Following is a repost from August 8, 2018. The issue today needs to be restated.
Masculinity
and femininity are emotional styles that express our sexual
self-confidence as a male or female person in relation to the opposite
sex.*
They are psychological achievements that derive from our
different anatomies and physiologies. Deficiencies in masculinity and
femininity, that is, diminished confidence in oneself as a male or
female person, are signs of an arrested development.
At birth,
our minds are tabula rasa, which means our minds have no cognitive
content. At birth, we begin processing the world we live in, which
produces an initial cognitive content. As we grow, especially when we
begin to talk, cognitive processing escalates.
Our character and
personality, in other words, are self-created; genes and environment can
influence us, but they do not create us (Applying Principles,
pp. 315-18). How well we cognitively process the world in which we
live, that is, how objective and rational are the conclusions we draw,
determines how psychologically healthy we will be in adulthood.
How
well we process the world depends, in large part, on how well we have
been taught by our parents and teachers about psychology, especially
about how to introspect our developing psychologies to catch and correct
errors in the processing.
Throughout history, and especially in
today’s culture, the answer to the question “How well have we been
taught?” must be: “not very well, if at all.” Thus, most of us reach
adulthood with mental inhibitions, that is, deficiencies in self-esteem,
often expressed as anxiety and defensive habits (defense mechanisms) to
cope with the anxiety, for example, depression, obsessions,
compulsions, projection, rationalization, hostility, and so on.
In
today’s culture, consequently, most of us reach adulthood with arrested
development in many areas of our psychologies, in varying degrees, not
necessarily extreme. An arrested development, nonetheless, combined with
mistaken ideas in the culture, may lead us to conclude that we are
controlled by genes and environment.
To be sure, environment
influences us in both helpful and hurtful ways, but we remain the ones
who must process the events of the environment, draw conclusions about
ourselves in relation to them, then act to deal with the situations.
This
applies to the development of our masculinity and femininity. Thus,
depending on our upbringing and schooling, we may conclude that
masculinity means to be a “macho man,” with big biceps, and that
femininity means to be a “clinging vine” or a fashion model.
Behavioral manifestations can and do express our masculinity and femininity, but they do not define them.
The
essence of masculinity and femininity, according to psychologist
Nathaniel Branden, derives from our respective sexual roles in a
heterosexual relationship, and that, in turn, derives from our
respective anatomies and physiologies. Men, says Branden, in addition to
the obvious sexual differences, are bigger and stronger—they have
stronger upper-body muscle, while women have broader hips. Geneticists,
indeed, say there are over 6500 genetic expressions that differentiate men from women, and the differences begin in the womb. “Society” has nothing to say about these differences.
In
the romantic-sexual relationship (and only in the romantic-sexual
relationship), Branden goes on to say that the man is more active and
dominant. “He has the greater measure of control over his own pleasure
and that of his partner; it is he who penetrates and the woman who is
penetrated (with everything this entails, physically and
psychologically” (The Psychology of Self-Esteem, p. 206).
Healthy—fearless
and guiltless—self-assertiveness, strength, and self-confidence, says
Branden, are desirable in both men and women. Pride in oneself and one’s
achievements and admiration of one’s partner are prerequisite to a
healthy romantic-sexual relationship.
The difference is that the
man feels his masculinity as romantic initiator and, more generally, as
protector of the woman, while the woman feels her femininity as
challenger and responder.**
To put this difference in the
vernacular, the man’s job is to make the woman feel “real good.” In this
process, the man also feels, or should also feel, if psychologically
healthy, “real good” in performing the role. The woman’s job is to feel
sufficiently free and confident to accept and experience the man’s offer
of total trust and security, not to mention the pleasure he is giving
her (and the reciprocal pleasure she gives him).
The
romantic-sexual act of intercourse between a man and a woman truly in
love becomes a feeling of total integration, an experience of being one,
a union. Branden describes this as “the most intense union” and highest
form of pleasure available to human beings (p. 136).
Behavioral
manifestations of a confident masculinity and femininity become highly
desirable, for example, to “look nice” for the opposite sex, and for men
to hold the door open for a woman and for the woman to look up to and
admire the man by saying “thank you.”***
Size of biceps, length
of hair, and whether or not a man or a woman wears a skirt or pants do
not define masculinity and femininity. These are just socially arbitrary
conventions.
It is not unfeminine for a woman to run a railroad (as does Dagny Taggart in Atlas Shrugged), nor is it unmasculine for a man to wear tight pants and excel as a world-class ballet dancer (as did Mikhail Baryshnikov).
Masculinity
and femininity are objective, reality-based psychological achievements.
An arrested development means self-doubt about our sex in relation to
the opposite. A young man scared to death to talk to girls, let alone
ask one for a date, is one example. A young woman who is afraid to
respond to a young man’s rational advances, a man the young woman might
actually admire, is another.
The objective, reality-based meaning
of masculinity and femininity raises a question that will have to be
deferred to another post. Is same-sex attraction and behavior
psychologically healthy? [Posted September 7, 2018] I immediately hasten to add that such
attraction or behavior is not in any way immoral or a sin.
But is it healthy?
* “Sexual self-confidence” is the term used by psychologist Edith Packer (Lectures on Psychology,
chap. 6, section 2). Other psychologists have used the words “gender
esteem,” an interesting narrowing of the broader “self-esteem.”
**
Branden uses the terms “romantic dominance” and “romantic surrender,”
but by using the above concepts I am trying to avoid the older,
historical connotations of knights in shining armor and damsels in
distress. “Initiator,” “challenger,” and “responder” are words used by
Branden.
*** Tradition says a man walking on the outside of the
woman, nearer to the street, originated in the days of chamber pots
being emptied into the roadway. The man, as a gentleman, eagerly sought
to protect his lady. Today, it is simply a pleasant gesture for the man
to perform—and for the lady to accept.
