“What men and boys need is a new set of role models—masculine archetypes that are not based in violence, homophobia or misogyny, and that are broad enough to encompass diverse sexualities, life goals and interests.”

I wonder if we need to designate these role models as “masculine,” or if it is merely necessary that these role models are male. I’m having trouble coming up with a definition of masculinity that is a proper subset of maleness, and for which I can agree with the above quotation.

Or to take it further, why should role models be restricted to one’s own gender? Role models need to be similar to the viewer in a few key ways, but there are always going to be differences – significant and insignificant. Why should we culturally mandate that gender is a significant difference?

In rock-climbing for example, Lynn Hill is a female hero of mine: she free-climbed The Nose before anyone else (male or female) thought it possible. On the other hand, I don’t identify at all with Adam Ondra – a top male climber – his body type is too drastically different from mine for me to really “get” the way he climbs, or to learn anything that I can transfer to my own technique.

In Science there are many role models of both genders, for both genders.

On the other hand, I can see how female ballet dancers might look mainly to other female dancers, and males to male dancers – there is such a divide between the genders as to what the discipline entails, and the aesthetics are quite different.

My point is, I don’t think gender is always a relevant criterion for being a role model.

-Rajiv