Why I Stopped Using “Masculine” and “Feminine” (and What I Say Instead)
We set out to redefine masculinity. Then I realized the word had problems that wouldn’t be resolved by a new definition.
In 2015 I teamed up with two leaders in men’s work to offer a workshop for men in search of a new healthy masculinity.
Over three days, thirty five men bonded, grappled with their emotions, held each other to a higher standard, radically shifted their beliefs and behavior, and stepped back into the world with new self-esteem and power.
In support of the workshop we had created a Facebook group for both men and women to invite open discussion about masculinity. Each instructor had his own personal understanding—we lived it, we recognized it when we saw it, and it was the bedrock of our work as coaches. But for class we’d need a formal definition. We understood the importance of getting this right and invited our communities into the discussion.
The group quickly grew to several hundred, and then to thousands. The conversations were all over the map, from insightful to openly hostile, as we learned what it takes to moderate a growing Facebook group. But it did teach us a lot, and made the workshop better than it would have been.
What it didn’t do was result in a universal description of what masculinity is. A definition that could be widely adopted.
We saw genuine contradictions and conflicting but equally legitimate world views.
We frequently saw statements that were as (unintentionally) insulting to one group as they were empowering to another; one person’s inspiring interpretation was inevitably another person’s indignity.
And I also started to grasp how difficult it would be to get masculine and feminine into right relationship with gender or biology in any universal way.
It’s not like we had a ton of trolls or saboteurs; everyone was trying to contribute. But no one was converging. No single truth was emerging.
At their very best, the words “masculine” and “feminine” are two buckets into which we can sort various healthy human traits. Then they serve as a kind of shorthand for these two constellations of traits.
In practical usage though, we tend to use these words cavalierly, as if everyone knows and agrees what they mean. Unfortunately, the most widely shared meaning is the old, outdated definition that rightly fell out of favor after the 1950s, the one everybody hates. All the healthy, positive connotations are what you could call local dialects—they live inside the speaker’s local bubble. Which makes these words aggravatingly inflammatory or disempowering more often than not, regardless of intent.
That was the problem we thought we were solving.
1. Come up with healthier definitions and
2. propagate them so they become widely adopted.
What I came to see was that there was a more fundamental issue.
The underlying problem is that attributing any positive quality to one pole, masculine or feminine, denies that quality in the other pole in a way that isn’t actually true.
So I decided to strike both words from my vocabulary. I literally stopped using masculine and feminine.
Wherever I would typically use them, instead I figure out the specific behaviors, thoughts, or ways of being I’m trying to refer to — what I actually mean — and talk about those directly.
What I found after making this one change was that my ability to communicate clearly about difficult, nuanced topics improved. My teaching and coaching improved. I was actually a more effective communicator without them.
For example, in the past I might have used masculine to refer to leadership, reason, intellect, assertiveness, confidence, rationality, narrow focus, strength, structure, integrity, taking a stand, hierarchy, battle, competition, financial or political or technical savvy, protecting, providing, function, accountability, self-reliance, and so on.
I might have used feminine to mean nurturance, emotion, support, following, devotion, surrender, love, tenderness, softness, beauty, receptivity, intimacy, collaboration, community, selflessness, feelings, tolerance, flexibility, diffuse focus, care taking, artistry, moodiness, nature, etc.
Even writing these lists feels odd to me now: it’s funny to think I ever tried to use the words masculine and feminine as a stand-in for any of these qualities.
Not because they’re bad lists. But because there can be a strong, leading, rational, confident feminine. And there can be an emotionally awake, loving, nurturing, devoted masculine.
The feminine can pursue sex. And the masculine can feel hurt without going to rage. The feminine can protect. And the masculine can soothe.
So I’m no longer out to achieve Masculinity 2.0 nirvana by coming up with a new and improved list.
It’s more powerful to talk about the qualities themselves.
If someone lacks assertiveness in an area where they need it, for example, then let’s talk about that. Making it about masculinity is at best a distraction, and at worst insulting to the person, and to femininity. The feminine isn’t not-assertive. Helping this person confront their internal barriers to being assertive and developing that skill—that’s powerful. Same goes for loving tenderness, or anything else on either list.
I do have a lot to say about men and women, their capabilities and their greatest attributes. About gender differences. Cultural and biological differences. And polarity.
But at this point I’m fresh out of reasons to ever use the words masculine or feminine. For me they only diminish or caricature the real message.
If they’re ever going to be useful, we need to rethink their purpose, their function. Not just tweak their definitions.
Until then I’ll stick to saying what I actually mean. It’s much more effective.
For an example of what this looks like in practice, go here:
Copyright © 2018 by Ken Blackman. All rights reserved.
About the author:
Ken’s passion topic these days is how women’s empowerment intersects with intimate coupledom. A former Apple software engineer turned international sex and intimacy educator turned relationship coach, Ken is in his 20th year helping couples co-create, bond, have great sex, thrive, and live happily ever after. His work has garnered mentions in Business Insider, Playboy, Cosmo, Tim Ferriss’s 4-Hour series and elsewhere. Find out more at kenblackman.com.
