Beyond Cultural Constructs: What is Masculinity?
What is masculinity? What is femininity? Why is masculinity important? These questions have long been subjects of discussion, and are fervently and fiercly present in contemporary debate. Cultural and societal constructs often dictate what it means to embody these traits. But is this explanation really final? Scientific research consistently shows that masculinity is not just a feeling, a temporary mood, or a mere social construct: Masculinity is innately rooted in biology and genetics, although the extent of biological influence is still debated and subjected to science research today.
While masculinity, gender, and sex are intrinsically connected for the majority of men born in male bodies, women can display masculine traits, while men can also display feminine traits. Standards of masculinity and femininity vary by generation, ethnicity, and culture. Despite biological and cultural influences, it is important to understand however that individuals express their masculinity in different ways. Increased reflexion and awareness surely helps men to understand themselves better, and express their true identities more easily. In this article, we will explore some of the evidence supporting the existence of innate masculine traits.
What is Masculinity?
Masculinity is defined as the traits and behaviours typically associated with men. When we refer to masculinity, we are talking about a person’s gender. Masculinity involves the physiological aspects of men’s brains and bodies. A male is characterised by XY chromosomes and has distinct physiological traits and hormonal profile, primarily driven by testosterone. This hormone influences a range of characteristics, from physical strength and muscle mass to aggression and competitiveness, traits historically linked to masculine roles in society. These biological factors are not mere social labels but fundamental aspects of male identity, deeply ingrained in his genetic makeup.
Even though still subjected to debate, scientific studies have consistently shown that these biological differences impact behavior and preferences. Research indicates that not just boys and girls, but also primates, from a very young age, display different preferences in toys and activities for example, which are not solely the result of socialization but innate tendencies: A research conducted and published by Alexander and Hines (2002), titled "Sex differences in response to children's toys in nonhuman primates" found that nonhuman primates exhibited sex differences in toy preferences, similar to those observed in human children, suggesting that male primates are more likely to be interested towards things and female primates towards people. Such evidence underscores the argument that masculinity is rooted in our biology, not a social construct, shaping how males interact with the world around them.
Biologically, a man is an adult human male. As established above, males typically have one X and one Y chromosome. They usually produce male gametes (sperm) and have primary and secondary sexual characteristics influenced by androgens, particularly testosterone. Biologically, masculinity is often associated with physical traits influenced by male hormones, particularly testosterone. These traits may include and are not exclusive to greater muscle mass, body hair, and a deeper voice.
Psychologically, a man can be defined by the mental and emotional traits typically associated with adult males, though these traits can vary widely among individuals. Masculinity can be identified by traits and behaviors that are collectively perceived as masculine, such as assertiveness, integrity, responsibility, competitiveness, independence, courage, fearlessness, strength, assertiveness, and leadership.
From a socio-cultural viewpoint, masculinity, is also partly influenced by societal norms, roles, and expectations. These can vary greatly across different cultures and historical periods. Masculinity is often associated with traits such as stoicism, and emotional restraint, but these associations are being increasingly challenged and redefined in contemporary societies.
It is important to understand that the above is an approach to a complex definition that is still subject to study and debate, as I mentioned before. What we do know is that genetics, biology, physical and psychological traits, as well as cultural and sociological context influence each other, both in men, as well as in women.
Innate Masculinity
Biological Foundation
Research in evolutionary psychology and genetics has shed light on the biological underpinnings of masculinity. Studies have shown that certain behaviors and characteristics associated with masculinity, such as aggression and risk-taking, have roots in evolutionary processes aimed at increasing reproductive success (Archer, 2009). For example, traits like physical strength and assertiveness have been linked to testosterone levels, a hormone predominantly found in males (Archer, 2006). Furthermore, studies on the role of genetics have identified specific gene variants associated with traits like aggression and dominance, which are often considered hallmarks of masculinity (Ferguson et al., 2010).
A research by Alexander, G. M., & Hines, M. (2002), entitled “Sex differences in response to children's toys in nonhuman primates. Evolution and Human Behavior” involved presenting vervet monkeys with a variety of toys, including those typically associated with boys (such as balls and toy cars) and girls (such as dolls and cooking pots). The results showed that male vervet monkeys spent more time interacting with the toys typically associated with boys, while female vervet monkeys showed a preference for the toys typically associated with girls. This finding indicates that sex differences in toy preferences are not solely the result of socialization but may have a biological basis, observable even in nonhuman primates. This study supports the perspective that biological differences influence behavior and preferences, which in turn shape gender roles and identity, including the concept of masculinity.
Cultural Influences
While biology plays the main role in shaping masculine traits, it’s without a doubt that cultural factors also contribute to their expression. Societal norms and expectations often prescribe certain behaviors and characteristics as masculine, leading individuals to adopt these traits to fit in and conform to gender roles (Connell, 1995). However, it is crucial to recognize that cultural influences do not negate the biological basis of masculinity but rather interact with it in rather complex ways.
Cultural Construct vs. Biological Reality
While cultural constructions undoubtedly influence how masculinity is expressed in all societies, they do not override the innate fundamental biological and gendered foundations. The politically driven contemporary push to redefine masculinity by separating it from these foundations, is leading many individuals to confusion, nihilism and identity crises. Such attempts ignore and undermine the inherent realities of male and female biology.
Masculinity and femininity should be celebrated and understood within the context of these natural differences. Attempts to diminish or negate the biological and gendered aspects of masculinity and femininity undermine the unique contributions that men and women make to society. Instead, recognizing and embracing these differences allows for a more inclusive and accurate understanding of what it means to be a man, or a woman.
Relevant Authors on Masculinity
Relevant authors like Carl Jung, Jordan Peterson, Robert Glover, and David Deida explore the concept of masculinity from various perspectives. Peterson, in his work "12 Rules for Life," emphasizes the importance of embracing traditional masculine virtues such as strength and responsibility in navigating the complexities of life. Glover, in "No More Mr. Nice Guy," discusses how societal expectations can hinder men from expressing their authentic selves and fulfilling their potential. Deida, in "The Way of the Superior Man," delves into the spiritual dimension of masculinity, advocating for men to embrace their purpose and pursue self-mastery.
Carl Jung
Carl Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, made significant contributions to our understanding of masculinity through his exploration of archetypes and the collective unconscious. In his work, particularly in "Psychological Types" and "Man and His Symbols," Jung delved into the concept of archetypes as universal symbols and patterns of behavior that are deeply ingrained in the human psyche. Among these archetypes are the masculine archetypes, which represent idealized images of masculinity that transcend individual experiences and cultural influences.
Jung identified several masculine archetypes, including the King, the Warrior, the Magician, and the Lover, each embodying different aspects of masculinity such as courage, strength, wisdom, and passion. These archetypes are psychological templates that influence how individuals perceive and enact their masculinity, shaping their behavior, values, and aspirations. Jung's work on masculine archetypes offers insights into the psychological underpinnings of masculinity, highlighting the universality and enduring nature of masculinity across cultures and historical periods.
Scientific Reference Summary:
Jung's work on masculine archetypes is not based on empirical studies in the traditional sense but draws from his clinical observations, cross-cultural studies, and explorations of mythology and symbolism. While Jung's theories may lack empirical validation in the strict sense, they have had a profound impact on the field of psychology and continue to influence contemporary understandings of masculinity. Jung's concept of archetypes and the collective unconscious offers a framework for understanding the deeper dimensions of masculinity beyond individual and cultural variations, contributing to our appreciation of the universality and complexity of human experience.
Jordan Peterson
Jordan Peterson, a clinical psychologist and professor, has garnered attention for his perspectives on masculinity and personal development. In his book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos," Peterson emphasizes the importance of embracing masculine virtues such as strength, responsibility, and courage. He argues that these virtues are essential for individuals, particularly men, to navigate the complexities of life and find meaning in their existence. Peterson's views on masculinity stem from the significance of archetypal narratives and their role in shaping human behavior. He advocates for a balanced approach to masculinity and femininity that acknowledges both their strengths and vulnerabilities, rejecting the notion that masculinity is inherently toxic.
Scientific Reference Summary:Peterson's work on masculinity is not directly tied to specific scientific studies but draws heavily from psychological principles and evolutionary theory. His perspectives on masculinity, as presented in his book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos," are informed by his background in clinical psychology and his interpretation of psychological research. While Peterson's writings may lack explicit references to scientific studies, they reflect broader themes in psychology, such as the importance of responsibility, resilience, and self-actualization in personal development. His insights into masculinity are grounded in psychological theory and clinical experience, offering a perspective that resonates with many individuals seeking guidance in navigating the complexities of modern life.
Robert Glover
Robert Glover, a psychotherapist and author, offers insights into masculinity and relationships in his book "No More Mr. Nice Guy: A Proven Plan for Getting What You Want in Love, Sex, and Life." Glover explores the phenomenon of the "nice guy" syndrome, where men suppress their authentic desires and emotions in an attempt to gain approval and avoid conflict. He argues that societal expectations often pressure men to conform to a narrow definition of masculinity, leading to feelings of frustration and resentment. Glover encourages men to embrace their true selves, assert their needs and boundaries, and cultivate genuine connections with others. His work highlights the importance of self-awareness and self-acceptance in developing healthy masculinity.
Scientific Reference Summary:
Glover's exploration of masculinity in "No More Mr. Nice Guy: A Proven Plan for Getting What You Want in Love, Sex, and Life" is informed by his clinical experience as a psychotherapist working with men. While Glover's work is not based on specific scientific studies, it draws on psychological principles and observations from his practice. His analysis of the "nice guy" syndrome and its impact on men's lives reflects broader themes in psychology related to identity, authenticity, and interpersonal relationships. Glover's insights into masculinity resonate with many individuals grappling with societal expectations and personal challenges, offering practical strategies for self-awareness and growth.
David Deida
David Deida, a spiritual facilitator and author, delves into the deeper dimensions of masculinity in his book "The Way of the Superior Man: A Spiritual Guide to Mastering the Challenges of Women, Work, and Sexual Desire." Deida explores the interplay between masculinity, femininity, and spiritual growth, advocating for men to embrace their purpose and pursue self-mastery. He emphasizes the importance of polarity in relationships, where masculine and feminine energies complement each other to create harmony and passion. Deida's work challenges conventional notions of masculinity by encouraging men to embrace vulnerability, authenticity, and emotional depth in their interactions with others.
Scientific Reference Summary:
Deida's exploration of masculinity in "The Way of the Superior Man: A Spiritual Guide to Mastering the Challenges of Women, Work, and Sexual Desire" is grounded in his understanding of Eastern spiritual traditions and contemporary psychology. While Deida's work may not directly reference scientific studies, it offers insights into the deeper dimensions of masculinity and personal transformation. His emphasis on purpose, presence, and polarity in relationships reflects broader themes in psychology and spirituality related to self-discovery and interpersonal connection. Deida's writings resonate with many individuals seeking meaning and fulfillment in their lives, offering a perspective that integrates psychological insights with spiritual wisdom.
Simon Baron-Cohen
Simon Baron-Cohen, a psychologist and author, explores the biological basis of gender differences in his book "The Essential Difference: Male and Female Brains and the Truth about Autism." Baron-Cohen's research focuses on understanding the cognitive and neurobiological differences between males and females, particularly in areas such as empathy and systemizing. He proposes the "Empathizing-Systemizing" theory, suggesting that females, on average, tend to excel in empathizing tasks, while males excel in systemizing tasks. Baron-Cohen argues that these differences are rooted in biological factors, such as prenatal hormone exposure, rather than purely social or cultural influences. His work challenges traditional notions of gender as solely a social construct and highlights the importance of considering biological factors in understanding gender differences.
Scientific Reference Summary:
Baron-Cohen's research delves into the cognitive and neurobiological aspects of gender differences, particularly in empathy and systemizing abilities. He proposes that these differences are not solely influenced by social or cultural factors but are also rooted in biological mechanisms, such as prenatal hormone exposure. Baron-Cohen's work contributes to the growing body of evidence supporting the biological basis of gender differences, challenging conventional understandings of gender as purely socially constructed.
Louann Brizendine
Louann Brizendine, a neuropsychiatrist and author, explores the neurological differences between males and females in her book "The Female Brain" and "The Male Brain." Brizendine's research draws on neuroscience and endocrinology to elucidate how hormonal differences between the sexes shape brain development and behavior from infancy to adulthood. She highlights specific areas of the brain that differ between males and females, such as the amygdala and the corpus callosum, and how these differences contribute to variations in cognition, emotion, and social behavior. Brizendine's work emphasizes the role of biology in shaping gender differences, challenging the notion that gender is purely a social construct.
Scientific Reference Summary:
Brizendine's research focuses on the neurological differences between males and females, highlighting the role of hormones in shaping brain development and behavior. She explores how these differences contribute to variations in cognition, emotion, and social behavior across the lifespan. Brizendine's work underscores the importance of considering biological factors in understanding gender differences, adding to the growing body of evidence supporting the innate aspects of gender.
Gender Identity and Spiritual Development
In the realm of spiritual development, there is an expression I often hear in spiritual teachings that says: “You need to be someone, in order to become no-one“. It refers to the understanding of the necessity of reaching maturity by becoming someone who embraces life in its full extent, integrating oneself in all aspects of human life, including family, profession and society. This reflection invites us to explore the profound human journey of self-growth, before progressing into the spiritual dissolution of a self. In other words, to navigate the spiritual path, one must establish a deep understanding of onself, by recognizing and embracing one's unique traits, before progressing deeper on the spiritual path.
The journey begins with self-awareness. To be someone means to deeply explore, understand and accept who you are at your core, while you are engaged in life. It involves recognizing your personality traits, preferences, strengths, and weaknesses. It also encompasses understanding your gender identity, cultural and ancestral background, and the myriad experiences that shape you. By acknowledging and embracing these aspects, you build a foundation of selfhood that is both strong and flexible. It’s important to note here that this foundational sense of self is not about ego or narcissism: rather, it is about understanding what self-image is about and progressing towards a unified sense of self. In spiritual terms, this is crucial because only when you have a solid understanding of your own identity can you begin to transcend it. Without this grounding, premature attempts to dissolve your sense of self can dangerously lead to confusion - what some may call personality disintegration disorder in extreme cases. Many individuals, misunderstanding the need for this maturation process, prematurely reject a sense of self, often resulting in dellusion, or even loss of direction and purpose.
Spiritual practices, whether they involve meditation, yoga, or other disciplines like martial arts or devotional practices, require a starting point. This starting point is the awareness of your current sense of self. As you engage in these practices, you begin to peel away the layers of conditioned responses, reactivity, societal expectations, and superficial identities that obscure your true nature. However, this peeling away is effective only when you are aware of what is being peeled away. Without a mature and strong sense of self, there is nothing to dissolve, and the process becomes hollow. The development of a mature sense of self is intertwined with the recognition and appreciation of one's gender. Gender is a fundamental aspect of who we are, influencing our experiences, perceptions, and interactions. In the spiritual journey, understanding and accepting your gender can provide profound deeper insights into self. It is through this understanding that one can approach the dissolution of self not as a rejection of identity, but as a transcendence of it.
Gender Dysphoria
As we established above, science points out distinct traits common to men, as well as distinct traits common to women. Yet, individuals exist who do not identify with the sex and body they were born into. This phenomenon, referred to as Gender Dysphoria, represents a minority who experience a disconnection between their sex and their gender. Gender Dysphoria is a real and a significant experience for those affected. While science confirms innate male and female traits, it also acknowledges the existence of individuals who feel a profound mismatch between their gender identity and their biological sex. Native American tribes, for instance, commonly considered the existence of a third gender. Accepting this reality is also crucial for fostering an inclusive and respectful society.
Despite the presence of Gender Dysphoria however, the majority of individuals identify with their biological sex: most women born in female bodies identify as women, and most men born in male bodies identify as men. This predominant alignment underscores the natural correlation between biological sex and gender identity for the majority of individuals.
It is essential to respect and include all individuals with Gender Dysphoria and those advocating for their inclusiveness. They have the right to express their identities and be heard. However, this inclusiveness should not overshadow the experiences of the majority who identify with their biological sex. True freedom of speech means maintaining an open discussion where diverse perspectives on gender identity are respected and acknowledged, both progressive and conservative.
While advocating for the rights of minority groups, I agree that it is important to keep an open debate, and avoid imposing one single perspective as the standard for all. Recognizing both the experiences of those with Gender Dysphoria as well as those who identify with their biological sex, ensures a balanced approach to the gender identity discussion.
Conclusion
Masculinity cannot be fully understood or appreciated without recognizing the interdependence of biology, gender, sex as well as social and cultural influence. These elements work in tandem to create the distinctive characteristics and behaviours associated with being a man, with all possible variations in their expression. Some scientific research underscores that masculinity is deeply rooted in our biology and not a mere cultural construct.
By acknowledging and respecting these interconnected foundations, we can foster a society that values and supports the unique strengths and contributions of men. This perspective champions a balanced approach, where both biological realities and socio-cultural contexts are considered, ensuring that masculinity and femininity are respected and celebrated in their differences, without fear, in a way that honors both their innate natures.
Masculinity is not merely a feeling or a cultural construction - It is also grounded in biology and genetics. While cultural influences shape its expression without a doubt, scientific evidence shows that innate masculine traits exist and play a significant role in human behaviour. Acknowledging the biological basis of masculinity is essential for understanding gender dynamics and promoting genuine equality between men and women.
On a spiritual perspective, if this is your path, by becoming someone - actively participating in all aspects of life, exploring and embracing your identity, your uniqueness, and what makes you who you are - you create the groundwork for deeper personal work and spiritual practice. This initial self-recognition is not an endpoint but a necessary stage in a deeper journey. It is through the full acknowledgment and acceptance of your unique self that you can embark on the profound spiritual journey of self-discovery. This journey, marked by years of practice and dedication, can lead to a state of unity and interconnectedness that lies at the heart of spiritual transformation.
Respecting the diverse experiences of gender, on the other hand, enriches the dialogue on gender and inclusivity. Upholding the biological realities of the majority while supporting minority voices, opening to dialogue with curiosity ensures that the conversation remains open, respectful, and reflective of true freedom of expression.
Scientific References
Alexander, G. M., & Hines, M. (2002). Sex differences in response to children's toys in nonhuman primates (Cercopithecus aethiops sabaeus). Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(6), 467-479.
Hines, M. (2010). Sex-related variation in human behavior and the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14(10), 448-456. Hines examines the neurobiological basis of sex-related variation in human behavior, focusing on differences in brain structure and function between males and females. She discusses how hormonal factors, such as prenatal testosterone exposure, contribute to the development of sex differences in brain anatomy and cognitive abilities. The article reviews empirical evidence from neuroimaging studies and animal research to elucidate the neural mechanisms underlying sex differences in behavior, providing insights into the interplay between biology and behavior.
Archer, J. (2009). Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(3-4), 249-266. Archer examines the role of sexual selection in explaining the observed sex differences in aggression. Drawing on evolutionary psychology principles, he discusses how competition for mates may drive males to engage in more aggressive behaviors compared to females. The article delves into the evolutionary roots of aggression, proposing that males may have evolved to be more aggressive as a means of enhancing their reproductive success. Archer's analysis contributes to the ongoing debate on the evolutionary origins of gender differences in aggression.
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 30(3), 319-345. In this review, Archer evaluates the challenge hypothesis, which posits that testosterone levels are positively correlated with aggression in males, particularly during mating season. He examines the empirical evidence supporting this hypothesis, discussing both animal and human studies. Archer also explores the role of testosterone in regulating social dominance and status-related behaviors. The review provides a comprehensive overview of the relationship between testosterone and aggression, highlighting the complex interplay between hormonal factors and social context.
Ferguson, C. J., Beaver, K. M., & Vaughn, M. G. (2010). Genetic and environmental influences on violent behavior: A critical review of twin and adoption studies. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 37(6), 721-739. Ferguson et al. conduct a critical review of twin and adoption studies to examine the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors to violent behavior. They analyze existing research findings to assess the extent to which genetic and environmental influences account for individual differences in violent behavior. The article discusses methodological considerations and challenges in studying the etiology of violence, providing insights into the complex interplay between genetic predispositions and environmental factors.
Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Univ of California Press. Connell explores the concept of masculinities from a sociological perspective, examining how masculinity is constructed and performed within social contexts. He discusses the plurality of masculinities and the ways in which gender norms and expectations vary across different cultures and historical periods. The book offers a nuanced analysis of masculinity as a social phenomenon, challenging essentialist and monolithic views of gender identity.
Eagly, A. H., & Wood, W. (1999). The origins of sex differences in human behavior: Evolved dispositions versus social roles. American Psychologist, 54(6), 408-423. Eagly and Wood review empirical evidence from evolutionary psychology and social role theory to explore the origins of sex differences in human behavior. They compare and contrast the evolutionary perspective, which emphasizes evolved dispositions shaped by natural selection, with the social role perspective, which highlights the influence of socialization and cultural expectations. The article provides a comprehensive overview of the theoretical frameworks and empirical findings related to gender differences, offering insights into the interplay between biological and sociocultural factors.
Buss, D. M. (2008). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of the mind. Pearson Education. Buss introduces the field of evolutionary psychology and its applications to understanding human behavior. He discusses evolutionary principles such as natural selection and sexual selection, highlighting their relevance to various domains of psychology, including mating preferences, parental investment, and aggression. The book provides an overview of key concepts and research findings in evolutionary psychology, offering a framework for analyzing human behavior from an evolutionary perspective.
