Far from being neutral qualities, the contrast between masculinity and femininity forms the backbone of patriarchy, creating a cycle where power and subordination are constantly reinforced.
In Part 1, we explored how masculinity is positioned above femininity and how men face societal degradation for any association with feminine traits and deviation from traditional masculinity. Now, let’s turn our focus to how this framework restricts women’s potential — particularly when they challenge traditional femininity.
Why Society Fears ‘Masculine’ Women
Some might argue, “But aren’t women also often discouraged and shamed for not being feminine enough? Isn’t this just about the oppression of those who don’t conform to gender roles?” But why are women discouraged from pursuing intellectual fields of study, entering physically demanding jobs, or building strong, muscular bodies (which, by the way, could help them in dangerous situations)? Why are they discouraged from being assertive, confident, and dominant? In what way do these qualities supposedly diminish a woman, like feminine would diminish a man?
It seems that society has a vested interest in keeping women in a lower position. This allows men to maintain a sense of superiority — feeling smarter, stronger, and more dominant. Yet, it’s not that women are disadvantaged by possessing these so-called “masculine” traits.
Historically, women have been steered away from careers like policing and those deemed violent, dangerous, and “manly.” These professions are tied to ideas of physical strength, authority, and dominance. The same applies to intellectual fields like STEM and leadership roles. Women who aspire to these positions are often told they’re overstepping gender boundaries — not because they lack the capability, but because their ambitions challenge entrenched notions of power, with women expected to remain in a lower societal role. This discouragement serves to preserve the social hierarchy, where men maintain control over roles associated with strength, authority, and intellect.
Men often feel threatened by assertive, “masculine” women, perceiving these traits as a challenge to their identity and ego. As a result, such women are often labeled as unattractive or are insulted and degraded in one way or another.
The Paradox of Progress
“But some people praise and admire these qualities in women! Society is changing,” you might say. While it’s true, the progress is still undermined by the way we frame these qualities.
Whether people shame or admire women for adopting these traits, notice how the focus is always on resembling men. Repeat after me: a woman can be confident, independent, strong, assertive, and dominant without being labeled “masculine.” Framing it this way implies that she isn’t acting like a “real woman,” whether the label is intended as a compliment or an insult.
Society has constructed a framework where power is inherently gendered — masculinity equals strength and authority, while femininity equals weakness and submission. Consequently, in media and literature, women aren’t simply strong; society views them as “masculine” when they display power or leadership. The underlying message is clear: women, by themselves, can only imitate male power. Strong women, whether in physical or mental strength, are seen as adopting male behaviors, attitudes, and actions. Their strength is only an imitation of male strength, not something authentically their own.
Both men and women face backlash for not conforming to gender roles. However, the nature of the criticism is profoundly different.
The Strength of Masculinity Lies in the Weakness of Femininity
Masculinity, as both a concept and a social structure, is fundamentally defined in opposition to femininity. This opposition is not merely about highlighting differences between men and women but about creating and sustaining a hierarchy that places masculinity — and by extension, men — above femininity and women. This hierarchical dichotomy is central to gender inequality.
The French philosopher Simone de Beauvoir, in her work The Second Sex, famously discussed how women have been positioned as “the Other” in relation to men. Beauvoir argued that women are systematically relegated to a subordinate status, defined not by their own identity but by what they lack in comparison to men. She wrote, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute — she is the Other.”
The definition of masculinity often relies on what it is not — feminine. Feminist writer Andrea Dworkin, in her book Pornography: Men Possessing Women, eloquently illustrates how this opposition works. In her work, she writes:
“He learns to be a man — poet man, gangster man, professional religious man, rapist man, any kind of man — and the first rule of masculinity is that whatever he is, women are not. He calls his cowardice heroism, and he keeps women out — out of humanity (fabled Mankind), out of his sphere of activity whatever it is, out of all that is valued, rewarded, credible…”
Dworkin’s words capture how masculinity is built on exclusion, portraying women as the “other” in nearly every aspect of life. This exclusion, she argues, is not only about maintaining power but about men distancing themselves from vulnerability and victimhood.
Rethinking the Dichotomy of Masculinity and Femininity
To move beyond this limiting and oppressive framework, we must challenge the masculine/feminine binary itself. Traits traditionally labeled as “masculine” or “feminine” are not inherently tied to one’s sex. They are socially constructed and reinforced by cultural norms. Despite the power of social conditioning, individuals are complex and capable of expressing a wide range of multifaceted traits if not constrained by rigid expectations.
Instead of simply reversing gender roles, we need to rethink or even reject these labels altogether. When we normalize “masculine” women or “feminine” men, we still operate within the same hierarchical structure that privileges men and devalues women. This reversal doesn’t challenge the framework but only reinforces the idea that these categories are valid and necessary.
Our goal should be to build a society that values people for who they are, not how well they fit outdated stereotypes. This requires embracing a more fluid understanding of gender, one that transcends traditional definitions. We should not see strength, empathy, leadership, and sensitivity as inherently belonging to one gender or another, but as qualities anyone can possess.
By breaking down the masculine/feminine divide, we challenge the power dynamics that sustain patriarchy. In doing so, we also open up new possibilities for personal and collective freedom. This is a crucial step toward a world where individuals can express their true selves without fear. It is also a world where they don’t feel pressured to suppress their personal traits.