To be a man, or not to be a man, that is the question..?

Last year witnessed the incarceration and subsequent release of Andrew Tate, a self-proclaimed contemporary Adonis and podcaster. The internet erupted, with Twitter, as always, eagerly joining the bandwagon to satirize the situation. Undoubtedly, it was quite a laughable event, with a pizza box becoming an unintentional accomplice in disclosing his particular whereabouts. While memes and jokes circulated, the incident prompted a revival of the perennial question surrounding male identity. In this contemporary landscape, the discourse on identity permeates various media forms, triggering generational tensions even within the confines of familial holiday gatherings. Figures like Tate have assumed the mantle of self-proclaimed prophets of masculinity, invoking antiquated ideals deeply entwined with the essence of male identity. Their rhetoric extols the virtues of dominance, strength, success, and self-sufficiency. However, the perilous potential of these characteristics, fostering violence against women or culminating in excessively assertive behaviour, cannot be ignored.

The predicament with these self-proclaimed prophets lies in their endeavour to circumscribe masculinity within a fixed essence, cultivating an unwavering and rigid conception of manhood. This inflexible perspective endeavours to market traditional notions of masculinity as an everlasting and immutable truth about men. The philosophy student in me is fervently exclaiming, 'Panta rei.' How is it that a concept that spans more than two millennia still eludes our collective understanding? Heraclitus, with his timeless wisdom, proposed the idea that change is the only constant in life. Yet, despite these age-old insights, the question lingers: Why does humanity struggle to grasp the inevitability of change? (Let’s keep that question for yet another blog post since it would lead us down a rabbit hole..)

Those opposing Tate and his ideologies frequently grapple with articulating a definitive answer regarding the essence of masculinity. Responses, when proffered, often gravitate towards nebulous descriptions of what constitutes a 'good person'—traits universally applicable to any gender. The question arises: why is it imperative for men to metamorphose into 'good men' rather than merely 'good people'? The answer might lie in our societal survival instincts, not in a biological sense, but within a socio-cultural context. Navigating the intricate social milieu necessitates individuals to possess both self-assurance and acknowledgement from their environment for optimal flourishing. To survive, comprehending one's identity becomes pivotal. Gender emerges as one societal response to this quandary, with assigned gender roles playing a formative role in shaping individual identities, albeit this answer exhibits cultural variability.

For some, the gender assigned at birth seamlessly integrates into their authentic selves. Charles Taylor's concept of the authentic self, an entity forged, constructed, and unveiled over time, resonates with this perspective. To unpack this idea further for those not deeply immersed in philosophical discourse, envision the authentic self as the essence of who you truly are. It's not a static identity stamped at birth but a dynamic, evolving construct shaped by personal experiences, societal influences, and self-discovery. In simpler terms, it's like the ongoing narrative of your life, where your understanding of yourself unfolds, matures, and takes shape through the various chapters of your journey. Thus, when we speak of someone's gender seamlessly integrating into their authentic self, we're acknowledging a congruence between their innate sense of identity and the gender assigned at birth, forming a harmonious narrative within the broader story of their life.

Portraying masculinity in line with what Tate and his followers presented to society appears to be a disastrous notion. Due to its reinforcement of harmful stereotypes and the propagation of a rigid, narrow definition of manhood. Tate's emphasis on dominance, strength, and self-sufficiency may appeal to some, but it carries detrimental consequences for individuals and society at large.

Tate's ideals align with aspects of toxic masculinity, fostering an environment where aggression is normalized, emotional expression is stifled, and traits traditionally associated with femininity are devalued. This perpetuation of toxic masculinity contributes to increased mental health issues and interpersonal conflicts.

While it is understandable for some to strive to be both a 'good person' and to assert their gender, it is crucial to recognise the fluidity and diversity within masculinity. Embracing the fluidity of gender roles allows for a more inclusive and compassionate society, where individuals can authentically express themselves without conforming to rigid expectations. Recognising and celebrating the myriad ways in which masculinity can manifest fosters an environment that values authenticity, personal growth, and the richness of human experiences.

So, as we as a society navigate this complicated exploration of masculinity, let us not forget the punchline: "Frailty, thy name is man." Let authenticity and diversity have the final curtain call, leaving us with a standing ovation for the richness of the human experience.