In Defence of Traditional Masculinity, By Mrs. Vera West

Phys.org published an article titled "Traditional Masculinity Imposes on Men a High Social and Psychological Cost, Says Study," authored by researchers from the University of Western Australia.

https://phys.org/news/2025-03-traditional-masculinity-imposes-men-social.html

The study, featured in Psychology of Men & Masculinities, argues that adherence to traditional masculine norms—such as emotional stoicism, physical toughness, and dominance—extracts a steep toll on men's mental health and social well-being. Drawing from a survey of 403 Australian men aged 18-76, it found that those who strongly endorsed these norms reported higher levels of loneliness, weaker social connections, and increased psychological distress, including depression and suicidal ideation. Lead author Dr. Michael Whitehead framed this as evidence that traits like self-reliance and aggression, while culturally prized, isolate men and hinder emotional resilience. The article suggests society should pivot toward more flexible gender norms, with Whitehead noting that "traditional masculinity doesn't serve men's interests" in modern contexts. This narrative, amplified by posts on social media calls it a "wake-up call" for rethinking manhood, positions traditional masculinity as a relic maladapted to today's world.

The study's indictment of traditional masculinity as a psychological and social burden is a half-truth at best, overlooking its enduring strengths and misreading its role in human flourishing. Far from a costly anachronism, traditional masculinity—rooted in stoicism, strength, and provision—remains a vital framework that benefits men, their communities, and society at large. The Phys.org article and its underlying research lean on a narrow lens, cherry-picking data to fit a progressive Leftist feminist push for softer norms, but a closer look reveals why this critique falters and why traditional masculinity deserves defence.

The study's core claim—that traits like emotional restraint and self-reliance breed loneliness and distress—ignores their adaptive value. Stoicism isn't about bottling up feelings to rot in silence; it's a disciplined mastery of emotions that lets men navigate hardship without crumbling. Historical evidence backs this: during World War II, Australian soldiers—steeped in mateship and grit—endured unimaginable stress, with studies like those from the Australian War Memorial (2023) showing lower PTSD rates than modern cohorts despite worse conditions. Why? Because toughness, forged through traditional norms, gave them purpose and camaraderie, not isolation. The survey's 403 men might report loneliness, but correlation isn't causation—modern disconnection owes more to screen addiction (7.5 hours daily, per Statista 2024) than to masculinity itself.

Moreover, the study's sample—Australian men in 2025—reflects a society already diluted by decades of cultural shift, not a pure test of traditional masculinity. Urbanisation, feminised education, and media narratives (think The Guardian's 2024 sigma male takedown) have eroded the rugged ethos of Australia's past—think drovers or ANZACs. The distress Whitehead flags might stem from men caught between old expectations and a new world that shames them for not crying on cue, not from masculinity's inherent flaws. A 2023 SBS survey found 25 percent of young Australian men still value traditional traits like strength and protection—hardly a dying breed, but a sign these norms resonate despite the pressure to conform.

The psychological cost argument also dodges masculinity's upside. Self-reliance isn't a shackle—it's freedom. Men who fix their own problems, from a busted car to a family crisis, report higher life satisfaction (Journal of Positive Psychology, 2022). Physical toughness? It's not just bravado; it's survival. In emergencies—floods, fires, wars—society leans on men who can lift, fight, and endure, not those paralysed by feelings. The study's push for "emotional resilience" through vulnerability sounds nice, but a 2024 Psychology Today piece on male anxiety warns that oversharing can backfire, alienating men from peers who still prize competence over confession. Traditional masculinity delivers resilience through action, not therapy-speak.

Critics like Whitehead frame dominance and aggression as toxic, but they're misreading the script. Properly channelled, these drives build civilisations—roads, armies, families—not just bar fights. A 2021 Pew Research survey showed most Americans (across genders) still admire men who lead and protect, suggesting traditional masculinity aligns with human instinct, not against it. The study's 403 men might feel "rudderless" not because dominance is wrong, but because modern life offers few outlets to wield it honourably—video games don't cut it. Strip that away, and you get the aimlessness Whitehead mistakes for masculinity's fault.

The social cost angle—weak connections—falls flat too. Traditional masculinity fosters bonds through shared struggle, not endless chit-chat. Think of firefighters or soldiers: their trust is ironclad, built on mutual reliance, not emotional dumping. A 2023 UK GOV survey found men citing "not showing weakness" as a norm still formed tight-knit groups—50 percent rated it a strong influence, yet they weren't lonelier than average. The study's lonely men might lack purpose, not masculinity; modern atomisation, not stoicism, is the culprit.

Yes, extremes can harm—unchecked aggression or repression—but that's a failure of balance, not the norm itself. The Phys.org piece glosses over this, pushing a one-size-fits-all fix that tosses out masculinity's baby with the bathwater. Men don't need to be remade into emotive shadows; they need contexts—work, family, honour—where traditional traits shine. Trump's appeal, surging in 2025 polls, taps this: strength and defiance, not tears, win loyalty. Traditional masculinity isn't a cost—it's a capital, paying dividends in a world that still demands men who can stand tall when the soft crumble.