For me, being a man is just being. That's the end. I am a man, I choose to be a man, and anything outside of that is someone trying to sell me something.
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
55 points (100.0% liked)
Men's Liberation
2213 readers
1 users here now
This community is first and foremost a feminist community for men and masc people, but it is also a place to talk about men’s issues with a particular focus on intersectionality.
Rules
Everybody is welcome, but this is primarily a space for men and masc people
Non-masculine perspectives are incredibly important in making sure that the lived experiences of others are present in discussions on masculinity, but please remember that this is a space to discuss issues pertaining to men and masc individuals. Be kind, open-minded, and take care that you aren't talking over men expressing their own lived experiences.
Be productive
Be proactive in forming a productive discussion. Constructive criticism of our community is fine, but if you mainly criticize feminism or other people's efforts to solve gender issues, your post/comment will be removed.
Keep the following guidelines in mind when posting:
- Build upon the OP
- Discuss concepts rather than semantics
- No low effort comments
- No personal attacks
Assume good faith
Do not call other submitters' personal experiences into question.
No bigotry
Slurs, hate speech, and negative stereotyping towards marginalized groups will not be tolerated.
No brigading
Do not participate if you have been linked to this discussion from elsewhere. Similarly, links to elsewhere on the threadiverse must promote constructive discussion of men’s issues.
Recommended Reading
- The Will To Change: Men, Masculinity, And Love by bell hooks
- Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements by Michael Messner
Related Communities
!feminism@beehaw.org
!askmen@lemmy.world
!mensmentalhealth@lemmy.world
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
As far as I'm concerned, I don't even choose to be a man. Society decided I'm a man, therefore I'm a man.
For me, being a man is just being.
What does this mean to you?
To me it sounds like simply existing. Which leads me to the question, why even bother with the use of a label or categorization?
I'm a person who broadly refuses to be labelled because I also want to simply exist without being sold shit.
Not the original commenter, but as someone who also feels that, in my book it's thinking that the virtues by which you live by aren't particularly reflective of being masculine or feminine, but good virtues that you are proud of nevertheless.
I am a man. I was taught to change tires before I was allowed to drive. I taught my wife how to change tires the day I found out she's never done it before. You bet I'll teach any daughters and sons I might have. It doesn't feel "manly" to change tires, it feels necessary.
the virtues by which you live by aren’t particularly reflective of being masculine or feminine, but good virtues that you are proud of nevertheless.
This sums up the last 10ish minutes from the video quite nicely and it's something I strongly agree with.
I don't want my next question to seem dismissive, in the past years I have changed how I talk to and about people, as well as surrounded myself by people who have very relaxed views on labels and categorization. I've become a bit out of touch as my mind tries to take in all the worlds events and changing personal experiences. I am asking because I would like some more perspective on something I am not really surrounded by much of anymore.
What purpose does it mean to you to state you are a man in your second paragraph? If I removed the first four words, everything that follows still makes complete sense to me and relates nicely with the first paragraph.
Personally when I talk about myself, I tend to refer to myself as a "person" in place of calling myself a "man." When talking about men or women, I would call them "people" unless I want to get more specific for whatever reason. I'm choosing to use the broadest term possible that is broadly inclusive. If I call myself a man, to me there's the unspoken hierarchy of men being above women which could very subtly affect the conversation. I am not higher than anyone, I am a person, just like everyone else that surrounds me.
By calling myself a person, I am hoping it's a reflection that I am equal to everyone else and not above a specific group of people. This is simply how I am choosing to deal with the current state of masculinity around the world. It's something that feels like it's working for my needs and situation. It has also brought me a lot more peace with myself.
I also tend to believe that language is fluid and ever evolving. I feel less significance behind the definition of words because they don't always stay the same. This has had the result of me looking to use broad, well known words over very specific words known by certain groups of people. This too has also affected how I currently think and feel about labels and categorization.
What purpose does it mean to you to state you are a man in your second paragraph?
In a thread discussing healthy/toxic masculinity, it's relevant context, especially when we're in a comment thread about someone saying "well, I just... am a guy"
If jotting down some notes, I can use a blue pen or a black pen. For all intents and purposes, they're the same. But it's still useful to have vocabulary to distinguish between them. For example, I may want to ask someone to pass me a particular pen and I want to communicate which one without having to explain how one of them is out of ink and expect them to test each pen to figure out which one it is. Maybe I'm writing the note for someone else and they have a preference for blue for whatever reason. It may not make any difference for me, but if it does for that other person, it makes sense to have vocabulary for them to communicate it.
To me, the epitome of positive masculinity is Aragorn from the Lord of the Rings movies (and also the book). Gentle, caring, not afraid to show emotion, cries, kisses his friends on the forehead, and yet a total badass, and Viggo just looks like a masculine dude. I don’t think even the most conservative Christian nationalist could argue that he’s feminine. If I had a son (who chose to identify as a man) and he turned out to be like Aragorn, I don’t think I could be a prouder parent.
I don’t see gender roles bringing a lot of value to the world, so I’d rather work towards rejecting them outright rather than trying to refine them.
I agree, and the creator of the video actually goes into that toward the end, suggesting that positive masculine and feminine traits are actually just universally good traits to have, and any attribution towards one being more attuned to one gender or another is an artificial social creation.
However, our shared stance on gender is still quite uncommon, I think, so the video creator is attempting to at least direct those who still hold firmly to gender roles as a concept toward a more positive outcome, instead of adopting negative traits and thinking it's good because it "makes them a man/woman".
I agree, and the creator of the video actually goes into that toward the end, suggesting that positive masculine and feminine traits are actually just universally good traits to have, and any attribution towards one being more attuned to one gender or another is an artificial social creation.
They do, but there is a difference between acknowledging that men can also have feminine traits, and asking what these categories are really doing for us in the first place.
Still, I should say it's a solid video. The concept of near enemies is very useful when thinking about any set of goals or values, and if it helps some people arrive at a healthier view of their own gender that's great. Variety of tactics and all that.
My positive vision of masculinity is using your power to protect the vulnerable, rather than punching down at them. As others have said, that is what Aragorn did.
That was a fascinating video, thank you for sharing. I have to admit, I was hesitant to click because I didn't want my feed to be full of toxic masculinity stuff, but I really appreciated it.
I think the worth of it is as an aid to "deprogram" the manosphere types - the concept of near enemies really helps to show that, yes, the ideals taught were in the right general area, but just slightly skewed.