The ‘crisis of masculinity’, a long-lasting myth. A conversation with Francis Dupuis-Déri

Francis Dupuis-Déri is a French-Canadian researcher. He teaches political science and feminist studies at Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM). He is interested in social movements, particularly anti-feminism and masculinism.

He is the co-director of the Chantier sur l’antiféminisme and of the Réseau québécois en études féministes (RéQEF).

Dupuis-Deri is the author of several books, including La crise de la masculinité ; autopsie d’un mythe tenace (“The Crisis of Masculinity: Autopsy of a Persistent Myth”, Editions du remue-ménage, 2018), Antiféminismes et masculinismes d’hier à aujourd’hui (“Anti-feminisms and Masculinisms of Yesterday and Today”, PUF, 2019) and Killer Althusser: The Banality of Men (Between The Lines, 2025). He lives in Montreal, Quebec.

---

Voxeurop: What is masculinity?

Francis Dupuis-Déri: “Masculinity” is a representation, a model, and I would even say an ideological reference, always consciously or unconsciously thought of in an unequal, hierarchical relationship with femininity.

There is no concept of masculinity without a concept of femininity; there is no masculine without feminine. However, in recent years, there has been much questioning of masculinity, and most often in a way that is disconnected from femininity. Whether implicitly or explicitly, masculinity is presented and perceived as superior to femininity in terms of rationality (men are considered more rational than women, who are seen as overly emotional), capacity for action and creation (women are said to be more passive), autonomy (women are said to be more dependent), strength, aggression and violence (women are said to be more gentle, more peaceful and more caring).

All of this is an ideological construct, based on simplistic and often fallacious stereotypes drawn from religious texts or popular science, built upon a fantasised prehistory, a supposed determinism of genes or hormones, which nevertheless has an impact on reality, on socialisation, on the expectations we have of people, of ourselves, etc.

How should the so-called “crisis of masculinity” be defined?

As I explain in La crise de la masculinité, this is a discourse that has been heard since at least Roman times in Europe, and today all over the world, suggesting that men are doing very badly because women are taking up too much space, taking “our” place as men, and because feminists are maliciously critiquing us... Men are portrayed as victims of women, and the solution is to revalorise conventional masculinity, which has been beaten down by the feminisation of society.

The discourse on the crisis of masculinity always serves to justify a strong distinction between the masculine and the feminine, and to valorise conventional masculinity while discrediting women’s desire or will to be free and equal to men. It is important to note that this discourse of male victimhood can be expressed regardless of the prevailing political or legal systems (including family and labour law), economic systems, cultures and religions. This discourse can also be expressed in the poorest or the richest countries. Today, the richest and most powerful men in the world, such as Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Donald Trump, claim that there is a crisis of masculinity.

Could you explain what anti-feminism is, and masculinism specifically?

Put simply, anti-feminism is a force that opposes women’s desire or will to be free and equal to men. As sociologist Mélissa Blais explains, anti-feminism, like any political force or social movement, has many strands and is mobilised on several fronts. For example, Catholic anti-feminism is very active in opposing abortion rights in the name of God.

“Masculinist” anti-feminism is based on the idea of a crisis of masculinity in order to justify gender roles and a sexual division of labour. Far-right anti-feminism intersects with masculinism, white supremacism and xenophobia in the name of defending the family as the pillar of the nation.

Left-wing or anti-capitalist anti-feminism has repeated for generations that women’s issues are secondary, that feminists should dissolve into a mass movement or a unified party in order to fight the capitalist class and capitalism, and that they must above all refrain from criticising sexism and sexual violence in progressive organisations, since that would divide their strength...

It seems like the masculinist discourse we hear today is similar to that heard in the past, before the #MeToo movement, before feminist movements gained momentum... Is there a difference?

Masculinism often uses the same general argument, namely that men are suffering because women are taking up too much space and not staying in the place that is set for them: as sex objects, docile partners, stay-at-home mothers. But depending on the context, the symptoms of the crisis can differ.

Historian Eve-Marie Lampron has clearly shown (in her chapter of the book Le mouvement masculiniste au Québec : L’antiféminisme démasqué, 2015) that masculinist discourse was expressed in all political camps during the French Revolution, with republicans accusing King Louis XVI of being effeminate and domineered by Queen Marie-Antoinette, while monarchists accused republicans of allowing “their” women to march in the streets wearing trousers and carrying heads stuck on pikes. We also know that before divorce was liberalised, it was said that men were dominated by their wives in marriage, which was a veritable prison for husbands. And since divorce was liberalised, it is said that ex-wives continue to dominate by extorting financial support from men.

Whether married or divorced, men can therefore claim they are dominated by women. As the analyses of Angela Davis, Patricia Hill Collins and bell hooks have so admirably shown, the discourse on the crisis of masculinity was also expressed in the Black Power movement in the 1960s and 1970s, when it criticised Afro-feminists for allegedly dominating the community.

Certain themes have been constant for at least 20 or 30 years, such as the idea that men can no longer flirt and that women have all the control in sexual relations, or that the academic struggles of boys are proof of a crisis of masculinity, even though men perform better than women in the job market after finishing school.

In the United States, there has been a repeated refrain since the 1990s that “angry white men” are victims of a terrible economic injustice for the benefit of the women and African-American and migrant minorities who are allegedly stealing their jobs... Donald Trump’s election victory has also been explained by the claim that these “ordinary” men are the big losers of deindustrialisation.

However, when we look calmly at the data, the states that most strongly supported Trump, such as Nebraska (78%) and Wyoming (74%), are marked by an annual full-time wage gap between men and women of around 15,000 dollars, in favour of... men! And why is that? Precisely because male-dominated jobs, such as factory work, mining, forestry and trucking, offer much better wages than jobs considered feminine.

---

‘Feminism is one of the most peaceful social movements in existence, especially considering the current and historical injustices faced by women’

---

As we can see, the discourse on the crisis of masculinity is long-standing and often perpetuates the same falsehoods from generation to generation. Parallel research in different countries has also shown that masculinism has long been used to discredit feminist analyses and mobilisations against male violence, whether in Quebec, Spain or France (see Antiféminismes et masculinismes d’hier à aujourd’hui).

Masculinism, or the discourse of the crisis of masculinity, was from the outset one of the pillars of Italian fascist and then Nazi propaganda, based on the thesis that Italian or Aryan men had been betrayed during the First World War by the decadent and feminised liberal elite, and that fascism would restore the value of virile masculinity and the patriarchal family. Fascist discourse elsewhere, including in Spain, took up this thesis of the feminisation of men and the nation, and proposed the same solution: a war-like masculinity that conquers, for example through colonisation (see Marie Walin’s work on Spain).

Still today, the far right participates in masculinism, including on the web, as many studies reveal.

Can you help us unpack some of the expressions we hear so often today, such as “radical feminism”, “totalitarian feminism” or even “feminazi”?

Anti-feminists often hide behind a mask, denying that they are anti-feminists and preferring to play the game of dividing feminists into good and bad. They will say that feminism has “gone too far” and that they are mainly angry at radical or extremist “neo-feminists”.

But when we try to understand who they are referring to, we realise that it is ultimately almost all of today’s feminists who are being denigrated...

The victim narrative of masculinists suggests that today’s feminism imposes a veritable “totalitarianism” on society, and that men can no longer say anything, that they are victims of anti-male sexism. 

As for the term “feminazi”, its origin is attributed to Rush Limbaugh, a reactionary radio influencer active in the United States in the 1990s. When you know your history and think about it seriously, the term “feminazi” is scandalous or ridiculous for three distinct reasons. 

Obviously, it is an insult to the memory of the millions of victims of the real Nazis. Secondly, the expression is an insult to feminism, one of the most peaceful social movements in existence, especially considering the current and historical injustices faced by women. For example, we regularly hear about the murders of women – femicides – killed by their partners or ex-partners, and what do feminists do? Nothing very radical, when you think about it: no riots against men, no revenge operations (hangings, shootings, destroyed villages, as the Nazis did repeatedly), no formation of armed militias or deadly attacks, as neo-Nazis do.

It is always claimed that feminists “castrate” men, but in reality they do nothing of the sort, unlike the real Nazis who actually tortured – and even castrated – their victims... What we must remember, ultimately, is that anti-feminists compete with each other to hurl outrageous insults at feminists and portray them as a terrible threat comparable to the worst political catastrophes of the 20th century, when – I repeat – the feminist movement is entirely moderate, considering the situation of women throughout history and even today.

🤝 This article was produced within the PULSE project as part of a series of articles on masculinism and gender-based violence. Lola García-Ajofrín (El Confidencial, Spain) and Petra Dvořáková (Deník Referendum, Czech Republic) contributed to this article.