“Masculinity” as we know it, have known it, is dead.
Manhood, the ideal, the prized jewel of civilization’s impetus to progress and foment intellectual revolution, is no longer.
This is probably not a popular nugget of wisdom in the MRA/manosphere where much energy is exerted complaining bitterly about the state of 21st century man, and more ineffectually, attempting retro-solutions that seek to rekindle man’s lost masculinity from the embers of a modern society that has exploited technological advancement to assist with the great purge of all that is Man.
Much of the MRA idealizes some conscious effort on the part of the human race (or at least the portion that cares) that will resuscitate an extinct template and miraculously, implement it against the wishes of legions of modernized, digitized humans who have gradually, through generations, become accustomed to a world that mocks and trivializes all vestiges of masculinity.
As if such a thing can ever happen.
Technology, that state of invention we lust after, that we idolize in spite of our best interests, is predicated on making life simpler and more recreational by replacing and standardizing the unpleasant chores of antiquity that required man to use his brawn, courage, resilience and creative spark to survive at all costs; in other words, all those glorious qualities that made us treasure the pinnacle of manhood for the safety and security it brought the human race as an embodiment of evolutionary ingenuity, but which are now trounced and spurned as trite, quaint archaic qualities, and which society has happily traded in for the cultural recipe of the day: sensitivity, cooperation, mildness, patience and sociological stagnation.
Masculinity as we know it is dead.
I will not pretend to know the answer.
This post is conjectural. The purpose is to present a problem and its theory, and ultimately, the question. This post is half-assed in that respect, for the quandary is so baffling that I am left tongue-tied. Most importantly, my aim is to spurn the dialog toward constructive, realistic directions of future trajectory, instead of wallowing in a dead paradigm. I love what the old paradigm was, what it represented, and where it’s brought us; but reality marches forward and we must march with it. If not, we will retreat into our own hellish descent toward obscurity while we nod in collective and futile agreement that man must be allowed to resume asserting his nature as he did…500 years ago.
And only the walls will listen.
Masculinity of yore cannot be revived.
Not without a major cosmological or terrestrial event which ushers in a new millennial era of prmitive society once again. Many of us have children, however, and we would never wish to see such an event transpire. Instead, we are left with 21st Century society that has banished the romanticized masculinity we hardly knew for a pale, odorless version of something that passes for “manhood,” a repressed, conflicted and indecisive quasi-masculinity that doesn’t quite know what to do with itself. It has no place in our world, and furthermore, its ancient legacy has been betrayed by a modern world that has ruthlessly turned its back on an ancient legacy in favor of a new brand of impetuous progress.
Man’s genes tell him he should be more, that he should rule his domain. But as his genetic constitution orders one Way, society scolds and castigates and shackles him to a lackluster world where passivity spells success.
What is the New Masculinity? How do we shape it and institute it and what will it look like?
How will the masculinity of the silicon age survive, and will it bear a resemblance to the masculinity our forebears once knew?
It is too late to conjure that image of masculinity we sentimentalize over. That masculinity cannot co-exist with the technological age we ushered in with our greed, sloth and craven materialism. We wanted it, now we have it.
What is the new masculinity?