Just like the Epstein files and other scandals that expose systems we once thought were untouchable, I sometimes wonder if patriarchy will one day be next. Not the shallow version people imagine — the “I am a man so I am better than a woman” type — but the deeper, quieter patriarchy that exists between men themselves. A system where different social “classes of men” are created, where hierarchies are formed, and where roles are silently assigned.
When we talk about patriarchy, we often imagine men standing above women. But there is another dimension to it: men constantly standing above and below other men. In that structure, somebody always has to be at the top, somebody has to set the standard, and somebody has to enforce it. Patriarchy needs rulers at different steps to keep it alive.
The male loneliness epidemic and the disproportionately high suicide rates among men are often discussed as isolated social problems, but they are also manifestations of this same system. The aggressions and micro-aggressions toward women are part of it too. Patriarchy does not simply restrict women — it also traps men inside a rigid hierarchy of masculinity.
In my book The Unhinged (2023), I briefly mentioned something I called “The Male Book.” By this I meant the invisible set of rules, expectations, and standards that men are taught to follow so that we can be accepted and feel like we belong. Because at the end of the day — beyond all the language of therapy and cognitive behavioral frameworks — human beings want one simple thing: to be part of the tribe. The Male Book teaches men what they must be in order to stay inside that tribe. Be strong. Be dominant. Do not be emotional. Do not be soft. Do not show too much care. If you do, you risk falling lower in the hierarchy of men. This is why men often police each other long before they police women.
Even ideas like the “Alpha Male” illustrate how shaky these constructs really are. The concept became popular through studies of wolf hierarchies conducted by wildlife biologist David Mech in the 1970s. But years later, Mech himself publicly clarified that the idea of rigid “alpha” dominance in wolves was largely misunderstood and misapplied. In natural wolf packs, leadership usually comes from parental roles rather than aggressive dominance. Yet the simplified version of the theory survived in popular culture and was absorbed into how we talk about masculinity. Leadership in early human groups may have depended on strength and survival ability, but over time these observations hardened into cultural myths about what masculinity must look like.
And yet both realities can coexist. Early humans did not fully understand the world they were navigating. A man who feared lightning might have believed it to be divine punishment. Those same early humans also ate worms and whatever they could find simply to survive. But just as we no longer eat worms to sustain ourselves, society too must evolve beyond the primitive rules it once created for survival.
In that same confusion, society slowly began to attach shame to emotional expression in men, treating tenderness and vulnerability as threats to survival rather than parts of humanity.
One psychological explanation for why patriarchy reacts so harshly to softness is projection. Projection occurs when we reject something within ourselves and then try to suppress it in others. The hostility some men show toward women occupying their feminine space — enjoying tenderness, emotional expression, vulnerability, or even something as simple as the color pink — may come from a deeper fear. If those qualities are allowed to exist freely, men may have to confront them within themselves. And that confrontation feels dangerous to a system that equates masculinity with emotional restriction.
Ironically, biology itself does not support such rigid divisions. Male bodies contain oestrogen. Female bodies contain testosterone. The human body is already more balanced and complex than the categories we impose on it.
From an Islamic perspective, the contradiction becomes even more striking. Some of the names of Allah include Al-Wadud (The Most Loving), Al-Barr (The Most Kind), Al-Halim (The Most Forbearing), Al-Latif (The Gentle), and Al-Rauf (The Compassionate). These names describe qualities such as tenderness, care, gentleness, patience, and mercy — traits that modern patriarchal culture often dismisses as “feminine” or weak. A man who prays to Al-Wadud cannot logically claim that love is weakness. A man who calls upon Al-Latif cannot dismiss gentleness as something beneath him.
Perhaps the real scandal of patriarchy is not simply that it subordinates women, but that it convinces men to fear entire dimensions of their own humanity. It turns belonging into performance, strength into emotional isolation, and masculinity into a constant test.
Musaib Bilal is an author, columnist and a mental health advocate pursuing Bachelor’s from Amar Singh College. Contact here: musaibbilal.216061@gmail.com