Meet Johnathan, the gynocentric psychotherapist.
(Johnathan is a real person. He is a *therapist*, not a patient, so information about him was not divulged during therapy. Nevertheless, as is common practice, I have altered his name and other identifying information in order to protect his anonymity.)
Johnathan is an accomplished psychotherapist. Since his early years, something has been incessantly driving him to pursue this job, and he has managed to become a recognizable figure in his specific field, despite lacking a bit on academic performance.
The bulk of Johnathan's clients are women. Some gay men, and only a couple of straight males. This is hardly a particularity, though.
Johnathan grew up with an older sister. Right off the bat, he has been taught that his place in the family hierarchy is *below*. Below everyone. He has been given the smallest room, has had it taken away from him at the first chance, and has learned to step lightly around others, lest something terrible happen to him. His father has always been "just a shadow in the house". He barely registered his existence, so in Johnathan's mind the word "others" refered only to "females", originally his mother and sister. He has been unable to stand up for himself as a *boy*, because of the subtle undermining of every such expression of masculinity by those "others". So terrified has he been as a kid, that rebelion has never been an option. Instead, at a very deep level in his soul he has *compromised*: he has sought to appease the females, since this has been his only way to survive.
His mother sexually loathed his father. She has stayed with him because of the social conventions of the time, but were it another era, might she had lead a lesbian life? Nobody can tell for sure. The fact is that Johnathan is at his best with his lesbian clients.
A critical milestone in Johnathan's psychosexual development is that he "somehow" identified with his mother's sexual longing. He does desire women, but, since he can't concieve of himself, i.e. someone born a male, satisfying them, (just as his dad couldn't satisfy his mother), he is kind of split about them. He desires them *romantically*, but doesn't go near them *sexually*. His vocation very neatly fits into this schema: as a professional psychotherapist he is "forbidden" to have *sexual* relationships with his female clients. Nevertheless, he maintains the fantasy of an deep *emotional* (isn't it also a *romantic*?) connection. In his mind, he's something like the husband of his female clients, or something like their female bestie. He looks out for their best, since their husbands are ("naturally") unable to do so. Their bond is *special*. Johnathan has advised about every single one of his female clients to have extramarital relationships, so that they find sexual fulfillment elsewhere. He gets jealous when his female clients start to get along better with their husbands, usually through circumstances and luck, and works to undermine that emotional reapproachment by reminding his clients of their husbands' past wrongdoings. Getting along with her husband wouldn't only threaten the special bond she and Johnathan share, it would prove that a woman can be satisfied with her man, which would be devastating for the schema that Johnathan has formed throughout his life, a schema that has shaped his understanding of the world (of women) and his place in it as a facilitator.
It's not always calmness and ataraxia, the psychic life of Johnathan. Far from it. Under the calm surface, he constantly boils. He routinely goes on extreme rage fits towards his inferiors, which are delivered in a deadly manner learned through his mother: passive aggressiveness. Since a sexual outlet towards women has been blocked (and, frankly, feels quite terrifying), he has found other sexual outlets, which I won't specifically discuss. These are not so much of sensual or physical character, but rather they center around an imaginary tranformation, annuling the masculine and transforming it into a feminine.
Especially with his male clients, Johnathan functions not quite as an individual, but rather as a force of nature: as an embodiment of his mother's sexual strategy - and her rage. He acquiesces to *attractive* male clients having sex with women, provided that they "put the woman first", that they submit to her frame. Even if "she" is just a random woman and the man is his paying client. And he puts unattractive men on a permanent reform plan, a constant seminar of how to worship the feminine, which is supposed to bring them sex at some point in the future, by women recognizing the man's devotion and pure intents - but practically keeps them in a state of constant punishment for their imaginary grievances their unattractiveness makes on females.
Couples therapy is another opportunity for Johnathan to implement his meaning-making ritual: He *is* the woman's sexual strategy, something that has absolute priority against anything else - the wellbeing of the children included. He steadily advances a plan of total female dominion, using the typical trick of ackowledging small, non-essential demands of the husband in order to keep him involved in the process, while forcing the heavy-handed, strategic female demands.
That's the best Johnathan can do. Arrange his life around the opportunity, provided by the current mainstream, to constantly suppress the nightmarish emergence of the notion that he has been *used* by his mother, to the extend that his very sexuality has been altered. Failure to do so, i.e. the realization of the exploitation and abuse he has been through even as a toddler, threatens a complete psychotic breakdown. In the face of this terror, the interests of his clients, male or female, are of neglegible importance.
(Johnathan is a real person. He is a *therapist*, not a patient, so information about him was not divulged during therapy. Nevertheless, as is common practice, I have altered identifying information in order to protect his anonymity.)
Johnathan is an accomplished psychotherapist. Something has been driving him hard to pursue the job incessantly since his early years, and he has managed to become a recognizable figure in his specific field.
The bulk of Johnathan's clients are women. Some gay men, and only a couple of straight males. This is hardly a particularity, though.
Johnathan grew up with an older sister. Right off the bat, he has been taught that his place in the family hierarchy is *below*. Below everyone. He has been given the smallest room, has had it taken away from him at the first chance, and he has learned to step lightly around others, lest something terrible happen to him. His father has always been "just a shadow in the house". He barely registered his existence, so in Johnathan's mind the word "others" refered only to "females", originally his mother and sister. He has been unable to stand up for himself as a boy, because of the subtle undermining of every such expression by those "others". So terrified has he been as a kid, that rebelion has never been an option. Instead, at a very deep level in his soul he has *compromised*: he has sought to appease the females, since this has been his only way to survive.
His mother sexually loathed his father. She has stayed with him because of the social conventions of the time, but were it another era, might she had lead a lesbian life? Nobody can tell for sure. The fact is that Johnathan is at his best with his lesbian clients.
What is important is that Johnathan somehow identified with his mother's sexual longing. He desires women, but, since he can't concieve of himself, i.e. someone born a male, satisfying them, (just as his dad couldn't satisfy his mother), he is kind of split about them. He desires them *romantically*, but doesn't go near them *sexually*. His vocation very neatly fits into this schema: as a professional psychotherapist he is "forbidden" to have *sexual* relationships with his female clients. Nevertheless, he maintains the fantasy of an deep *emotional* (isn't it also a *romantic*?) connection. In his mind, he's the husband of his female clients. He looks out for their best, since their husbands are ("naturally") unable to do so. Their bond is *special*. Johnathan has advised about every single one of his female clients to have extramarital relationships, so that they find sexual fulfillment. He gets jealous when his female clients start to get along better with their husbands, usually through circumstances and luck, and works to undermine that emotional connection by reminding his clients of their husbands' past wrongdoings. Getting along with her husband wouldn't only threaten the special bond Johnathan has with his female client, it would prove that a woman can be satisfied with her man, which would be devastating for the schema that Johnathan has formed throughout his life, a schema that has shaped his understanding of the world (of women) and his place in it as a facilitator.
It's not always calmness and ataraxia, the psychic life of Johnathan. Far from it. Under the calm surface, he constantly boils. He routinely goes on extreme rage fits towards his inferiors, which are delivered in a deadly manner learned through his mother: passive aggressiveness. Since a sexual outlet towards women has been blocked (and, frankly, feels quite terrifying), he has found other sexual outlets, which I won't specifically discuss. These don't have so much a sensual or physical character, but rather center around an imaginary tranformation, annuling the masculine and transforming it into a feminine.
Especially with his male clients, Johnathan functions not quite as an individual human being, but rather as a force of nature: as an embodiment of his mother's sexual strategy - and her rage. He acquiesces to *attractive* male clients having sex with women, provided that they "put the woman first", they submit to her frame. Even if "she" is just a random woman and the man is his paying client. And he puts unattractive men on a permanent reform plan, a constant seminar of how to worship the feminine, which is supposed to bring them sex at some point in the future, by women recognizing the man's devotion and pure intents.
Couples therapy is another opportunity for Johnathan to implement his meaning-making ritual: *He* is the woman's sexual strategy, something that has absolute priority against anything else - the wellbeing of the children included. He steadily advances a plan of total female dominion, using the typical trick of ackowledging small, non-essential demands of the husband in order to keep him involved in the process, while forcing the heavy-handed, strategic female demands.
That's the best Johnathan can do. Arrange his life around the opportunity, provided by the current mainstream, to constantly suppress the notion that he has been *used* by his mother, to the extend that his very sexuality has been altered. Failure to do so, i.e. the realization of the exploitation and abuse he has been through even as a toddler, threatens a complete psychotic breakdown. In the face of this terror, the interests of his clients, male or female, are of a neglegible importance.
There were some posts at a male non-Red-Pill sub about the notion of masculinity. I tried to sum it up for them. This is my briefest take.
Esther Vilar in The Manipulated Man defined man and woman in this simple way: Man is a human being who works. A woman, in contrast to man, is a human being who does not work. This was back in the '70s. Thirty years later, she acknowledged that this has changed, of course, since women entered the workforce. What hasn't changed, though, which brings us to the definition of masculinity, is that "only a few of these women would be prepared to offer a life of comfort not only to their children but also the children's fathers, supported by their often substantial salaries."
Psychologist Roy Baumeister, in Is There Anything Good about Men?, again defines masculinity as the capacity to work more than one's individual needs merit, i.e. to provide to others.
These views capture the crux of the matter. In simple terms:
Masculinity is the capacity to love.
Some more discussion to illustrate the point: (please understand it cannot be exhaustive).
As can be seen, the definition of masculinity relies on the definition of love. Love is consciously caring about someone. This ascribes the quality of consciousness to masculinity. If you are doing caring behavior instinctively, that's not bad, but that's neither love nor masculine per se. Every monkey can do that. (Literally). Our definition ascribes the quality of caring to masculinity. This basically means self-sacrifice: if you do "caring" behavior expecting future rewards, you are just being a good businesswoman, not a loving person.
Another example: in several (all?) cultures around the world, "faggot" is a word used for a swindler. People probably can't put their finger to it, why it is so (it isn't that the one who swindled you is having gay sex), but the gist of it is that a swindler diverts resources to himself, instead of caring about you by being honest. Therefore it's about a masculine quality that is subconsciously perceived as lacking about him. (Please note that I'm not necessarily endorsing this view of gay men, only discussing it as a social phenomenon.)
In this example above, we can also see the definition of femininity, which is the opposite of masculinity:
Femininity is the tendency to divert resources towards yourself.
More on that in a while.
Now, the other key word in the definition of masculinity is capacity. This has profound consequences.
For example, if you get incapacitated by disease, women perceive you as less masculine, and you yourself lose your sense of masculinity - unless you can maintain faith that you'll 100% get back on your feet.
Also, capacity is something you can build, consistent with the notion that masculinity is something you develop and cultivate throughout your life.
Confidence is a masculine trait, because it is the subliminal assertion that 1) you needn't count on others for your needs (that's feminine), and 2) you have an abundance on which others can count on.
These notions permeate all discussions around gender issues and men's personal dilemmas. Notably, by actually doing caring behavior as a man, i.e. by incurring the cost, you gradually diminish your capacity for further caring. Women expropriate that in order to branch swing, e.g. after they have depleted the first husbands providing capacity.
Note now that given a man and a woman, a man is generally more probable to be more masculine, but this does not exclude the possibility a woman being more masculine than a man. At the level of politics, however, averages count, not individuals. In most cases, women behaving masculine, i.e. caring for others, is a special case - and ever more rare in contemporary capitalism, despite the fact that women work and earn money themselves.
Now, where did masculinity and femininity come from?
They are neither moral judgments neither "social constructions". They flow quite straightforwardly from the biology of the sexes, from even before humans existed. Females in species, being the only certain parents and the most probable to stick around, had to divert resources to themselves (rather than their children!) since if they perished, their children would perish too. Sadly, women play that biological script even today. Males, on the other hand, evolved displays of abundance as a female attraction trait. Love is a wondrous nature's creation in the male soul.
A practical implication of the above discussion is that men must personally safeguard their capacity to love, since society is build around the tendency (of the system and of women) to exploit that capacity, and in today's society there are no limits to that kind of exploitation.