What does it mean to be a man in the 21st century? Are we men disposable? Are we, as some Darwinian feminists have held, the imperfect beta version of what ultimately evolved into the “more perfect” female?

I meet quite a few men in my workshops who seem to be struggling to find a model for manhood that fits the circumstances of the world we live in. I’m not needed as the “provider”, my wife earns more than I do. I’m not needed as the protector, that’s really more in the line of police work. I could join the armed services and train to be a warrior, but so can she. I’m not a hunter, and my local supermarket is so much easier and more convenient than hunting ever could be. Heck, given her 3 days a week at the gym, I’m not even certain I’m stronger than she is.

Interviewing Alison Armstrong, creator of the Celebrating Men, Satisfying Women workshops, I heard a message of men’s essential value and worth. Then interviewing Michael Gilbert, author of “The Disposable Male“, he seemed to imply the opposite. And it’s all really got me thinking.

I think part of the problem is that, given a level playing field, the difference between men and women is relatively subtle, while the similarities are so obvious we sometimes “can’t see the forest for looking at the trees.” Any woman who likes men will tell you that sometimes what makes a guy really sexy and attractive is the sense of his untapped power and assertiveness. At the same time, what makes a guy really sexy and attractive is his empathy and sensitivity.

I don’t have one simple model for being a man. Sometimes I want to seem like James Bond, sometimes more like James Dean, sometimes more like Jimmy Stewart, sometimes more like Jimmy Neutron. Sigh. I guess I’ll just keep being myself and hope that’s enough.