Let's jump into gender politics for the moment, shall we?
I found this link to be interesting. I've only skimmed it, but it seems that there's a book out that calls for the end of "manhood" -- that is, male behavior. So, I suppose I'd like to have you read this and give me a reaction to what this writer is talking about.
Are we wrong to have gender identification? Do gender roles get governed by society, or are they genetic in nature? If we were to eliminate masculinity, what kind of society would we have? And if you've got anything to add to this, I'd like to hear it -- so long as you're at least at 300 words.
Ladies, have at it. Gents -- we're looking outnumbered.
-- MP
I would first like to say that this extreme attack on the masculine identity is completely ridiculous. These outrageous feminists, though they would never admit it, would in fact miss the aggressive male nature if it were eliminated. Not only is it general knowledge that many women like bad boys, but this nature is what motivates social interactions among men. The competitive nature that goes along with masculine aggression is a very motivating factor in the progress of mankind. It is what pushes us to succeed and go further than any man has gone before. It is the driving factor which pushed America into the space race and the fuel which has flared up numerous revolutions throughout history. Without it, men wouldn't be men at all. They would simply be flat-chested women. The macho attitude may have some negatives such as confidence issues in men who are not as masculine and causing domestic violence. However, these are extreme cases and the positive functions of male aggression can not be overlooked. The masculine nature, though violent and proud, is a necessary evil.
ReplyDeleteSuggesting the elimination of the masculine nature would be comparable to do away with the sexiness of the female gender. Women dress in revealing outfits, wear makeup, and act helpless in order to attract men and stand out among other women. In the same way, the macho aggression which dominates the male population is a show of confidence and strength to attract women and intimidate other men. If these nagging feminists would also oppose such females, then we must ask ourselves what society would be like without either of these instinctual personality traits. Society would perhaps have less criminal activity, yes, but life would also cease to have healthy competition and the diversity which makes the world so great. It would be a gray mass of nearly identical individuals. Eliminating these dominant gender characteristics would do much more harm than good.
Before I address Stoltenberg's article, I'd like to comment on a few of Logan's statements. First, the "girl's like bad boys" statement. Contrary to Logan's claim, psychological studies show that on long term mate selection (this concerns marriage and child rearing) women rate the characteristics "kind", "honest", "intelligent", and "dependable" at the top of a list of 76 ideal mate characteristics. I would also like to point out that the same exact characteristics ranked at the top of the men's lists. The particular study I refer to was conducted by Buss and Barnes in 1986 (a time when gender norms were even more pronounced).
ReplyDeleteSecond, "these nagging feminists" oppose the damsel-in-distress act, complete with the lack of appropriate clothing. I have taken two gender studies classes as a part of my college education, and never have I found any "feminist" in favor of the helpless female stereotype.
In response to both Stoltenberg's article and Logan's post, I can't say I'm in favor of extreme gender norms in either direction. Extremes hurt both genders in this case. High competitiveness, risk-taking and aggression are linked to health complications associated with stress. I remember covering this ad nauseum in my psychology of adjustment classes. Men also tend to be the more aggressive, risk-taking, and competitive of the sexes, and have a higher risk of high blood pressure, suicide, and alcoholism (all these traits are linked with "masculine" traits) . In this regard, it would benefit men to try and rein in the more extreme characteristics. Hyper-masculinity is not a benefit. On the other hand, we have the hyper-feminine women. The over-emphasis on body image and looks in this category lead to depression, anxiety, and eating-disorders. This is also not a benefit.
As humans, we all share 45 of 46 chromosomes. In statistics and psychology, groups of people (in this case, males and females) differ less than individuals. In this day and age, especially in developed countries like the United States, traditional gender roles are outdated and unnecessary. Seeing as males and females are more alike than different, I don't see why we, as a society, have to focus on gender so much. If a male wants to act feminine, let him. If a girl wants to act masculine, I don't see a problem with that either. Gender says less about a person than his or her actions and behaviors do. Both genders could learn valuable lessons from one another.
At first I thought I wouldn’t like the article, but it turned out that the article was more interesting than I thought. It was fascinating that Stoltenberg thought the concept of “manhood” had no appealing function in society. In the article it was interesting how Stoltenberg said “that gender is nothing more than a means of social control that is harmful to individuals, families, and society because the culturally defined ways of "being a man" are generally at odds with intimacy and real interpersonal connection” (The End of Manhood). I don’t think that gender is controlled by society, society may help influence gender but it doesn’t define it. I don’t think being masculine will be in conflict someone’s manly values as Stoltenberg says.
ReplyDeleteI don’t think it’s wrong to have gender identities and I don’t think it’s to the extreme to what Stoltenberg says. Yes, there a few people out there that are extreme but that doesn’t mean every body is like that and thinks like that. If we didn’t have these extremes and everything in the middle we would have a very boring world. With the extremes we can see different points of views and how different people think. Every body can learn from each other.
While I admit society does place some of the blame on manhood, there are woman out there in the exact same “boat” so to speak. Personally I don’t think society is to blame for manhood issues. These are things that can and should be resolved by the parents. I hate it when one group decides to blame another as being solely responsible in any situation. I like to think that while the group doing the blaming never did anything to try and stop it from happening so aren’t they to blame just as equally as everyone else?
ReplyDeleteManhood I would guess is kind of the same as womanhood in that they try to bring to light the good issues of being associated with that particular gender and not nessicerily the bad things. Every gender or even groups of people will always have labels associated with them. What they should be doing instead of trying to counter the other groups arguments is to try and find better ways to deal with situations that got them there in the first place so they can prevent these things from happening again.
Now personally, love it or hate it, there are certain things men do better than woman and vice versa. While I have no problem with woman trying to be one of the guys there will always be that little separation that will always be there.
Case in point, when I was in the Navy I learned that there was only 2 things the Navy wouldn’t allow woman to do. One of those being serving on submarines and the other is being a part of the elite combat unit known as navy seals. Now I am for equal woman’s rights and I think that it would be a good thing to integrate woman into sub duty but with that being said I think the Navy seals should and will always stay men only.
Yes, the macho self righteous male ego can sometimes annoy the shit out of me. There are many valid points made in this article, however, I don't think that we can title this sometimes obnoxious aspect of the male personality as "manhood". Just as I wouldn't characterize "womanhood" as scandalously dressed, body image-obsessed psychos. I would, however, say that there is nothing wrong with gender roles and there is nothing wrong with breaking gender roles. The writer Virginia Woolf once wrote about concept of androgynous mind, a creative intellectual state of mind that extended beyond gender. She said that woman were closer to this state of being because they were not dragged down by an extensive ego- much like men. If they were able to shed this pride they would be able to attain intellectual equality. Due to current cultural standards of gender, I don't think we will attain this androgynous mind or any concept of sexual equality. But maybe there is nothing wrong with that. Honestly, if men were just like women I wouldn't be attracted to them. Just like I'm not attracted overly pompous douche bags (and most certainly not "badass guys: who are actually just self-conscious pricks, as Logan assumed women are). There is nothing wrong with meeting in the middle. When I think of manhood I think of the comfort men provide as protectors, as they always have since the beginning of societies. And womanhood, to me, is a women's ability to be sensitive and caring towards their values. As long as we can all determine that these characteristics are equally appreciated by both sexes. Men have come a long way in terms of the male ego since Virginia Woolfs time. I don't think they need to alter their manhood but change their appreciation for our differences.
ReplyDeleteI read this article with my best friend and he just flipped. He’s a very strong believer of women want their rights then they can be treated the same as men, no sympathy or anything. The first paragraph or the first couple sentences set him off, and actually me myself. This article straight out starts off blaming men for violence, even though statistics show that men tend to be more violent than women, that doesn’t mean women aren’t part of the problem. (were just a smaller part of the problem). What really is manhood anyways? And why is it being compared to how much violence is out there? I think this article is a bit stupid and typical of a feminists thoughts. I found it interesting when the author stated that “gender is nothing more than a means of social control that is harmful to individuals, families, and society because the culturally defined ways of being a man are generally at odds with intimacy and real interpersonal connect.” I agree to some extent that gender is a means of social control, but that doesn’t mean the men because of their manhood are having problems with intimacy and real interpersonal connection. I think this article is awful and yet funny to read with a guy since they are targeted so hard. Its very bias and doesn’t really come up with any depth to anything.
ReplyDeleteStoltenberg article was far fetched in my opinion. If I were a man I would be furious for being put into this stereotype. I felt because Stoltenberg made these loose-ended claims it discredited his stance. The beginning of the article starts off with this statement, “if all violence committed by males were somehow eliminated from the planet, we wouldn't need a special issue on violence.” It grabbed my attention, and also made me laugh. If only violence could be ended so easily! Women may not be stereotyped as violent but what makes a man more violent than a women? Nothing. Being violent is correlated to how you were raised as a child or how you live now. It has nothing to do with your gender
ReplyDeleteThe article goes on saying “gender is nothing more than a means of social control that is harmful to individuals, families, and society because the culturally defined ways of "being a man" are generally at odds with intimacy and real interpersonal connection. As boys take on a "masculine" identity in place of a true sense of themselves, they lose those parts of themselves in conflict with "manly" values — their sensitivity, vulnerability, emotions, affections — all of which are needed for achieving intimacy and love. The falseness and distance of their own ways of being in relationship typically leave males feeling lonely, insecure, and scared of honest intimacy, which in turn makes it difficult for them to have loving relationships where they can finally get the love they've always wanted. “
This is totally false for at least half the men out there. Yes, there are some men who are extreme and feel like they need to be “manly” and fit the macho criteria. But not all men are like that. It would be the same thing as saying women are to sensitive and gossip too much. Yes, people like to believe that’s true but it is not the case for every single person.
While I do not agree that all men act in this behavior I think it is important to have those extremist. Having extremes is part of nature, and without the extreme man or woman life would be a little less interesting.
Personally, I think it would be difficult for manhood to be “eliminated from men's personal identities and social interactions.” Manhood has its good attributions to society along with the bad. I do not agree with Stoltenberg when he explains that masculinity causes men to lose important values needed to have relationships with people, mainly women. We all know that there are men out there who are complete assholes and think the world revolves around them, although as there are women who act the same. I do not think that manhood should be eliminated from our society because I feel that some manhood is necessary in protecting and leading a strong society. Logan stated that girls are attracted to the bad asses, but that is a broad statement and definitely does not apply to every woman out there. A lot of women are turned off by men who act like they run the show and appreciate a more sensitive man. Regardless of the preferences of women, I think according to our society we need some manhood to a certain extent. Being a woman, I do sometimes feel that men believe they are better than women no matter what, but I also appreciate the safety and protection I feel in “manhood.” When considering Stoltenberg’s comment on how a child raised without just a mother should be able to be brought up as if there was a father as well. He claims that there should be no difference because if men would lose the “manhood” and gain the “selfhood” then there would be nothing missing from the child’s life if manhood is eliminated and selfhood is replaced. Having a father figure is very important because regardless of “selfhood” or not the child misses learning valuable lessons in the role of being a man in society.
ReplyDeleteThis is honestly the most ridiculous article I have ever read. How can someone's manhood cause them to be lonely, insecure, and cause them to not have the ability to be in a relationship with someone them love? There are so many men out there who do not own any of these characteristics. Their manhood is not the reason for people to have these types of characteristics. It is just them as a person. The author can not blame this on a certain gender. That is not the right thing to do. This author could be sexist for writing an article like this saying manhood hurts the society in so many ways. That does not make any sense at all. Maybe a man who is always ignorant and obnoxious would have those problems but not because of their manhood. I think this author has the wrong definition of manhood. The author thinks that manhood causes violence. I am pretty sure it is not someone's manhood that causes violence. Violence is caused by unsettled arguments and ignorant people who can not settle arguments without fighting. If a man did not have their manhood how men and women’s attitudes would be segregated. This article wants everyone to have a women's side of view. That does not make any sense. Everybody should not have the same type of reputation, which would cause a whole mess of problems. Also, manhood helps create leadership. It helps men have been confident enough to be a leader and many corporations would struggle because a lot of CEOs are men. I am not sure who this article is focused on but I am pretty sure it is focused towards women because many men would not like this article too much. Many men would probably agree with me that this article is full of opinions that would not be accepted by a majority men population.
ReplyDeleteThe End of Manhood
ReplyDeleteIn modern society gender roles have been governed more by society. I believe the society gender roles derived from those of a genetic nature because of the difference in physically strength between men and woman. The majority of men are physically stronger than most women, obviously there are going to be some exceptions. Compare high school basketball teams between both men and women. A good women’s varsity basketball team would hardly be a decent matchup against and average men’s freshman squad. The ball would be in the men’s court, with the freeman men’s team dominating due to shear physical capabilities regardless of each team’s knowledge of the game. The division in physical strength arrived when modern humans hit the scene and developed hunter gatherer societies. In a hunter gather society everyone is equal, but is given different roles. Men normally became the protectors and hunters while women took the role of the gatherers. Centuries later a shift in attitude occurred where the physical strength was equivalent to more power, creating a male dominate society. I do not think it is wrong to have gender identification. The idea of selfhood is something everyone should strive for, but even with selfhood there will be gender lines drawn, it is inevitable. I found the concept of “personhood” to be interesting, but it is not practical. The author’s idea of eliminating “manhood” is a little dramatic. The cases of violence John Stoltenberg points out that stem from the concept of masculinity are extreme cases of violence, which I don’t think would disappear from society if manhood was eliminated. I also feel that the attitude behind manhood is more generational. I do not know anyone woman today who is the way Stoltenberg described, “To be less outspoken, less forthcoming, less present, and less real as a person”. There is a clear change in attitude today regarding gender roles, yet we still have the concept of “manhood” in society
I feel that this article was a straight attack on the male population. We have been generalized and placed as the "majority". According to this article, all males are said to pillage villages and rape the women because we want to prove our manhood. I feel that this author is either homosexual, or had an abusive father and therefore hates on the male gender. Not all males are violent, heartless bastards that thrive for violence, competition, and capable to prove their manhood. I know many males that are more sensitive than women and would give anything to be in a loving relationship. America is not like the Spartans, and the city of Troy where from birth, males are raised in combat. We are no longer a society of violence. Sure we feed off competition but that is just in our human nature, women can be accused of this also. Just because they aren't put on television for millions to watch, I could walk by a shoe store with an "amazing" sale, and see two or more women competing for that shoe. I feel that blaming everything on males is ridiculous because women as just as at fault. A loving, kind hearted mother that raises their son in a loving environment can alter his true nature. If this same child had been raised in an abusing, non caring household, this child would become more violent and not be as successful in life. This can also be true for a father to a daughter. Society does affect masculinity because of the newfound obsession on bigger, faster, and stronger. Males are to be muscular and zero-body fat, and females are to be petite and beautiful. This causes males to strive to work out more to become more physically fit, but it is not forced upon them like the Spartans of the past. I feel that this book is anti-males and would never consider picking it up, unless to burn. Call me closed minded, but I refuse to read a book that destroys my gender.
ReplyDeleteManhood comes down to nurture verses nature. Are men really just that different from women and are born with “manly values” or is it how they are raised and what society tells men how to be a man. To be honest I think it is both but society does influence men how to act from movies and role models. I think some men do think they are better than women and isn’t true that to every dollar a man makes a woman with the same job only makes 70 cents. Women have always been inferior to men. Some girls like being the stereotypical girl. They would like to get married and be a housewife as their husband makes all the money and Men like being able to provide for their family. Things are changing though and there are more and more women working. I am all for breaking stereotypes and I do think there are more opportunities for women to be more equal to men. I have to disagree with him when he says if we keep the “manhood act” we miss the point of being human. I don’t think anyone is trying to put on an act and once you get to know someone their true colors always comes out. There are both extremes from women dressing scandalous to men fulfilling the “manhood”. Most women don’t like men who are full of themselves and I don’t think most men like women that are full of themselves. There is a difference between cocky and confident. I really don’t see a problem with male gender roles and female gender roles if you don’t like it break the stereotype there are a lot more opportunities to in today’s world. I also love the line “you are never more real than when someone else is real to you” and I think that is completely true.
ReplyDeleteThis concept is a really interesting one, I've never heard of such a think to be completely honest. Sure feminists have hated the "macho" man forever, but the author of this book is a man. His picture is well... telling.
ReplyDeletehttp://thewip.net/contributors/snortland_jonstoltenberg.html
In my humble opinion I think this guy is off his rocker. Sure, machismo can certainly cause problems, but blaming violence and everything else he mentions is just ignorant. Women have their own version of it as well. Not sure what you want to call it, perhaps "Cattiness."
Plus, not all men are like that. And a lot of guys who constitute this population do show emotion and can be sensitive when they choose to. It is unfair to make that generalization of all men.
Another point to make, no one person should able to tell anyone how they should or should not act. We live in a country and for the most part a world where you can be whatever you want. If that means being a manly man who says 'bro' and is a womanizer than live and let live. Generally that person will get whats coming to him or her sometimes.
Another issue with this is that for every different kind of guy there is a different kind of girl. In fact there is a fair number of girls who prefer a guy who acts manly, or macho.
Finally, the attempt to change something that has been a part of male DNA dating back to when we came to be is ridiculous. Since the time as hunters and gatherers men have been defined by of course their physical differences. But also by their personalities. The stronger and more leadership qualities one presented the more likely that man could lead a tribe or group.
So, in short, heres to being a man and hoping this guy doesn't turn too many heads.
I completely agree with the idea that Manhood is 'nature' vs. nurture. If a young man sees his father, a very important role model, acting in any way, the child will more than likely repeat exactly what he does. An example...Whenever my dad would mow the lawn, I got my plastic mower out and followed right behind him, trying to anticipate his every move, my mom even has video tapes of it. However, if a child sees his dad smacking his wife around, he might think this socially acceptable, while on the contrary it is awful. However, I believe that isn't always the case. I believe that each individual has the power to control and think for themselves. If they are taught what their parents do is wrong, as hard as it is, they can break that trend.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with Taylor that no one person can tell anyone how to act. However, society and our laws can. Yes, there is no right or wrong in society, just socially acceptable and socially unacceptable. Even then, society is not all black and white, there are holes with varying cultures. A great example is the Middle Eastern culture opposed to the American culture. Women in the Middle East aren't even allowed to display their hair, whereas in the US, the more the skin you show, the famous you are....As far as laws go, if a man acts out and breaks a law, he is punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Ultimately, I believe it depends on the culture, society, and laws of land to which people live. Yes, biology and 'nature vs. nature' play a huge part, but each individual person has the capability to think for themselves and make their own educated decisions.
I believe that this is partly true about men not staying true to themselves because of the image they have to uphold. Men cannot have feelings when they are around other guys, it isn't cool or macho enough. I am a girl obviously, and I have no idea if guys go back to their rooms or house and talk to each other about these things, you never know unless you go undercover. I do believe guys get advice and talk to each other about the girls they are talking to and to get "approval" from their other guy friends. While girls on the other hand talk to whatever guy will talk to them in most situations. I feel like most girls are desperate for that attention and go out looking for it, while with guys they really aren't looking for it. Unless it involves getting laid in our age right now. I do believe people are influenced in these situations with peers but they have their own mind at the same time also. People should make their own decisions, you can't let other people live your life for you. Your life could be completely different if you think your own thoughts and opinions. I believe that masculinity is the most huge factor in decision making and I have many guy friends that have exposed their feelings to me, and they are straight, and most of them cry to me because they have to bottle up all those feelings to themselves, cause their guy friends don't want to hear it. An example is my guy friend from balwin wallace broke up with his gf he has had for a while now. and he was heartbroken, I have never seen him more upset in my life. He was a prime example to seeing that guys definitely have feelings, they just have trouble talking about them and expressing them.
ReplyDeleteJohn Stoltenberg’s argument was very interesting. I would have to agree with some of the responses from my classmates. The author completely bashes men and their masculinity however, there are some characteristics that men have that we do need. Men do have the ability to take risks more often and do have some competitive characteristic to them. Also, when it comes to romance men suck at it, but thats when a women’s role is vital. We’re nurturing and and loving and this is why we tend to balance each other out.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that there would be a little more peach and collaboration between nations if a woman was in power. We tend to want to talk things out and not take violent actions such as jumping into war or invasions.
Now the complete elimination of males would be somewhat odd to deal with. Females would have to take on the masculine role in some way. I would also have to say that “womanhood” is great! Whats wrong with a woman wanting to be feminine, but there are also other woman who aren’t as feminine. There is nothing wrong with gender roles and there is definitely nothing wrong if sometimes people break away from the stereotypical roles.
I personally don’t think that gender roles are bad. Stoltenberg makes a really good argument and I agree with some of his points. I agree that “manhood” should be probably be changed to “personhood.” I do also believe that manhood is important when it comes to parenting. Young boys and young girls do need a male role-model when being raised. It isn’t crucial but it does help with their development and will help them with challenges they will faces in later years. There are certain things that kids need in their life, such as trust and support. I do however, not agree with how some young boys are raised when it comes to hiding their emotions and not being able to express themselves.
I, for one, found this article to be rather ridiculous. The thought of eliminating manhood for the betterment of society and men themselves would help how? As annoying as a pompous, macho, or power hungry male can be at times, I feel this is not the majority of males out there. This is not to say there are not some, there are plenty, but I don’t feel this certain characterization of the male gender is necessarily correct. It is an extreme version, an extreme version that can be characterized on females as well. In being a female, I can’t speak and say why this characterization of male acts the way he does, I simply don’t know. But to eliminate the extreme would be ridiculous. How boring would the world be if everyone had a similar characterization? This is not to say these extremes are necessarily good, but they do feed diversity amongst both genders.
ReplyDeleteThe author’s claim, ““if all violence committed by males were somehow eliminated from the planet, we wouldn't need a special issue on violence.” I found to be a bit bold, bordering on a large generalization. Yes, this might eliminate some violence, but it’s a far cry from solving the problem. Women are often just as violent (in their own way) as males. In a year at my high school I probably witnesses more fights between girls than guys had in the entire four years I was there.
While I don’t necessarily agree with much of the article, or the statement listed above, I do see some truth when the Author talks about a male’s influence from his father. Again, not being a male I can’t speak for the gender as a whole, but from the perspective of a women I think we too learn or pick up different traits from relationships with out mothers. In the end, I found this article to be rather ridiculous, the though of eliminating the ‘masculinity’ of males seems so outlandish!
I didn’t really like this article or agree with much of the points being made. Although the article was interesting and brings up valid points about the idea and expectations of masculinity, the entire time I was reading the article I only kept thinking to myself, “This does not apply to all or even most men.” I felt the article was grouping all men into the same category, when really every person is completely different in their own way. The ideas seemed based on a society of the past, but do not apply as well in our current society. Maybe this is due to the fact that previous ideas of masculinity have actually started to fade slightly, but it also seemed as if the article exaggerated poor qualities of some men and applied them to all males. Sure, it is true that society has certain these ideas and expectations of males, like being tough and not too sensitive, but it seems most of these aren’t as true as we say. There are plenty of typical masculine guys I could think of that are just as described in the article, lacking sensitivity and love, but at the same time I could think of just as many if not more who are just the opposite. This article describes the situation of manhood as an entire societal problem, when in reality, I believe it is only a few men along with the way males were in the past that bring about these negative stigmas for males as a whole. Basically, this article is stereotyping all males into one group based upon a smaller portion of the male population that actually do act in these negative ways. I will admit that many men could use improvement on becoming better people, but I think it is ridiculous to claim that all men need to change and remove the concept of manhood. Males and females are going to be different no matter what. Simply considering estrogen and testosterone, one could argue we must always be different, it’s biological.
ReplyDeleteThe end of manhood would be absolutely terrifying. There are so many things that men can do better than woman. I have never been on the extreme feminism train, although I do believe in equal rights. My mom is a single mother, and she has the ability to do all the things a man can do. But she doesn’t want to. It is a women’s nature to want a man to provide security. Yes, male aggression is so annoying, but females unconsciously love it. And, yes, sometimes aggression can lead to crime, but the elimination of manhood to reduce crime would not even come close to the counter effects it would cause. Stoltenberg explains that the “macho” personality causes men to not be intimate. Maybe the guys he has encountered were too macho and not intimate, but I have met plenty of guys who were both. If guys were not manly, girls would lose the natural attraction to a man and then the intimacy issue would fall onto the women. Not to mention, a man’s natural drive for competition would cause a lot of change. This relates to a lot of issues. We would not have ESPN, because there wouldn’t be a high demand for it. Most girls don’t like sports, and a man’s competiveness gives him the interest. So many things in the world would be different if manhood would disappear. So many that we could not even imagine. If masculinity were to be gone, it would be the end of humanity as we know it.
ReplyDeleteGender roles are governed by nature. Girls contain everything that makes them girls and boys will be boys. It really depends on how they are raised. The physical attributes can not be disputed. Men are naturally stronger than women physically. So they can lift things we can't.
ReplyDeleteHow one raises a boy or girl child is different. Children imitate what they see. If a boy is raised by a single mom, he will try to act like her, maybe even dress in her clothes, that is, until he gets an awareness of self, and figure out how different he and his mother truly are.
Yet for a man to dictate his feelings as which ones are feminine and which are masculine is wrong. Humans are humans, men are made to cry just as women do. If not, they wouldn't have tear ducts.
Also, the rules of genetics plays a factor throughout this topic. Children that resemble their parents are more than likely to inherit their demeanor or personality with a little of their own added to it. A girl might be brash and hard-headed if her father or mother is the same. Or a boy might be timid and sensitive if either parent is similar.
If masculinity was eradicated there would be no difference between boys and girls, only the sex would tell the tale.