What is Masculinity, is it some inoculation of traits each man is born with, is it a collection of characteristics, is it some transcendental right as men we carry, or more simply put is it a power dynamic created by men for men? I propose the latter, a system of oppression; systematically and historically branded into our souls with the hope and negative reinforcement that its phenomena will take.

What then does this collection of power dynamics look like? We can answer this question by imagining a stereotypical man and describing his traits and characteristics: Bold, Strong, Stoic, and Successful to some extent. Where does this generalization come from and most importantly what purpose does it serve?

During more erratic and unstable periods of human existence we have had to muster armies of capable men to protect our nations, tribes, and rarely families. We were sold Patriarchal Systems to ensure these nation states would have an ample supply of our flesh to commit to the pyre of wealth and power. These structures are visible through inspection of power in the church and hegemony of these periods. We have stoic and powerful men holding the monopoly of power of those that are lesser; Kings over peasants and The Pope over the Laity with both systems having women being excluded. In the 21st Century capitalism seized this structure and built the conception of manhood as a means to further pervert man to being subject to further exploitation. With the notion of breadwinners and the ideological perversion of Darwinism the capitalists branded their system as natural and as an extension of masculinity. So eventually with the liberation of women and their increased presence within modern industry and into the public sphere we must ask “where does this leave men?” the answer should be “revaluating our conception of gender” but alas it’s simply “men are not women”. This simplistic answer combined with the perpetual marketing of the masculine capitalist as created an ‘otherness’ with regards to women in power.

This utilization otherness and the metaphysical ambiguity has made it possible for Patriarchal Collaborators to use masculinity to serve their agenda similarly to when the church used such a force in the exploitation of foreign bodies in the new world. We see throw backs in advertising of when men use to be men, those men aren’t men; this ambiguous group doesn’t think you’re a man!

So where does this leave us? Are we destined to be perpetually exploited because of our outdated and ambiguous definitions of what we are?

Given social progresses rate I’m inclined to say yes unless we can finally see these system and cast our notions to the flames.

Why do we hold on to such haphazard ideas if we can be coerced so easily to betray our own best interests? Because we are terrified, we are absolutely frightened to be alone. We rally around labels and definition in the absurd hope that others will be there to greet us. Our own aversion to aloneness chains us to the will of others. Through cohesion we find death.

Our following of this cohesive force is an irrational choice. Instead we must be willing to become acquainted with the reality we do not know who or what we are. There is no fundamental definition of our essence. This realization is not out of nihilism but out of the absurd. We must unite our own individual traits and our own individual genders instead of relying on the marketing of the status quo.

In each one of us lays characteristics we have self-actualized throughout our lives. Out of necessity and love of life evaluate these and release the ones that cause happiness to be so elusive. Nothing short of personal liberations will save us from the damnation and destruction of exploitation.

Metaphysically man does not exist. Our existence is merely one of physical limitation and exploitation.

To be strong is not a masculine trait; it is a trait of strength itself. It has only been adopted by the concept of gender to serve a purpose. That purpose is to ensure men strive for such an ideal. Men and women alike have strength and this fact as is sufficient enough to cast away our notion of strength as a part of masculinity. Men do not hold the monopoly on this and nor should they.

What is strength in a metaphysical sense? Strength is the ability to ensure hardships, adversities, indecision. Metaphysical strength is looking at the path ahead and understanding one is capable to walk it. This understanding isn’t from the hope of success but of knowledge of the systems that must be opposed and overcame to ensure you will succeed.

Patriarchal strength is similar but adds the notion of the physical. We as men will succeed because we are physically strong and physically fortuitous. Patriarchal Strength is the refusal of acknowledging any sense of failure. Instead of revaluating our own capabilities we must throw ourselves down the path ahead and any form of failure is because we weren’t man enough. Instead of acknowledging our limitation as limitations it forces us to view them as faults, faults which are worth of blame.

This is where the notion of the male breadwinner comes into focus. We are told that we must be strong enough to succeed and anything short of complete success is a failure of our capacity of being men. When men are replaced in a space it is the whole that see it as a failing of those men, which in turn causes a crisis of the self within the observers. Seeing others being replaced pulls the observer into questioning their own masculinity. When they search for this masculinity is isn’t to be found. Masculinity is nonexistent. So women, automation, and alternative forms of production are an existential threat to masculinity.

Patriarchal pressure to be seen as breadwinners, providers, strong, and ultimately success has led us to develop a small focus. Combined with the need to see male dominated industry and politics in the world we have created a major weakness in this system. Our willingness to adhere to the masculine ideal has isolated us from ourselves and those around us. We have become increasingly unwilling to listen to the plight of those our ideology steps on. We shy away from our comrades because their choice to rebel contradicts our own beliefs. We have become fearful of being told we are wrong as our choices destroy the planet. Socially it would appear masculinity is crumbling beneath its own weight but yet it is still the driving ideology for the world’s ills.

For this reason it must be of the utmost importance that men wishing to undermine the systems of patriarchy ally themselves with women and non-binary peoples in seizing the means of production. Such a combined seizure will ultimately reduce and render patriarchal constructs irrelevant. It must be constantly be scrutinized by men that they are not following systems pressed into them by the patriarchy and that they are enabling others to live a life equal as we have had the privilege of living for so long.

So now what are we left with, how do we proceed, how do we ensure that we are not following patriarchal propaganda?

We must burn the patriarchy which birthed us, that chained us to our demise. Acknowledgment and rebellion must go hand in hand, they must be constant. We must behave in the exact opposite of its intentions. When it wants us to oppose we must join, when it wants us to chastise we must celebrate, when it wants us to be closed off we must become vulnerable. Our existence must no longer be a beguilement of someone else’s meaningless and exploitive ideology, it must be our own. We have an obligation to strive for our freedom from these patriarchal structures and strive for the freedom of those who are caught in the less powerful positions in our system.