IQ2 Debate: Masculinity – Is It Really So Fragile?

Toughen up. Be a man. It seems guys are prodded from boyhood to meet certain gendered standards of brash confidence and stoicism. Yet they are also encouraged to protect, respect, provide, and be good guys. Is ‘masculinity in crisis’? Or are we at a critical juncture for positive change?

We invited four speakers to share their perspective on modern masculinity. Is it really fragile?

Hear from journalist and educator Catharine Lumby, psychologist and men’s health advocate Zac Seidler, author and journalist David Leser, and social scientist Raewyn Connell.

//

Find out more about The Ethics Centre:

Experience our events:

Be part of our community:

[soulfuzz]

I don’t see how this was even a debate, all the speakers seem to agree that men would be happier if they were more like women. They rightly point out that stereotypes are stifling but they speak like they just want them changed into something else. The people that have helped me understand masculinity the most are those who show people how to channel these energies into positive things.

[Tina_K]

This isn't a debate, this is an echo chamber. And personal experience has taught me that toxic femininity vastly outnumbers fragile masculinity, so much even that the former is often a direct cause of the second.

[lancewalker]

I refuse to take anyone who presumes to speak on this subject seriously who does not take into consideration the influence of a culture whose message to boys has been: "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle". The "weakness" you continually make reference to as that which men fear fails to address the root of the fear: worthlessness. It should not be surprising that many of them would be so desperate to project their power into the world, they have been robbed of positive aspiration and are left only with a mirage of superficial power by which to establish any modicum of relational value. To cut a long story short: feminism has absolutely no place in addressing this issue, the ideology simply has no ability to understand the complexity of these issues, and in particular, the prospect of a feminist understanding the world from the male perspective is absurd. This was painful to listen to.

[TheIggyfuzz]

Interesting debate. I do feel a bullet was dodged when it came to addressing violence, aggression and strength as a vital part of this conversation. Why do we need to frame the awareness and experience of emotions as "masculine fragility"? Why not peddle it as "enhanced emotional intelligence", getting rid of the paradigm of gender all together? Nobody in their right mind would embrace what they perceive to be a weakness. But everyone wants to improve themselves.

[Myknewimterest]

community defines, family defines, the the way we are raised is difference defines for the individual. that it is defined as a leader, responsible, adhering, communication, empathy, compassion, for unity.

how men are not masculit but femine,

[armanshaghi]

IQ2 I'm a big fan but you've dropped the ball here - a debate motion needs to be a statement, the sides for/against ... you know that. This was a great chat, but not a debate.

[emmmanueeel]

One of the arguments seems to imply that lots of men are quite fragile, not that strong. That argument assumes that these weak men are influenced by society to act more aggressively and with less emotion to fit the traditional stereotype of masculinity. I'm sure that for a number of men, it is the case. But these men are not getting stronger mentally, they just fake it: that's why there is a distortion between reality and what they want other people to see in them. The thing is, I believe that the vast majority of people, no matter the gender if the conditions are right, can become stronger mentally, more decisive, and more stable. For that to happen, we need to do acts of wisdom and strength and go through challenging times and do the best we can, while being honest about what we can do at the moment and not blame ourselves if we don't achieve everything, we thought we had to do. It's more an Aristotelian way of thinking than a stoic way.

[Myknewimterest]

it took a 1000 years to figure some things out.

[Myknewimterest]

we need to stop the spead of that ignorant information, seperate the bad ones from what we need. we are so far from the farm and its the same issues.

[victorkonijn]

Interesting watch. I think the debate could have been clearer and gone deeper by from the outset defining masculinity and femininity as a certain set of values and needs in both men and women. We can then shift the debate: how and why society has grown to value masculinity above femininity and still does without much shifting, while individuals of both genders are becoming more comfortable in embracing their full authenticity by valuing feminin qualities for their personal relationships next to masculin qualities - and how we would like to see both trends merge including what we can (all) do to be part of the desired change.

[Myknewimterest]

ethics females are need of more support, they need to check themselves and each other. and we have to keep the population up. ethic says that infrigment and fraud has toppled our society .

[Myknewimterest]

so we don't know what is means so we make up what we expect. our world masculinity is a child. a narrisictict world and ideals.

[Myknewimterest]

i believe it resentments of the corperation and government. on grown childly guys and girls. it the systematic if the corperation benefits for the dismembered community, so the gold is to make ne new culture of people without guidance to keep the system functioning but the system is falling a part.

[Readmybumpersticker]

But the entitlement and rigid gender lines Raewyn talks about in domestic violence sound to me like the consequences of a fragile man lashing out to try and achieve power over a woman to achieve some stereotype of masculinity. Can't they both be sort of right?