This post is part three of a three part series. Click here for part one and part two.
A woman simply is, but a man must become. Masculinity is risky and elusive. It is achieved by a revolt from woman, and it is confirmed only by other men.
– Camile Paglia, Sexual Personae
‘What is Masculinity?’
While masculinity can be understood in seven different ways, the exact definition of masculinity has not yet been proposed.
Masculinity is the central attribute of manhood by which individual men are measured against the ideal.
In the pursuit of this ideal, men require a solid conception of what they should be striving for. Every culture has its own pantheon of gods, heroes, and role models against which individual men can compare themselves. Yet, these figures are selected precisely because of their virtues.
What are the virtues of men?
The word ‘virtue’ rings oddly to modern ears. The shared image of virtue seems closer to a quiet grandmother praying in her room with a lit candle rather than a manly figure cutting across the wilderness.
Simply put, however, virtue is the trait of moral excellence.
The classical Greeks and Romans identified four cardinal virtues: Prudence, Temperance, Fortitude, and Justice. Each of these virtues can be worked upon by careful and dedicated effort. Christian theologians later added three theological virtues to this set: Faith, Hope, and Charity. These theological virtues, by contrast, can only be acquired and augmented by the grace of God.
Another set of virtues are the ‘Seven Heavenly Virtues’, which are the opposite of the ‘Seven Deadly Sins.’ These virtues are: Chasity, Temperance, Charity, Diligence, Patience, Kindness, and Humility.
Yet, in both of these sets, these virtues remain as true for men as they are for women.
Jack Donovan, in his book ‘The Way of Men’, tries to establish four ‘Tactical Virtues’ for men. He makes a distinction between those who are ‘good men’ and those who are ‘good at being men’. In addition, he claims that these virtues are amoral, and, as such have no bearing on the ‘moral excellence’ of a man. His list of ‘tactical virtues’ are: Strength, Courage, Mastery, and Honour.
Donovan fails to account that if a virtue is ‘amoral’, it cannot truly be considered a virtue. Nor are his four ‘Tactical Virtues’ limited to the masculine realm. A woman can display Strength, Courage, Mastery, and Honour. Of these, only Honour strikes as something more unique among men. Honour makes sense as a central virtue among a legion, a shipcrew, or a band of thieves rather than among a group of women in any form of traditional occupation.
Masculinity, however, does not exist alone. It exists in contrast to femininity. The virtues of men must be opposite to, but supportive of, the virtues of women. The opposites of the Cardinal & Theological virtues, as well as the Seven Heavenly Virtues, are sins. The opposite of Donovan’s virtues do not rank much different, albeit the opposite of Strength – Weakness – does not seem a sin in and of itself. What is required is a set of virtues that exemplify the masculine world as well as compliment the feminine world.
The Virtues of Men & Women
While each of these virtues require greater elaboration than the current space provides, the following introduction will be sufficient for this post.
Please note: A more in-depth discussion of the feminine virtues will occur in another post.
The Seven Masculine Virtues are:
Activity (or, Yang)
Competitiveness (or, Contest)
Fealty (or, Arborescence)
Staunchness (or, Rigidity)
Duty (or, Imperativity)
Respect (or, Honour)
Exclusivity (or, Initiativity)
Activity (or, Yang)
Activity is the central aspect of masculinity. Others may call this aspect ‘Drive’. The Chinese philosophical concept of ‘Yang’ – in contrast to ‘Yin’ – serves as the most complete conception of activity. Yang presents the active, the positive, the heavenly, and the restless.
Culturally, the ‘Activity’ of the male is encapsulated by the traditional and stereotypical image of the man going out into the world, whether it be hunting or working a steady job, in order to bring home the much-needed food or money. The male goes out and takes, while the female remains and receives. This aspect of masculinity can also been seen in the symbolic associations form by the sexual dynamics between the two sexes.
Parallels: Heavenly ‘Diligence’, Donovan’s ‘Strength’.
Feminine Counterpart: ‘Passivity’ (or, Yin).
Competitiveness (or, Contest)
The male, in his pursuit of the world, will encounter other males. The desires of males will inevitably conflict. The only solution is a contest, an agon. This contest must result in one man being a decisive winner and the other a decisive loser, otherwise there exists no solution. The competition could be over something as essential as food or the possibility of procreating with a woman, or it could be something more abstract such as money or reputation. Not only will men compete against each other for something they desire, but men desire competition itself. When there is no need for war, there will exist sports.
Donovan touches upon a similar virtue in his discussion of ‘gameness’ within his chapter on Courage.
Parallels: Cardinal ‘Fortitude’, Donovan’s ‘Courage’
Feminine Counterpart: Cooperation (or, Selflessness)
Fealty (or, Arborescence)
The contests of men will naturally form a hierarchy of betters. This hierarchy is essential for the establishment of any stable group, whether it be a tribe, country, company, or team. There must be an internal order stemming from the leader onto deputies, officers, and, finally, everyone else. Men must pledge fealty, a declaration of allegiance, to this order. Then, the men must honour the rank of those above them. If the order is unstable, contests will erupt between men of higher and lower statuses.
This sense of hierarchy has also been given the name of ‘Arborescence’, because it is structured like a tree: there is one central trunk that begins with a peaked top that widens to the base, and is supported by its roots.
By contrast, the corresponding feminine virtue is ‘Cooperation’. This feminine virtue, however, is antithetical to hierarchy. One cannot cooperate with someone who is their superior; you obey their command. One can only cooperate with an equal.
Parallels: Cardinal ‘Justice’, Heavenly ‘Humility’
Feminine Counterpart: Equality (or, Egalite)
Staunchness (or, Rigidity)
The structure of any organization requires a sense of order and permanence. Without this stability, the hierarchy would devolve into a constant set of competitions. Men would vie for their favoured positions until a new order would be established. Staunchness is the glue that holds the order together.
In many cases, the virtue of ‘Staunchness’ parallels that of Duty (below), except for the fact that there can exist a rigidity in other aspects of life, such as Reason. Only a man would be bold enough (and stupid enough) to follow the cold logic of Reason to its natural end; a man would make a decision and abide by it, even if it killed him. Only a woman would have Reason enough to reject rigidity and live another day.
Parallels: Cardinal ‘Fortitude’, Heavenly ‘Patience’
Feminine Counterpart: Adaptability (or, Malleability)
Duty (or, Imperativity)
Men have jobs to do. These jobs, regardless of their status, must be done. A man should know what is asked of him, and he must perform it to the best of his ability. There is no excuse for abandoning a duty. If he cannot do his job, he and others will pay the consequence. A man who cannot fulfill his duty is a danger to everyone else. This is the reason why soldiers who desert in battle are shot.
In a drastic example, during the Battle of Mars-la-Tour in the Franco-Prussian war, the Prussian forces who were greatly outnumbered, but needed to attack a French line protected by artillery. Adalbert von Bredow, the overseeing calvary officer knew he and his bridge must charge into the cannon’s mouth. Reportedly, he said: ‘It will cost what it will’. He charged with his brigade, and succeeded in his task, but at the cost nearly half of his men.
Men must pursue their duty, even onto death. This rigidness can make for awful company. A man who prizes his duty must abandon everything that interferes with it, whether it be the simple pleasures of a meal, the possibility of intoxication, or even a relationship with a woman. Aeneas must leave the shores of Carthage.
Woman, by contrast, are not so staunch in this virtue. For them, their expression of Duty appears more as an act of compassion for the other. A woman may drop her obligations in order to help someone in need, in order to care for an other before herself. She empathizes with the sufferer and tries her best to remedy the situation. A man possessed by Duty has no time for such distractions as they interfere with his calling. That being said, some men may have the Duty to help those in need, in which case, everything else would fall to the wayside.
Parallels: Cardinal ‘Justice’, Heavenly ‘Diligence’
Feminine Counterpart: Compassion (or, Empathy)
Respect (or, Honour)
Men, in their activity and drive toward competition, want to be respected for their accomplishments. If a man receives ‘Respect’ or ‘Honour’ from his fellows, he feels a sense of accomplishment and power.
Woman, by contrast, want to be loved.
In many cases, a man has no problem being hated by another man, as long as that man gives the respect deserved. Or, as Cicero puts it: “Unpopularity earned by doing what is right is not unpopularity at all, but glory.” If an honorable man is booed by a crowd, he knows that he is above them and worries not. The same is less likely to be said of a woman.
Yet, this is not to say that Respect is greater than Love. Respect is conditional, while Love is unconditional. No one can respect a man who has not earned it; but any one could love a man who does not deserve to be loved.
Interestingly, St. Paul in his Letter to the Ephesians demonstrates this tacit understanding between Respect and Love: “Let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband” (Ephesians 5:33). Men are required to give what women desire (Love), and women are required to give what men desire (Respect).
Parallels: Heavenly ‘Humility’, Donovan’s ‘Honour’
Feminine Counterpart: Love (or, Benevolence)
Exclusivity (or, Initiativity)
Men who are bound together by ‘Duty’ and ‘Respect’, while organized within a certain hierarchy or order, must have limits to their community. Not every male is allowed to be with the men. There must be standards to every group. Weak men endanger the lives of others, especially in the physical dominions of war or dangerous labour. Even in more abstract dominions, such as the arts, there are boundaries between those who are ‘in’ a group or movement and those that are ‘out’.
Anthropologically, this structure is most evident by practices of initiation, wherein boys must prove their mettle to the men of the community. Famously, the Satere-Mawe tribe of the Brazilian Amazon has a practice where boys at the age of 13 must place their hands in gloves filled with bullet ants – insects whose bites are rated as the most painful of stings, and can give the sensation of burning that can continue unabated for almost 24 hours. The boy must keep his hand in the glove for 5-10 minutes at a time, and must suffer the hardship without crying or showing weakness. He must then do this up to 20 times over the course of several months. Only after this ordeal, can he be understood as a man. Any male who cannot do this, has not earned his manhood.
Not all initiations are as tough as this particular one, but every culture has its own.
These rites of passage are not limited to the entry into manhood. There are various thresholds within groups, faiths, and hierarchies. Examples such initiations include Baptism for Christians, matriculation for scholars at universities, or even bootcamp for new military recruits.
Thus, men have a disposition to draw staunch boundaries between who is ‘in’ and who is ‘out’. Once ‘in’, a man is wholly loyal to those in the same group.
By contrast, the feminine counterpart is ‘Inclusivity’ (or, Openness), which allows others to enter and participate. A group of boys might not want to include the new boy, but one of their mothers might ‘force’ them to play nice. This drive to include permits the band of boys to grow and establish greater strength and skill, which would otherwise be missed. But, like all virtues, its distortion can introduce problems: unrestricted inclusivity may lead to the dissolution of the group and group loyalties.
Parallels: Cardinal ‘Prudence’
Feminine Counterpart: Inclusivity (or, Openness)
In short, a new set of Masculine specific virtues must be established and understood if the concept of masculinity is to be restored. While this set of seven virtues remains untested and untried, they help articulate the knowledge that each man hold silently in his heart.
I hope you enjoyed this series.
Click here to revisit part one and part two.
Follow me on Twitter.