…From the outset the first line is controversial: A line which makes an apology for masculinity in boys weakens the argument for “equal opportunity”.

...It’s that “part” of the debate which objects to the intrusion of femininity into the male role, that causes most anxiety and breaks down clear roles for boys in society by confusing signals for them!

…To suggest as do the feminists, that Women should be granted “Carte blanche” entry into all aspects of the traditional male roles is a failure, and does more harm to the cause of a "fair-go" for Women than does a more realistic approach of dealing with genuine discrimination such as unequal pay rates for example.

...Theirs has a political agenda which fails to consider the negative effects, such as the psychological confusion in boys a feminists "boots-and-all" approach is having on the role of our young males.

Diver Dan what do you mean by masculinity? Do you think there is only one way for a boy to be a 'man'?

Is there only one 'script' or one type of arrangement that all humans 'should' follow, as we sort out how to get along with each other. Are all men and women the same and all boys and girls respond in the same way to the experiences they encounter?

Another good article on gender differences.

"We all ought to be smart enough to take a critical look at the ideas we grew up with about gender roles, to identify the good bits from both masculinity and femininity and strengthen them and pass them on to our kids. At the same time we ought to be willing to recognise the harmful bits, to challenge them for ourselves and avoid passing them on to our kids."

The author makes a lot of sense in this summation.

Femininity doesn't have to include the often perceived weakness, and masculinity doesn't have to include aggression as such.

Women are often accused of trying to be more like men, when really they just want an equal go in life.

Many men, who accuse women of being too aggressive in their fight for equal opportunity, forget that most of these women have much loved men and boys in their lives, so why would they want to hurt them by some apparent feminist conspiracy against men?

If either a mother or father is bitter after a marriage break-up for example, the very worst thing you can pass on to the kids is a paranoid feeling that all men or women are somehow as 'bad' as your ex!

Suse.
Nope, aggression is an essential characteristic of masculinity, if you're not aggressive you're going to suck at being a man.
Female supremacists are obviously going to pathologise any essentially masculine trait which might give men and boys an an advantage in society, thus the female supremacist always uses the words "masculine aggression" in place of "male violence".
Aggression is how men overcome obstacles and challenges, aggression enables men to drive an F1 car at 300kmh or to push themselves to the limits of human endurance fighting a bushfire or rescuing earthquake victims. Masculine aggression build cameraderie, esprit de corps and self esteem among men, it's an essential component in teamwork and especially leadership, men won't willingly follow a timid or vacillating man.
Female supremacists who are fighting masculine aggression are simply trying to keep men and boys down, to turn them into docile, bovine creatures who will tug their forelock and mumble "Yes ma'am" when given an order.

Oh come on JoM, you're being a bit over the top surely?
I know many fine men who haven't got an aggressive bone in their body.
They are confident, assertive men who are doing well in society.

I guess it depends on your definition of aggression.

Wikipedia tells us that aggression "...is behaviour, or a disposition, that is forceful, hostile, or attacking...an intention to harm or an act intended to increase relative social dominance".

Now that definition certainly does fit for some people in society, and is very necessary for those in the police force or armed services at times, but for the average person living in suburbia ?

Hopefully not.

Maybe you look for these 'qualities' in others JoM, but I don't.

Thank you Jay for expanding on masculinity. One of the victories of feminism of the past 50 years has been the successful demonisation of masculine aggression as if it is a pathology or mental illness that must be cured. They have reduced masculinity to acts of physical violence, and ignored the sublimation man engages in when he creates art, science, technology, and advancements of all descriptions. We owe all these advancements to the men who can impose strict self-discipline on themselves and advance the field of expertise they are in.

The feminists, in their attempt to create a secular utopia on earth where everyone will live in harmony, have basically made men go to war against themselves. What I mean by this is not a physical war of man versus man, but an internal war in each man's soul where he has to combat his own masculine drives and instincts. Every time he feels a piece of aggression rise to the surface of consciousness, he must feel extreme guilt. Men, then, walk around with bad conscience about themselves; feeling utterly confused at what is there place in the world. The suicide rate of men confirms this.

The feminists want to control man's mind and soul. They have no time for balance or respect for the 'other.'