What Do Men Want?

Masculinity and Its Discontents

Brought to you by Penguin.


Something is definitely up with men. From millions online who engage with the manosphere to the #metoo backlash, from Men's Rights activists and incels to spiralling suicide rates, it's easy to see that, while men still rule the world, masculinity is in crisis.

How can men and women live together in a world where capitalism and consumerism has replaced the values - family, religion, service and honour - that used to give our lives meaning? Feminism has gone some way towards dismantling the patriarchy, but how can we hold on to the best aspects of our metaphorical Father?

With illuminating writing from an original, big-picture perspective, Nina Power unlocks the secrets hidden in our culture to enable men and women to practice playfulness and forgiveness, and reach a true mutual understanding and a lifetime of love.

© Nina Power 2021 (P) Penguin Audio 2021

Graceful and Thoughtful

As a millennial male who’s endured some of the modern travails of today’s heterosexual hellscape, I was greatly moved by Nina’s message: the diffuse vilification of an entire sex (casually or otherwise) should be seen as alarming, and possibly a moral failing of our society. Whatever the case may be, we should set our aim at revivifying the divine dance between the sexes.

Splendid,joyful,insightful essay

In this essay, the author attempts to bridge the gap of misunderstanding between men and women. In the process of exploring the conflicts that be set modern relationships between men and women, the author offers many keen insights with an understated sense of humor that is utterly delightful. I strongly recommend.

A long awaited gem

If you want to read something critical, in depth, and balanced, then Power's analysis of the male situation today is a must.

Blind spots

The author offered a diverse set of resources, strong arguments, and a surprising amount of empathy for a conservative perspective. However, there seemed to be a critique of but ultimately a refusal to prosecute capitalism and patriarchy.

The strongest point is the main conclusion: forgiveness should be included in our future of gender. Strong cases are made that the critique and dismantling of patriarchy has left men without purpose. But instead of searching into the beyond for the possibilities of men to explore, she recedes into familiar patriarchal traits - looking for positive trails to pick apart from the mold. In centering on differences and generalities, there is a push to classify what men can be/generally are. Not to mention that traits such as protection are still rooted in domination as an aspiration (to be stronger than your partner.) The critique of the “nanny-state” left assumes any sort of effectiveness in changing men or patriarchy still be perpetuated today. Being “cancelled” on social media is so frequent that most stories don’t make it to people’s news feeds. As well, original “cancellations” have passed in the case of Mel Gibson and other actors still receiving steady work despite having more horrendous actions and rhetoric to be in the public eye. #MeToo led to some firings and two major convictions (Weinstein and Cosby - Cosby already having been released from jail), but aside from a general anxiety amongst men of being one of the few to finally get sunk, men are still majorilly in positions of power and can exert that power in a multidude of closed door ways.

I agree that forgiveness is necessary in being able to move on and avoid resentment from men who would likely return to the safer haven of patriarchy; but searching for the good parts of patriarchy still puts both genders in boxes. Many of these negative effects from feminism she describes are further conditions of patriarchy - suicide rates and job site mortality are results of men’s inability to connect with men or women, strength giving value, and having been instilled valor in violence. Bringing up many valid points and arguments, the author still manages to offer an unconvincing connection between them or a valid point less broad than we should be kinder in how we talk.