“How would you define healthy, or holistic, masculinity?”
This is the question that I got when I was interviewed this past summer on the 3% Podcast. The hosts, Blake and Jamie, graciously allowed me to reshare that episode in its entirety on my own platform. You can catch that episode here.
First, I have to admit I usually shy away from these questions. I don’t actually think there are that many things that are “masculine” and “feminine.” Studies show that there’s tremendous overlap between the genders, and most things that we assume are “masculine” or “feminine” are stereotypes, not actual differences.
When we talk about things as if there are absolute essential differences, we can cause harm when people don’t live up to the stereotypes, or we can cement uneven power dynamics (like saying that men lead and women are emotional, for instance.)
But at the same time, there is such a HUGE push in the popular culture right now to define healthy masculinity. We all hear about toxic masculinity; what is healthy masculinity?
I’ve tended to steer clear from that too, because my answer would just be “Jesus”, who is also my answer for healthy femininity. Like, seriously–just be a good person!
Nevertheless, people keep demanding a definition of masculinity.
So, when I was asked on that podcast, without warning, and had to come up with something on the spot, I shared what my husband and I have been talking about. And before I get to that, let me put some caveats in that I wish I had been able to do on that podcast:
- Any definitions of masculinity and femininity have to, at some level, take into account biology. Because there really aren’t any other significant differences between the sexes. Men and women were not made different in terms of emotions, intelligence, etc. Only biologically.
- Our biology does influence how we live throughout the world. Men’s larger frame in general puts them at an advantage and women at a disadvantage.
- But also–nothing can be set in stone, simply because there is so much overlap.
So here’s what I came up with:
Healthy masculinity is putting aside the privilege men have of walking away from responsibility, and not being vulnerable or hindered by their biology, and instead using that privilege to show initiative and lift others up.
Now, a lot of people aren’t happy with that for several reasons that I’ll get to in a second. There was a lot of debate after I aired the podcast about whether what I said was right, because I made it sound like women didn’t take responsibility for things, or that only women with babies are constrained by their biology. I’m sorry about that! But I hope you’ll allow me to elaborate a bit.
Women are much more constrained by our biology than men are. Our bodies literally take over, most pointedly during pregnancy and labour and in the postpartum time, when we’re extremely vulnerable and when a small person is counting on us to keep us alive, but also at other times. Our menstrual cycles can give us pain in a way that men just don’t experience. Our smaller stature, in general, makes us more vulnerable to assault. Sex brings more risk for women because of the risk of pregnancy, pain, or abuse.
At its most fundamental level when it comes to survival of the species, a husband’s privilege in this area means that he can fully care for his wife and child. If God created both of us to be helpless and constrained by a baby then humanity would be in a whole pile of hurt. So women need somebody who is, to a certain extent, free from that so that they can still get the food when she can’t get out of bed.
I think that’s what masculinity is: It’s realizing, “wow, I have the freedom that women don’t necessarily have. And so this is great because I can use that for other people!”
Women’s bodies constrain us in a way that men’s just don’t.
And so men, much more than women, have an easier time escaping responsibility. Women bear much more of a burden for not acting responsibly.
So what does it mean to be a healthy version of the gender that has the privilege of not being as vulnerable? Well, I think Philippians 2 has something to say about this:
Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
rather, he made himself nothing
by taking the very nature[b] of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
by becoming obedient to death—
even death on a cross!”
Jesus laid aside his equality with God, in order to lift us up.
That’s what I think it looks like. It reminds me of this clip from our podcast, episode 287, with Marg Mowczko:
Basically, she’s saying that men have the responsibility of lowering themselves and giving up their status, so that they can join in unity with those around them and lift them up.
If there’s going to be a healthy masculinity, that’s what I think it is. It’s a giving up of the privilege they have in order to use it to lift up others. So it looks like taking initiative to be responsible for make things easier for people. It’s noticing when others are struggling and working to relieve some of that struggle. It’s not waiting to be served because you deserve it and are of higher status, but it’s giving up that status to help others.
The pushback comes when people say, “but women already do that.”
Yes, they do. But women do it not when we give up our privilege, but rather when we sacrifice despite the hardships we already face.
Now, I am not saying that when men act responsibly they’re taking initiative, and when women act responsibly they’re just–well–being women. I’m just saying that if there’s such a thing as healthy masculinity, it has to be something rooted in biology and in the uniquely male experience of life, which is one of relative privilege compared to the women and children around them. So a healthy version of using that privilege is to follow Jesus’ example and use that privilege for those around them.
The Marriage You Want is HERE!
It's time for HEALTHY and SAFE marriage advice!
It's time for a marriage book that doesn't leave you defeated or guilty--but instead leaves you empowered, hopeful, and excited.
It's evidence-based. It's got tons of charts! And it's fun.
Available in audio, ebook, or paperback, with an accompanying study guide, let's talk about the things that actually go into making a great marriage, rather than the things that evangelicals have tended to stress that all too often harm.
Together, we can change the evangelical conversation about marriage!
The problem when we talk about masculinity is that we often root it in ideas rather than biology.
We talk about “what it means ot be a man” and “what God created men for” and “how to be a man.” It’s all about ideas behind manhood that can often get really toxic and can’t really be well-defined, let alone reasoned from Scripture.
And usually men are defined as being in opposition to women. So if women are emotional and soft, then men have to be hard and steadfast!
But what if it’s not like that? What if the point of life is to remember what Isaiah wrote:
“In the wilderness prepare
the way for the Lord;
make straight in the desert
a highway for our God.
4
Every valley shall be raised up,
every mountain and hill made low;
the rough ground shall become level,
the rugged places a plain.
5
And the glory of the Lord will be revealed,
and all people will see it together.
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”
So God’s design is for that which is high to be brought low, and that which is low to be lifted up. So healthy masculinity is bringing God’s will for us to fruition in this sense–it’s giving up the privilege of being higher in order to lift up others.
What does this mean for healthy femininity?
Perhaps I’ll talk about that at another time, but I would see it as the flip side. Healthy femininity would be being sensitive to those who are helpless and weak, because we ourselves understand this condition really well, but then using our voice to be brave and to lift ourselves and others up out of our compassion.
So we recognize that we are often in the valleys because of our biology, and the impact that that biology has had on how we experience life as women throughout history. And then we become healthy versions of that by living out God’s purposes, as listed in Isaiah, and we lift our voices high, in order to make that rough ground level.
Does that idea of femininity and masculinity make sense?
I wanted to come up with something rooted in our biology, not in our distorted ideas of manhood and womanhood. And I wanted something that goes along with God’s bigger desires and purposes for how we relate to each other, and that’s what I’ve come up with.
It isn’t that acting responsibly is only a man’s job; it’s that a healthy version of masculinity recognizes that because he has the privilege of walking away, he has to give up that privilege to help others and elevate them.
I’m not sure that idea of masculinity is complete. But that seems biblical to me, and is something that I could support as well from research into what makes healthy relationships.
What do you think? What could I add to it? Is there a way you’d better express it? Or do you just not like the idea of naming healthy masculinity at all?
Let’s talk in the comments!
Ok, so I prefer the definition that you share in this blog, because it’s more focussed on physical strengths/weaknesses, which apply to the majority of men and women, rather than the podcast definition which was much more focussed on being able to walk away from responsibility, which basically only refers to women who are able to have children. But I still think it’s missing something, because it is still focussing on physical strength and ability – so where does that leave men who have severe physical impairments? Often times, it works to produce a definition that works for ‘most’ people, because we can acknowledge the outliers. But when you define healthy masculinity, it HAS to be something that is within reach of ALL men – because otherwise, we are writing off any man who cannot ever fulfil that definition.
I’m not sure how I’d phrase it, but I think a more workable definition would be a man who realises that he has some unearned (and even unfair) privileges because of the way society functions, and instead of using those privileges for himself, uses his position to stand against injustice. Obviously, if we ever achieved a safe and just society which treated all people as equals (spoiler alert: it’s not going to happen until Jesus returns!), then the definition would be outmoded – but at that point, we wouldn’t need a definition for healthy masculinity anyway, because it would just be how all men were!
(And I’m still not a fan of defining ‘healthy’ masculinity and femininity because it’s pretty much just about being a decent human being, which is not gender specific. But I know a lot of people love rules and definitions, and if producing a definition of how to be a nice person couched in ‘masculine’ terms is going to turn even one man away from being an Andrew Tate wannabe, then it’s worth trying to come up with one)
And yes, I was one of the people who pushed back a LOT on the original definition you gave – I hope I didn’t come across as ungracious. I’ve had a lifetime of being told by the church that ‘real’ women are able to have children, so any definition that links femininity to fertility is a red rag for me.
I have a similar issue from the male perspective actually. I think fatherhood is indeed something admirable but I do see people push fatherhood as sometimes being the pinnacle of manhood and well that is going to make things incredibly uncomfortable for those who cant have children or for those who are sorting out there own problems who understand I am not in the right emotional space to pursue relationships.
Yes, and especially when Paul said the ideal was singleness, we really can’t tie procreation to any definition of masculinity and femininity. But from a species standpoint, women are more vulnerable, especially at key times.
Totally get that! And on the podcast it was literally off the top of my head, without being able to think about it too long!
That’s kind of how I feel too! But I also think there is something to that “mountains made low, valleys lifted up” thing, where men just do have an innate privilege that can be used for others!
Something that came to mind today…God did not create “two separate genders”. He created human in His image, and only then split human into two parts.
I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone told me about how the father in ancient Hebrew society sat in the center of a circle during meals so that he could literally distribute food equally to all those he was responsible for. The picture was tied to the fact that no one else could move within society as he could (he was privileged); therefore, it was his responsibility to care for the women, children, and slaves under his protection. The privilege- being able to work and move freely in society – brought him responsibility for those who could not move freely. This really framed for me that the father was in the center of things not because he deserved it, but because he held privilege others didn’t have so to be a good man was to use that privilege to literally make sure the others survived. It’s so easy to see how people want to twist that into the “I’m the provider, so I’m in charge!” narrative. However, when you can do something others can’t, it makes you responsible. Just like an infant cannot care for himself/herself, so the adults become responsible. In our age, woman of course can care for themselves by working, etc. so this can muddy the waters a bit. However, your points on biology and how women are vulnerable at certain times that men don’t experience make complete sense. Monthly cycles, pregnancy, childbirth, postpartum, nursing, and let’s add menopause. These are extremely difficult times for many women, and a good man uses his hormonal stability to create safety for the woman who is creating life – or is suffering because she has a body that is made to create life. This is a fantastic discussion.
Oh I’ve never heard that about the circle! I like that.
Beautiful post, Sheila.
It again occurs to me how deeply childish complementarians are.
When we are adults, we take on responsibility for others around us: we rear children, we coach Little League, we hold jobs, we care for the elderly. We use that specific time in our lives – old enough to be mature, young enough to be strong and healthy – to take on responsibility to our families, churches, and communities.
Unhealthy masculinity basically says: “I get to be strong and that strength is to be used like a teenager. I am not responsible for using that strength for the good of my family; I use it to be entitled. Orgasms, sex in demand, my home cared for without a second thought. I’m strong so I get more.”
Yes, exactly. That’s what so many of these megachurch pastors sound like!
I wonder if that’s why they get so upset about women in the workforce.
What’s the difference between a 17-year-old and the way these mega-church pastors say that men can be? House gets cleaned for them, food gets cooked, they want sex and don’t have the maturity or consideration to make it good for women… but at least the husbands work!
So if wives earn money, too, it means that these man-child types basically do not have anything to distinguish themselves from children or their wives. They might then start wailing about getting a crown to become a king; however, their go-to isn’t to be so unequivocally mature and responsible (in the ways you suggest) that they are clearly not adolescents.
Oh that’s interesting! I think you have a point.
“That’s what so many of these megachurch pastors sound like!’
i.e. They sound like Andrew Tate without the huge cigars and dozen Lamborghinis.
To be fair, some have Lamborghinis. And private jets!
What this discussion reminds me of is this.
“If you love someone you need to be strong enough to protect them”.
A pregnant woman or a woman who cant stop throwing up and is taking trampoline needs somebody to help her and more often than not that person is also the father of her child.
I think a lot of us have accepted the definitions because that is what we were taught by parents, pastors, and other well-known leaders. I think the definitions were not questioned because the people questioning were labeled as rebellious or not following Jesus. In a lot of instances, it was easier to stay quiet than to be told we shouldn’t think that way. I think we have not followed what Jesus truly taught; treat others the way you want to be treated, and loving your neighbor as yourself.
When I was a young teenager my father told me that to be a man was to have responsibilities. He said that there will be people that depend on you for their very existence. Yes it will be hard at times but you won’t count the costs because you love those people and you would rather die than let them down. You’ll move heaven and earth to keep the safe, sheltered and fed. He
Concluded by saying that man doesn’t eat until he knows that all who depend on him are fed. He doesn’t sleep until he knows that all who depend on him for protection are safe in their beds. He’ll get up and go to work in the morning even though every muscle hurts and he’s still exhausted. He will listen, he’ll encourage and he’ll do his best to make everyone else’s burden lighter.
That was 53 years ago and I remember that talk like it was yesterday. It’s the way I saw my father and grandfather live. It’s the way I’ve tried to live. It’s the way I see my sons and my son in law live.
Well, that’s my definition of healthy masculinity
🙂 🙂 🙂
I love this.
My dad was a no-nonsense, practical, industrious man with very clear personal boundaries. You always knew where you stood with him. Yet I would often hear him say, “People are always fighting for their rights. It’s rubbish. The way I see it, I have no rights; only responsibilities.”
I like that, Boone! The only thing I would add is that he’s also vulnerable enough to accept help when he needs it, because that sounds a little exhausting. 🙂
Great post and insights. Having worked in intervention programs for male DV offenders, I think the piece that I’d like to add would be something about healthy masculinity also giving men permission to be vulnerable (and to embrace any number of other stereotypically “feminine” traits or gifts they may find within themselves that are outside the Man Box).
Ie. maybe healthy masculinity is about being free to be and do those things, while also being able to recognise whatever privilege we have and use those to serve others rather than accumulating advantage and power for ourselves.
..which might also be a good definition of healthy femininity?
This post came at just the right time for me. A few days ago a friend of mine had posted a short video of Josh Howerton talking about how a successful marriage is about following prescribed gender roles. The man’s domain is his job, while the woman’s domain is the house. Well, she can work, but the house should be her domain. And he did not back this crap up with any scripture. So, I commented on this post something along these lines, “show me scripture that states this.” I was not expecting any comments as hardly anyone ever comments or likes these videos she posts on her church’s marriage ministry page on Facebook. BTW, many of the videos are Mark Driscoll or good ole Josh.
Well, she said something about getting together over coffee and discussing the scriptures. She said it’s in Proverbs 31 but she’d have to find the scriptures. I commented a bit about how there isn’t just one way to be a man or a woman, the careers of some of the women in the Bible like Deborah and Lydia and I linked the Bare Marriage website. Well, her response was that she wasn’t going to argue with me.
Alrighty then. Sounds like she’s going to remain hung up on those prescribed gender roles.
Putting aside the lack of logic in picking out ONE example of a woman in the Bible as proof of how all women are meant to live, and ignoring all the others who lived differently, it makes me laugh so much when the tradwife crew pick out Proverbs 31 woman to be their example. Because have they even READ Proverbs 31? That woman was not some stay-at-home cleaner, cook and childminder. She brings “her food from afar…considers a field and buys it; out of her earnings she plants a vineyard…She sees that her trading is profitable…she makes linen garments and sells them, and supplies the merchants with sashes.” Importer of goods, landowner, vintner, trader… They could scarcely have chosen a worse example to prop up their ideas of gender roles.
I know! She also has a lot of servants.
As an icebreaker in a traditionally male job 50 years ago, in a church that didn’t know what to do with a techy female in a good job who had 0 interest in being a submissive doormat, Proverbs 31 was and is my life passage. She was involved in everything in her culture except the military and the priesthood, therefore so can I! For a number of years I wore a (synthetic) ruby solitaire ring on the on the basis that a woman worth more than rubies should have one.
But, but, she makes her living with womanly things (cloth-making) and she’s doing it out of her home! She’s not in an office building. She’s turning her home into a unit of economic production so she can always be there with her babies. Every second.
Well back then nearly everything was “home-based”. There was a lot of feminist writing about 30 years ago about how much work migrated from home to factories but the married women couldn’t migrate with the work. When both parents are raising and processing the food and clothing the and skilled trade not-always-father are all working mostly at home and the kids start helping young you get a very different ethos.
Most people going away from home to work all day is the smallest of blips in history.
I have a lot more respect for people trying to do family based businesses that let both parents parent as well as earn enough for things they can’t make, like cars, insurance, and taxes.
Haha, not sure planting a vineyard is that womanly. And pretty much all businesses were home-based back then. If you weren’t working for the family business at home, you were working for another family’s business in their home – so maybe we should start telling the Proverbs 31 fans that the men should be staying at home too!
Do you remember what reel that was, Laura? Of Howerton? That sounds like something I could quote in a chapter in my new book, if you have the link!
Here is the link. I hope you can get this.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BuKQLwrTpNg
Oh thank you!
For an example of toxic masculinity that is being pushed by men in the church all you have to do is look at Betterman lead by Chris Harper. Their core workbook curriculum, podcast, videos and other materials push very toxic and destruction beliefs women’s submission to men, men call to provide, women’s call to stay at home, men not showing emotions, etc. It’s all a fear based response to men who have looked up and realized they are losing power over. Would love for you to do an article about their material. There main points of protect and provide aren’t even biblical calling for men.
One of my mom’s sayings is, “With every privilege comes a responsibility.” I always assumed that applied to all humans, but this post reminded me of it.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this observation:
The only time masculinity is referred to in Scripture, is when Paul comments that he wishes those that circumcise themselves, “would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!” So, according to the Bible, masculinity equals male genitalia. The end.
Love this! I wonder how Mark Driscoll would feel when he sees this. Lately, he’s on a kick saying that, “Men, if you are not the head of your homes, Satan is.” That’s heresy. Christ should be the head of our homes.
Have you seen the campaign being run by the Victorian State Government in Australia? It’s called “What kind of man do you want to be?”.
https://www.respectvictoria.vic.gov.au/campaigns/kind-man/what-kind-of-man-do-you-want-to-be
The underpinning research was done by Jesuit Social Services, in a study called “The Man Box”.
https://www.respectvictoria.vic.gov.au/campaigns/kind-man/what-kind-of-man-do-you-want-to-be
From their reports: The “Man Box” describes a set of beliefs within and across Australian society that place pressure on men to act in a certain way. The Man Box consists of 19 “rules” that represent a rigid, outdated and often harmful template for how a “real man” should think, feel, and behave.
They found 7 key pillars for this harmful template: self sufficiency, acting tough, physical attractiveness, rigid gender roles, homophobia and transphobia, hypersexuality, and aggression and control.
https://jss.org.au/programs/research/the-man-box/#s3-key-findings
Apologies, the link the The Man Box project is here: https://jss.org.au/programs/research/the-man-box/
I really appreciate Brant Hansen’s book “The Men We Need” and his take on masculinity. It has been a big influence in a lot of change that is happening in my mind and heart lately. I would highly recommend it to anyone thinking through this issue!