Fighting fires requires courage and toughness, but does it necessarily need to lead to dominating women? The article passes over the many positive points of masculinity, and that's a shame. But that doesn't invalidate the negative points of how masculinity is misinterpreted by a lot of guys out there. Apparently, the ones in these studies felt that, if their masculinity was threatened, they needed to respond by being sexist and domineering. Dumb.

Fire fighting good, sexism bad. Is this too complicated to understand?

I would argue that femininity also has positive and negative sides. Kudos to the people who care for and nurture others. But if you take femininity to mean you need to be small and weak and a victim, that's toxic.

Nurturing good, being a victim bad. Still following?

Now let's complicate the issue. What if there's a guy who's really good at caring for others, and what if there's a girl who's really good at fire fighting? Are you going to tell them they're not being a "real" man or a "real" woman? No. That would be ridiculous. But society does tend to do that, and it makes these people feel insecure about what they're good at, and makes them feel like they need to compensate (sometimes by being overly aggressive, like the guys in this article, or overly wimpy, which wasn't discussed in this article).

LESSON OF THE DAY: It doesn't matter if a guy has some feminine attributes or a girl has some masculine attributes. In the real world, things are going to be mixed like this. Some girls will be brilliant at math and some guys will be great with babies. It is okay.

More Posts