I’ve become curious why people, including very smart people with Ph.Ds, tend to leap at moralistic conclusions, adhere to them and consider them “science” when they are no such thing.

This is the second part of a two-part article. Part 1 can be found here.

“This brings me to a final value of tonic masculinity as I see it emerging. And that is the work to be done of restoring harmony between the sexes, to return relations in the nuclear family and local community to a degree of genuinely democratic responsibility and caring for the other.”

I want to argue in favor of what I term tonic masculinity and what a dose of it might provide society to dispel some of the mystifications and often ironic ambiguities about sex and gender.