Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

The ‘Masculinity Crisis’ Is Real.

132 replies

MsAmerica · 24/01/2026 22:53

The ‘Masculinity Crisis’ Is Real. This Forgotten Book Explains Why.
Why do men find it so hard to connect with other people, and their own emotions?
By Parul Sehgal

Where are we exactly, in this deathless debate about the crisis of masculinity? We stand splattered in discourse, ears ringing from the unceasing alarm over men and their prospects — their lack of education and lack of friends, their porn and gambling, their suicide rates. This while tech elites, sporting their bulgy new bodies, call for an infusion of “masculine energy,” and a hideous new sport is born: “sperm racing.” Is it any wonder that a stance has emerged of principled contempt? The so-called crisis, according to its critics, is actually a crisis of accountability, a refusal on the part of men to regulate themselves emotionally and behave like adults. In this view, men aren’t in crisis, America is in crisis, and to suggest otherwise is to engage in a kind of “himpathy” — to show excessive concern for men’s feelings — and to co-sign a reactionary pushback.

Amid all this conversation, simultaneously so bloated and thin, an old book has been exhumed. Eccentric and a bit embarrassing even in its own time, it is also oddly appealing in its open curiosity and lack of inhibition, even as it exemplifies how any idea, passed through the fun-house mirror of discourse in our moment, gets reflected back in its most grotesque form.

Its author, the journalist Norah Vincent, has been anointed as something of a godmother to the manosphere. In her book “Self-Made Man” (2006), she recounted an 18-month social experiment in which she disguised herself as a man and infiltrated male-only spaces. As “Ned,” she dated, applied for jobs, did a stint in a monastery. She joined a bowling league and lurked at dank strip clubs. Vincent assumed her project would reveal that men moved through life with a kind of ease that women could scarcely imagine. She was brutally disabused. The men she met were lonely and unhappy. Their pain became her own. When she tried to date as a man, the cruelty of women left her shaken and humiliated...

At first it was the world of masculine subtext that felt so exotic, the micro-intimacies she traced, small moments of warmth and deference between men. Even a handshake felt like a revelation: “Receiving it was a rush, an instant inclusion in a camaraderie that felt very old and practiced.” But slowly she began to find the communication between men painfully awkward — “bumper cars trying to merge.” The men she met had a palpable need for one another’s company; they seemed starved for closeness, but they could not speak of anything personal. She wrote of one: “I could feel his loneliness, his need for intimacy so long suppressed, pushing out like the palms of someone’s hands against the window of a sinking car. He was still alive in there, intact behind the dejection and neglect.”

It wasn’t merely that they didn’t choose to speak about their emotions. Some of them couldn’t name them; others weren’t conscious of having feelings at all, as one shared at a men’s rights retreat...

As a child she had envied boys their abandon, but living as Ned, in his narrow emotional register, felt constricting. “I curtailed everything: my laugh, my word choice, my gestures, my expressions. Spontaneity went out the window, replaced by terseness, dissimulation and control. I hardened and denied to the point almost of ossification.” She missed the emotional range women enjoyed — “women get octaves, chromatic scales of tears and joys and anxieties and despairs and erotic flamboyance.” Men had irony and silence and rage. The scrutiny and self-surveillance proved exhausting. “Someone is always evaluating your manhood. Whether it’s other men, other women, or even children.”

For the whole article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/23/magazine/masculinity-crisis-norah-vincent.html

https://www.scribd.com/document/970865185/The-Masculinity-Crisis-Is-Real

OP posts:
OtterlyAstounding · 02/02/2026 08:56

Shortshriftandlethal · 02/02/2026 08:50

Perhaps the two examples you give are not automatically negative marks in the male playbook, though, they are simply indicators of a different way of prioritising and focusing on what is important?

If you look at the biological essentials of the two sexes the female is necessarily more open and porous to others because of the fact of pregnancy, childbirth and the necessity of forming relationships that support those things.

Males tend not to band together so much because their survival and wellbeing depends more on being succesful, able, strong, showy, impressive etc. Males are also very vulnerable to attack from other males.

Edited

If you're talking about primitive, tribal times, then males absolutely had to band together to hunt.

But I didn't say they were negative things necessarily, I just pointed out why men might be so reluctant. It's not that they can't, it's that it makes them uncomfortable.

That's their problem, though.

OtterlyAstounding · 02/02/2026 08:58

Shortshriftandlethal · 02/02/2026 08:55

I think men and women have different communication styles, generally. Different priorities, interests and focus.

Even were that true to any notable, non-socialised extent - and? What's your point? Men are still entirely capable of communicating their emotions, should they wish to. They do not lack the ability, nor the vocabulary.

Shortshriftandlethal · 02/02/2026 09:00

OtterlyAstounding · 02/02/2026 08:56

If you're talking about primitive, tribal times, then males absolutely had to band together to hunt.

But I didn't say they were negative things necessarily, I just pointed out why men might be so reluctant. It's not that they can't, it's that it makes them uncomfortable.

That's their problem, though.

Relationship issues are all of our problems when they effect us negatively or don't provide what we need. I guess i think that we have to accept that males tend to be different to females and have different priorities and needs, but that at best men and women can hopefully come together and compromise and find a way that delivers some of what we both want and need.

OtterlyAstounding · 02/02/2026 09:10

Shortshriftandlethal · 02/02/2026 09:00

Relationship issues are all of our problems when they effect us negatively or don't provide what we need. I guess i think that we have to accept that males tend to be different to females and have different priorities and needs, but that at best men and women can hopefully come together and compromise and find a way that delivers some of what we both want and need.

Edited

The issue in the OP was a woman, disguised as a man, saying that she observed that men seemed to be isolated and had difficulty expressing their emotions to each other. So in that regard, it is a male issue. If men feel isolated from other men, then women can't (and shouldn't) fix that for them.

"I guess i think that we have to accept that males tend to be different to females and have different priorities and needs, but that at best men and women can hopefully come together and compromise and find a way that delivers some of what we both want and need."

What does this actually mean?

GiantTeddyIsTired · 02/02/2026 09:26

GeneralPeter · 25/01/2026 08:30

@OldCrone In a similar vein,
do you consider the attached findings on knowledge differences either surprising or offensive? Why?

Edited

That's an interesting one - I think I would have been inclined to put some made-up words in that, because I've noticed that there is a tendency from both sexes to feign ignorance - and also to feign knowledge

If they'd asked people to define those words and scored them on their response that might have been more interesting too - perhaps men would say they'd heard of degaussing but couldn't use it in a sentence (I think you'd need to be of a certain age to have encountered it anyway in daily life TBH).

MsAmerica · 10/02/2026 22:52

5128gap · 01/02/2026 10:20

Mother tongue was historically used to differentiate between the everyday language used domestically which varied by location, and the common languages used in formal institutions, church, law, academia that were the preserve of educated men.
So rather than the phrase linking higher levels of communication skills with women, it was actually used to denote lower status communication in the domestic sphere. The every day language you learn from your mother to discuss the mundane, as oppose to the language of learning that enabled men to understand and express complex (and superior!) thinking.

I thought "mother tongue" referred to the native language that you were brought up with?

OP posts:
MsAmerica · 10/02/2026 22:53

OtterlyAstounding · 02/02/2026 02:50

As I said in a previous comment:

Perhaps men are extremely opposed to opening up emotionally and being vulnerable to other men, because they perceive other men as a threat, and wish to maintain a show of strength around them.

They are less opposed to opening up to women, because they perceive themselves as being stronger than women, both physically and socially, which means women are not a threat to them.

Women are probably less opposed to opening up emotionally, partially because we exist in a state of awareness of our own constant vulnerability, in a way that men do not. We are more accustomed to being vulnerable, and strong in spite of it, while men fear it far more.

Wow. Interesting. Well said.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread