Why does the world fail to see the good in masculinity? By Vivek Singh

Many reap the benefits of men and their masculine attributes but condemn masculinity without due credit for the good that men have accomplished. For every male criminal there are thousands of male heroes.

As for men’s equality, we must first realize that men and women can’t replace each other. As creatures of mother earth and God, both sexes are designed to exist in their own right but in complement to one another. Everything men do can’t be done as well by women and much of what women do can’t be done as well by men. Men and women are equal but different—opposites that support each other. Men’s role in advancing society through technology applying to labor and agriculture, the military, mining, and occupations as a firefighter, police officer, etc. have been cherished. We use and depend on these technological advancements everyday yet we still condemn the source of their creation with no credit? Through the creation of a constitution, government, and just laws, engineering, and technology, men and masculinity advanced society.

However, we must keep in mind that although men and women may have different roles when united, the roles of men and women must be equally shared when they separate, especially if children are involved, (including custody and support of children) because each parent takes on the tasks and responsibilities of the other–roles are split (of equal importance) pertaining to children and to equal physical custody shared by both parents.

In recent years fatherless children have increased. This disallows children to receive teaching from both parents and causes them to go the wrong way.

Feminism, a recent sociological cancer, was created and started spreading, breaking up families. It continues recently taking the lives of many males through false accusations and keeping fathers away from their children, causing tremendous harm to men and to the healthy development of children. Laws are specifically designed to favor women and target men, hypocritically holding those who claim to be equal to men (women) less accountable.

When a man commits a crime like murder, rape, or expresses aggression through war, masculinity is targeted and blamed under the premise that all masculinity is toxic. However, all the pros of men and masculinity are exempt by this feminist assessment, and some of the negative assessment includes normal male characteristics that feminists just don’t like (e.g. the male’s sexuality, commonly condemned or used by women to get what they want from men). The heroes portrayed in movies too show aggression, violence, and ambition unchecked by conscience. These are examples of toxic masculinity. All that makes up toxic masculinity (defined by feminists) is if the male identity doesn’t somehow benefit women. If there is no positive masculinity in the world, then toxic masculinity will increase as toxic people (including toxic femininity) will set the standard. No positive masculinity or positive femininity will exist to fight it either. Masculinity doesn’t always destroy by causing wars, it helps to defeat tyranny or dictatorships often necessary in response through war. Also keep in mind that through men masculinity is often used as a tool, if not by the government by women in which case men are pawns–this form of masculinity can be toxic (e.g. chivalry). As for the economy, when a male becomes a thief, feminists attribute toxic masculinity as the cause, but when economies grow, credit is either exempt or taken by women.

When men take foolish risks, its ‘toxic masculinity’, but when they take heroic risks, often required performing the duties of a police officer or firefighter or in hazardous occupation required of a miner or logger, the credit is either unnoticed or taken away by feminists. The media is notorious for doing this.

The media and movie industry is also extremely dishonest in its portrayal due to apparent feminist propaganda in conveying masculinity and male roles. For example, in the recent movie Avengers End Game, Captain America got 1h,6m of screen time, Iron Man 1h2m and a female character, Cyborg Nebula, got 41m, less than any superhero. Source: Daily Mail. Refer to:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6958449/The-REAL-battle-Avengers-male-superheroes-Endgame-enjoy-screen-time-women.html

It was being debated and hyped by feminists why a female superhero got this much less screen time than a male. Is this effort to incorporate the female superhero role not an attempt to take away pros from masculinity and men? How can one say female superheroes don’t get screen time, especially when these comic book-based movies were prior being criticized by feminists for being sexist or ‘objectifying’ women? Few women even watch superhero movies or read superhero comics. It’s a business after all, so the industry has to relate to the target audience.

A bit of reality must still apply to make a movie watchable. Professional occupational standards have even been lowered to accommodate women as police officers and fire-fighters, so we must also take this into consideration when the effect is applied to a movie.

Recently, Gillette showed an ad on ‘toxic masculinity’ which got Gillette razors boycotted by men. The sales really went down. Now Gillette is still recovering from it.

Fathers can do a mother’s role too, if necessary. Keep in mind that a father is one who loves sometimes with less emotional expression, but also often with a different kind of expression often unnoticed. A father shows love to a child in very meaningful ways. He introduces the world to a child, teaches a child responsibilities, how to walk and get up from a fall, and about life; he teaches a child to learn from his own experiences and reflects reality to him or her.

A father’s love is known when a man becomes a father. So accept and enjoy what your father’s guidance and keep loving your mother too.

It’s not masculinity that is toxic, it’s the lack of a positive version that is the problem. Bad men don’t become good when they stop being men, they become good when a positive masculinity is developed from childhood. But a positive masculinity is not to be subjectively defined by women nor men who are influenced by women.

As long-time men’s rights advocate Alan Millard writes:

“Are not our rights as men more important than our masculine image? How masculine is it to have no status as men, to be second-class citizens as men? There’s little dignity or pride to be had from a gutted ‘masculinity’. Masculinity becomes nothing but a face, a façade–something without substance if not supported by rights, including the right for men to exist in their own right. This existence otherwise fits the masochistic male identity that has been used to define ‘masculinity’–“Take it like a man.” Is it possible to have a lesser identity than ever before yet still be masculine? Sure. but only if we define masculinity as a mere servitude to others and self-loathing. There is no regard for men in a servitude and disposable role, and a low status without rights masked by a masculine image will continue to ensure this continues. Take it ‘like a man’ about sizes up his existence without thought or consideration given to him as a real person. This idea of masculinity without a priority given to equal rights depletes any worthy masculine/male status and serves well to undermine our basic human rights.

Keep in mind that a positive femininity is necessary to support a positive masculinity. (e.g. Feminism is toxic femininity just as chivalry is toxic masculinity.)”

5 Replies to “Why does the world fail to see the good in masculinity? By Vivek Singh”

  1. Well exposed the pretence of feminists and henpecked men. Along with Me too Movement, Feminism is taking the toll of wrongfully convicted and innocent victims. When will our lawmakers take into consideration this burning issue of lopsided verdict in courts? Linear family values are disrupting and innocent progenies are suffering. Times have changed. The Angel in the House image has reversed as the medium of extortion of money for feminists. So deplorable state of marriage institution causing unrepairable loss and troubles, but who cares? Shiv is the principle of sheer truth and purity, Shakti is the principle of divine energy. Without the assistance of Shakti, Shiv cannot do the good of the world, and without the assistance of Shiv, Shakti cannot take the initiative. Both are made for each other.

  2. I realise that English may not be your first language, but I beg you to find someone to edit your articles before publishing. What you are trying to say is important, but gets lost in such a poorly constructed and written piece and just comes across as an incoherent rant.

Leave a Reply