusion that gender expectations should therefore be destroyed entirely is as much of an overcorrection as saying that because some people have food allergies, nobody should have food. There can be different dishes, with different flavours. We can make more gender roles. We can make dozens. Hundreds. And “none for me, thanks,” can always be an option.
But many, maybe even most people are the sort to walk into a restaurant and ask the waiter “what’s good?” They arent looking to obsess over details, they aren’t super into customization, they just want to do what works, and they’re asking “if this old thing doesn’t work, what does?”
Stop saying “whatever you want.”
TLDR: Men do not want role models, they want paths to praise and positivity
This is an interesting thought. The tldr though IMO is weird, because to a role model is a path to praise and positivity.
The problem is that the path and the model are both determined by the society. To build new ones, you need a vanguard. But in this case, the vanguard would be self sacrificing itself to pave the path, and that while the old path does work to get praise and success.